Trump's plans for tax reforms: Bigger paychecks?

Trump's tax reform statement, Missouri

Last week, Trump explained plans to reform taxes for the workforce of the United States, in attempt to widen peoples incomes by taxing less. "I want to work together with Congress, Republicans, and Democrats alike, on a plan that is pro growth, pro jobs, pro worker, and pro American", Donald Trump explained in the statement.

The White House is not very specific with this project, but priorities include cutting income tax rates, and reducing tax on companies. He notes that a corporate tax rate of 15 percent could make us very competitive. Trump says that the new plan will help the American workforce by boosting peoples wages.

Many Republican politicians including Mitch McConnell support this idea, but say that it needs more work. The plan is expected to raise income in the middle 20 percent of workers by 1.3 to 9 percent after taxing.

Even though this plan guarantees "bigger paychecks" for all workers, the rates for the taxing are not equal. While the middle class taxes are lowered, and their incomes increase by 1-9 percent, higher classes incomes are increased by 10-20 percent. This is obviously a problem, but the plan is not complete yet.

Links to further information:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/30/trump-tax-reform-plan-faces-roadblocks-on-main-street.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-heads-missouri-push-tax-reform-vision-specific/story?id=49511451

Questions for discussion:
1. Do you think there are any problems with the proposed plan? If so, explain.
2. How do you think lower class tax payers will react to this in contrast to higher class tax payers or corporations?
3. Are the increases enough to make a broad difference to paychecks?

Trump's First Natural Disaster Test as President

After bringing up this topic in class, I thought it was appropriate to make a current event on it.
Days after Hurricane Harvey hit Texas, Trump decided to make a visit to South Texas and show his compassion. Trump thanked government officials and emergency response leaders for their help in the aftermath of the hurricane. He mainly addressed the effort of responses, and the crowd who cheered him on as he made a speech afterwords- loving the attention. Here's a quick video showing parts of his speech and what he brought to the table:

Many have questioned these actions and why he didn't take the time to meet and sympathies with hurricane victims. Article II of the Constitution says the official duties of the presidency, one of them being to act as the counsoler-in-chief  in moments of crisis, offering support to fellow citizens. Instead, Trump brings light to his team and didn't offer much solicitude for those who have lost their homes, families, and even lives. 

Here are other articles to give you more information:

What Trump Got Right in Texas

Trump steered clear of storm victims during Texas visit

Trump In Texas: Words vs Actions
Recovery from past storms will test Trump's promises to Texas

Questions to discuss:

1. What does Trump's words and actions in Texas show us?

2. Do you think he handled his first "disaster test" correctly?

3. Are critics blasting Trump too much that he didn't meet with hurricane victims? Or not enough?  

Trump Reverses Obama's Limitations on Police's Use of Military Equipment

On Monday the 28th, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, backed by the Trump administration, announced that the police will now have access to military equipment, such as grenade launchers, bayonets, and armored vehicles. This decision reversed the restrictions set by President Obama in 2015 in response to the death of black men by the hands of police. 

The shooting death of 18 year-old Michael Brown was one of the incidents, which was viewed as an "unnecessary use of force and intimidation" by local residents. Soon after, protests opposing these shooting incidents were met by police- armed with riot gear and other heavy military equipment. President Obama ordered a review of the Pentagon's program, which ultimately led to restrictions on military hardware.

President Trump's executive order has angered many community activists who believe that this turns their communities into war zones and is unnecessary and potentially very dangerous. Others argue that the police need " all the tools available to do their jobs." 

Questions to Consider:

1.  Do you believe that Trump's decision to reverse the weapon ban will benefit the public?
2. Can these weapons be abused by the police to serve and protect the public?
3. Would this make law enforcers more effective in carrying out their jobs?

Links for Further Understanding:

• https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/us/politics/trump-police-military-surplus-equipment.html?rref=collection%2Fnewseventcollection%2FThe%20Trump%20White%20House&action=click&contentCollection=Politics&module=Collection&region=Marginalia&src=me&version=newsevent&pgtype=article
• https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/27/us/politics/trump-military-equipment-police.html?action=click&contentCollection=Politics&module=RelatedCoverage&region=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article
• http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/28/politics/police-military-gear-ban-lifted/index.html

Police with Military Equipment

Police departments will now have access to military surplus equipment typically used in warfare, including grenade launchers, armored vehicles and bayonets, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced on Monday, describing it as “lifesaving gear.”

Restoring the program will "ensure that you can get the lifesaving gear that you need to do your job," Attorney General Jeff Sessions told a cheering crowd at a national convention of the Fraternal Order of Police in Nashville, Tennessee. The group, America's largest organization of rank-and-file officers, endorsed Trump for president after he promised to revamp the program.

"Tensions between law enforcement and communities remain high, yet the president and the attorney general are giving the police military-grade weaponry instead of practical, effective ways to protect and serve everyone," said Kanya Bennett, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky called the plan a dangerous expansion of government power that would "subsidize militarization." Another Republican, Rep. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, said the program "incentivizes the militarization of local police departments, as they are encouraged to grab more equipment than they need."

A New York Post review of the federal program in December 2014 found that New York state greatly benefited from the supplies. Law enforcement agencies throughout the state hauled in nearly 4,000 pieces of surplus military equipment valued at more than $26 million.

This issue of police gaining military equipment could either be a pro or con and could result in many benefits.

The move rescinds limits on the Pentagon handouts that were put in place by President Barack Obama in 2015 amid a national debate over policing touched off by a spate of high-profile deaths of black men at the hands of the police, including the shooting death in 2014 of 18-year-old Michael Brown, in Ferguson, Mo., by a white officer. Some local residents viewed police use of military equipment during the ensuing protests as an unnecessary show of force and intimidation.

Links To Sources:

• http://nypost.com/2017/08/27/trump-wants-to-lift-ban-on-giving-military-equipment-to-police
• https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/us/politics/trump-police-military-surplus-equipment.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FUnited%20States%20Politics%20and%20Government&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=collection

Questions of Consideration:

• Do you think that this decision is unnecessary? Why or Why not?

• Do you believe that this is a pro or con? Explain

• What benefits would you consider to come out this decision?

New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu Addresses the Removal of Confederate Statues

On May 19, 2017, New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu delivered a moving speech about why the city took down four Confederate monuments that had been installed during the end of the 19th century.

Discussion Questions:

Please prepare responses on a separate piece of paper to the questions as you watch the speech and after you view the speech. We will discuss your responses in class - be ready!

1. What stands out for you most in the Landrieu's speech?  What did you find upsetting, surprising, or moving? Why?
2. How important do you think it is that these statues were removed?  Why?
3. If the statues are going to be taken down, what should be done with them?
4. The controversy over the statues – and other Confederate symbols across the country—has sparked many conversations, as well as angry debates and protests.  Is this a positive development? Why or why not?

ISIS Claims Suicide Attack at Mosque in Afghan Capital
By:Rachel Braccio
This past friday, August 26 2017 ISIS admits to a suicide attack on a Shiite Muslim mosque in Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan. This terrorist attack left 28 people dead and is another horrific event caused by the growing terrorist group. The way this attack happened was there were three attackers. As one attacker pulled the bombs from his back causing an explosion the two other men began to rapidly firing their weapons at security forces. The fight between sides  took nearly 4 hours until the gunmen were  shot and killed. At the end of the attack police say that 28  innocent civilians were murdered and 50 were injured including women and children. Two out of the 28 civilians were police officers. ISIS claims full responsibility for the attack on the mosque saying they were targeting Shiite Muslims. However this isn't the only attack ISIS has done lately on Shiite worshipers. In this month they have admitted to performing a dual suicide bomb at a mosque in  the Western City of Herat. This attack killed 30 people while they did their evening prayers. Even though ISIS preformed this terrible act the Taliban another terrorist group actual openly condemned the bombing of the mosque. The reason I  choose this current event is because I feel like the terrorist group is getting stronger so people need to be aware of this growing problem. Also I am strongly against judging people on their religion so i'm heart broken the attacks were because they were Shiite Muslims.


Discussion Question:
Do you believe that ISIS is getting stronger and more aggressive?
How would you try to solve the ISIS problem?





Links:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/25/asia/kabul-bomb-blast-mosque/index.html
http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-mosque-attack-20170826-story.html

Thousands Flee to Bangladesh Border

Members of the Muslim Rohingya minority Escape:

Many members of the Muslim Rohingya minority in Rakhine, Mayanmar are running away from a severe outbreak of violence. Tensions with the majority and minority population have been rising for years. Fighting erupted on Friday when thirty police stations were attacked by Rohingya fighters. This is the most significant outbreak of violence in Rakhine since October 2016, when nine policemen died in similar attacks on border posts.

The people of the minority are being turned away by Bangladesh' Border Control. However, about 3000 people have managed to get past the border and find refuge in camps and villages.

Links for further information:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/27/asia/myanmar-rakhine-rohingya-violence/index.html

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ongoing-myanmar-clashes-leave-96-dead-including-6-123525716.html

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/08/deadly-clashes-erupt-myanmar-restive-rakhine-state-170825055848004.html

Questions for Discussion:
Is there anything the U.S. could or should do to interfere?

Should the surrounding countries be more welcoming and helpful or are they right to turn the refugees away?

Is there something that could be done to prevent minority/majority outbreaks of violence such as this one and like the Rwandan Genocide?

Controvercial Pardon

Recently, Trump pardoned a former Arizona sheriff named Joe Arpaio, who was arrested for ignoring a judge's orders to stop border patrols, and continuing these patrols for 17 months. Joe Arpaio and his forces were reported to have arrested and deported 30,000 illegal immigrants. In an attempt to show his innocence, Arpaio claimed that he did not intentionally disobey the judge, but that his attorney did not properly explain what was going on. Arpaio has been know for a few other controversial actions, like forcing prisoners to stay in desert camps, and starting a "birther" campaign against the Obama administration.

When questioned about why he pardoned Arpaio, Trump said that Arpaio was "convicted for doing his job". He also said that Arpaio would have come across as innocent by the jury, but that he did not feel that the trial was necessary, as Arpaio an " old American patriot. Arpaio would have had a trial on October 5th and would have faced a misdemeanor and up to 6 months in jail. Many people, including Senator Jeff Flake, a politician that has a public feud with Trump. Flake says that Trump should have allowed the judicial process take care of it, and let the jury decide Arpaio's fate.

Currently, Trump is under quite a bit of criticism, and Arpaio is obviously supporting Trump, even showing at a few of Trump's rallies.

Arpaio and Trump

Questions:

1.Should Trump have let court decide Arpaio's fate, or is Arpaio innocent, and his trial pointless?

2. If Arpaio did go to court, should he be deemed guilt or innocent, why?

3. Are people over reacting, or is all of this heavy criticism justified?

Additional Information:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/25/sheriff-joe-arpaio-wins-pardon-from-trump.html

Sebastian Gorka leaving the White House

Sebastian Gorka left the White House

Sebastian Gorka was a military and intelligence analyst. He served as a deputy assistant to President Donald Trump. But the question is why did he leave?

Some officials are saying that he was forced out of the White House, but this is hard to believe considering he was always very supportive of Donald Trumps decisions. Others say that he was not satisfied about the current government, and resigned. His position in the White House has not been very important as of late, and this could have been the reason why he left his job. His wife works at the Department of Homeland Security, so we might se him taking a job there because this position deals with American Muslim communities.
It is quite possible that he left on his own initiative because he stated that he was upset about how the people of the White House were doing their jobs. It is also very possible that he was forced out of his job because there have been many others that have been forced out including Anthony Scaramucchi and Steve Bannon.

Discussion Questions
1. Why do you think is the reason he left the White House, or do you believe he was forced out of the White House?
2. Do you think he will get another job involving politics or is he retired?
3. How come so many people are leaving their jobs at the White House, do you think this is linked to some of the poor decisions President Trump has made?

Links for further reading
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/25/us/politics/sebastian-gorka-leaves-white-house.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/controversial-trump-adviser-sebastian-gorka-leaves-white-house/story?id=49427323
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/08/25/national-security-aide-sebastian-gorka-leaves-white-house.html

A Look at the President's Pardon Power and How it Works

By The Associated Press

President Donald Trump has exercised his pardon power for the first time, using it to pardon former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. A look at the president's unique power:

WHERE DOES THE PRESIDENT'S PARDON POWER COME FROM?

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution says: "The President ... shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." The president's power can only be used to pardon someone for a federal crime, not a state one.

HOW DOES THE PARDON PROCESS USUALLY WORK?

Someone who has been convicted of a federal crime and wants to be pardoned makes a request for a pardon to the Justice Department's Office of the Pardon Attorney, which assists the president in exercising his pardon power. Department rules tell pardon seekers to wait at least five years after their conviction or their release from prison, whichever is later, before filing a pardon application.

It's then up to the pardon office to make a recommendation about whether a pardon is warranted. The office looks at such factors as how the person has acted following their conviction, the seriousness of the offense and the extent to which the person has accepted responsibility for their crime. Prosecutors in the office that handled the case are asked to weigh in. The pardon office's report and recommendation gets forwarded to the deputy attorney general, who adds his or her recommendation. That information is then forwarded to the White House for a decision.

WHAT MAKES ARPAIO'S PARDON UNUSUAL?

Arpaio didn't submit a pardon application through the Office of the Pardon Attorney. His pardoning also took place before he was sentenced. Arpaio was convicted July 31 of misdemeanor contempt of court for intentionally defying a 2011 court order to stop traffic patrols that targeted immigrants. He had been set to be sentenced Oct. 5 and faced up to six months in jail. The fact that Arpaio was pardoned for a misdemeanor offense, which carries a penalty of less than a year in jail, is also unusual. Generally those seeking presidential pardon have been convicted of felonies.

WHAT HAPPENS TO ARPAIO'S CASE NOW?

One of Arpaio's attorneys, Jack Wilenchik, said in a telephone interview Saturday that next week Arpaio's attorneys will file a motion to vacate his conviction and to dismiss the case with prejudice, "meaning forever." ''This is the end," he said. Wilenchik said of the pardon the "president has done the right thing here."

WHO ELSE MIGHT TRUMP PARDON?

Arpaio's is Trump's first pardon, but hundreds of other people also want his help. According to Justice Department statistics , as of Aug. 7 Trump had 376 requests for pardons pending and 1,508 requests for commutation, a reduction of a prison sentence a person is currently serving.

It's not unusual for presidents to ultimately use their power to help hundreds. During his time in office President Barack Obama granted 212 pardons and commuted the sentences of approximately 1,700 people, including about 300 drug offenders he pardoned on his last day in office and Chelsea Manning, the transgender Army intelligence officer convicted of leaking more than 700,000 U.S. documents. President George W. Bush pardoned 189 people and commuted 11 sentences.

Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Questions to Consider:

Why did Trump pardon Arpaio for a misdemeanor when usually pardons are given to a felony?

Is Trump going to use this power to his full advantage and pardon people that should not be technically pardoned and why would he be doing this? 

I chose this article because it related to the first article I had posted in a way. My first article was on Trump firing Comey. Many people did not support his action on that and may not support his action on pardoning a guy for a misdemeanor as well. Also it was interesting to find out that the president had the ability to have a power like this and be able to wonder if he will use this power to pardon people that should most likely be put on trial. Lastly, I am now going to follow up and see if Trump will be pardoning any more people that may start a debate or controversy. 

White Supremacy In America 

          As many are aware of, white supremacy has blown up within the past few months of Donald Trump's presidency, and there have been marches and rallies country-wide. The most heard of march was the one in Charlottesville, Virginia. All rallies have consisted of angry white men waving confederate flags, flags with swastikas on them, etc. and screaming slurs, nazi phrases, and things like "we will not be replaced." All of this anger in Virginia arose around a statue of confederate hero Robert E. Lee. The angry white mobs burned torches and several acts of violence were displayed against people of color. 

           President Trump did address the hatred and bigotry that had arose. He made several statements talking about unity as a country (which does go against things he has said in the past, but that's not the point). He did neglect to single out groups such as Nazis and the KKK, though. He also mentioned the hatred, bigotry, and violence "on all sides," which was a statement that many found to be controversial.

Links for Additional Information:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/local/trump-lit-the-torches-of-white-supremacy-in-charlottesville-we-must-extinguish-them/2017/08/13/6cb02b94-8014-11e7-902a-2a9f2d808496_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-condemns-charlottesville-violence-but-doesnt-single-out-white-nationalists/2017/08/12/933a86d6-7fa3-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html?tid=a_inl-amp&utm_term=.240e5d39d39a

Questions for Discussion:

1. Do you think these white supremacists should be punished? How?

2. How did you like what Trump said about the events?

3. What do you think Trump meant by saying "on all sides?"

President Trump's First Pardon

As you all may know President Donald Trump has recently used his presidential power of pardoning to pardon Joe Arpaio claiming that “Sheriff Joe was convicted for doing his job.” This "Job" president Trumps mentions is to find and bring in undocumented immigrants in Arizona. According the the Washington Post "pardons are granted for two reasons: either to provide mercy or correct a miscarriage of justice, in an individual case; or on more general grounds based on public policy." But Donald Trumps training for pardoning Arpaio do not fit these reasons. I have chosen this current event because Joe Arpaio is a very controversial person in the media. 

Links For Further Reading:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/25/us/politics/joe-arpaio-trump-pardon-sheriff-arizona.html?referer=https://www.google.com/

http://amp.usatoday.com/story/597547001/

https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/537729/

Questions For Discussion:

1. Do you agree with Donald Trump's statement that Arpaio was "convicted for doing his job"?

2. Do you think that Donald Trumo should have pardoned Arpaio or should he have been put on trial?

3.  Do you think that Joe Arpaio is the "American Patriot" Trump claims he is?

North Korea Launched Three Missiles Into Sea

North Korea Launched Three Missiles Into Sea

Kim Jong Un

  

                           Last Saturday morning, North Korea launched three missiles into the sea near Japan. They appear to be short-ranged and not the missiles that are capable of reaching the United States they had fired last July.

               It has been a month since Kim has test launched any missiles. But this just goes to show that Kim still wants to continue his progress on the North Korean's missiles.

               The launches are apparently supposed to be a response to the joint training that are ongoing with the South Korean and United States military, analysts say. The missile launch was apparently their own training.

               This missile launch is the 17th this year. Kim has been upgrading his missile arsenal with more advanced technology. His father, Kim Jong Il, conducted 16 launches in his 17 years of power.

               Tensions have indeed increased because of this 17th missile launch. Kim has even warned that it is contemplating whether they should launch missiles into the Pacific Ocean near Guam or not. Trump has warned that the U.S. military is locked and loaded, ready to fight back.

Questions for Discussion:

1. Should North Korea be considered a big problem?

2. Do you think the US should conduct their own missile launches?

3. Is there still any chance that a treaty could be negotiated?

Smuggling Tunnel Found In San Diego

This just in, authorities in California say they have found a tunnel that has carried dozens of people across the border of Mexico into the United States, through San Diego. Authorities found the tunnel Saturday at 1 am. It appeared to look only like a simple hole, but the hole had a ladder inside of it. When the agents approached men and women on that street started to run. 23 Chinese and 7 Mexican people were detained since they are believed to have entered the United States illegally.

Their have been thirty undocumented immigrants suspected to come into the country illegally. Some of those who were caught running tried to go back down the tunnel. Which made authorities figure out the tunnels purpose, to smuggle in illegal immigrants. Several were detained inside the tunnel, some outside. Will their be more to come?

Sources:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/08/27/smuggling-tunnel-found-in-san-diego-30-people-

detained.html

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/30-Undocumented-Immigrants-Detained-Tijuana-San-Diego-Border-Tunnel-441817983.html

Questions:

Do you think this tunnel should be blocked off ?

Do you think those who entered should be brought back to their own country?

Trump Administration Introduces Green Card Hurdle

Trump Administration Introduces Green Card Hurdle

A new change in the process of obtaining a Green Card will require an in-person interview for Certain Applicants, which will slow the process of obtaining one. This new requirement will apply to anyone moving from an employment-based visa to lawful permanent residency. Visa holders who are family members of refugees or people who receive asylum will also be required to undergo an in-person interview when they apply for provisional status.

Nearly 168,000 immigrants in these categories obtained permanent residency in 2015. Most moved from a employment based visa to a green card.This new change is for Trump's plan for "extreme vetting" of immigrants to the US.

This is not new to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services. Until about 10 years ago, in-person interviews for people moving from employment visas to green cards. According to William Stock, a Philadelphia-based attorney and former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, "The immigration service realized that most of the time it was a colossal waste of everyone's time."

The agency plans to take measures to speed up the interview process. The new policy will take effect Oct. 1.

Links
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/25/trump-administration-green-card-hurdle-242050
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/03/06/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states
https://www.uscis.gov/

Discussion
What are your thoughts on this new change?
Is it worth the time?
Do you think in-person interviews will prevent terrorists from coming into our homeland?

Attack on Spain

                             Attack on Spain

On August 17, 2017 tragedy happened on the streets of Barcelona. Barcelona is one of the most popular cities in Spain with a population of  1.61 million people. When tourist and citizens were walking the streets of Las Ramblas, an area where people shop and no cars are allowed, a white van pulled in killing at least 14 people and injuring over 100 more. This attack was one of the major terrorist attack in Spain since the train bombing in Madrid that happened in 2004. Eight hours after the attack on Barcelona, a black Audi A3 car, plowed into pedestrians at Cambrils killing a Spanish woman. Cambrils is located 62 miles down the coast of Barcelona. These two attacks were not the first, the night before in Alcanar (further down from Cambrils) a house exploded. Police who searched the house found 120 canisters in the wreckage, and believe the house was being used as a bomb factory. The house explosion was a major setback from the bigger plans they had planned. This explosion may of caused the van rampage. The terrorist (which ISIS takes the blame for) had plans to attack more places including the Sagrada Familia Church.

Trump's reaction to the attack on Spain was very heartwarming at first, but then turned very brutal. Trump brought up a chain email hoax that claimed a twentieth century army general dipped bullets in pigs blood and shot 49 out of 50 people known as terrorist and warned the last one to tell the others. By Trump bringing this up was very unnecessary for a person who attacks the fake news, is spreading an internet rumor himself. Trumps comment was dangerous and can help us get involved in the attacks.

Bombing of the House in Alcanar

Links for further reading:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-40964242

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-barcelona-attack-mass-murder-of-muslims-would-prevent-terrorism-2dfb26f121f2/


Discussion Questions:
Do you think Trumps comment was wrong?
Are there going to be any more attacks on Spain?
Is Spain as good country for ISIS to terrorize?
How do you feel about these attacks?

North Korea tones down missile threat on Guam

  There has been great controversy over whether North Korea will actually drop missiles on Guam.  However just recently North Korea toned down its threats towards Guam, and left its people in relief.  During this time of threats North Korea said they were going to release four medium range missiles on Guam.  Guam is an island, that has been targeted, near the U.S military targets.  Not only will this hurt our soldiers, but it will affect the island drastically . What do you think this could be connected to?  Before the threats were toned down, President rump went on to say that North Korea would be met with fire and Fury.  Do you think this helped the situation?  If president Trump did not make this statement, would the threats still be present, or would the damage already be done? Or do you think that Presidents Trumps speech scared North Korea and caused him to stand down?

According to  fox news, "The U.S. military occupies about one-third of the island. The rest supports tourism, but remains largely rural. With clear waters in the 80’s, and a coral reef surrounding the island, Guam is popular with divers. Marine biologist Ashton Williams worries about an armed missile strike."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/08/15/guam-residents-relieved-for-now-after-north-korea-tones-down-missile-threat.html

Kim Jong Un and his troops

President Trump's Speech 

Guam is the largest island between Hawaii, and the Philippines, it is also a former U.S military base.   we will defend our allies and that island because we have a connection to that island.  

Questions to think about

• Did president Trumps speech help or hurt the situation
• What could a potential attack on guam be connected to 
• why do you think its so important to north korea to attack guam? 
• And why do you think they toned down the treats?

Fate of The Current Transgender Soldiers

It has been one month since President Donald Trump placed a ban on transgender people in the military and now the next step in the process has been taken. Trump recently gave the Pentagon Cheif the final say on whether or not action will be taken against them transgender military persona already in uniform but there is still no further word on whether aspiring transgender soldiers will be accepted but it is not looking good.

On July 26, 2017, people held Human Rights Campaign equality flags were
 held up during an event on Capitol Hill in Washington, in
support of transgender members of the military.

Chief Mattis has been given six months to come to the final conclusion on what will happen to the transgender soldiers already in the military. In that time though, the use of federal funds to pay for sexual reassignment surgeries and medications has been put to a halt. The only word regarding the whole situation came from Dana W. White, the main spokeswoman for Mattis which stated "“More information will be forthcoming.”

Links For Further Explanation

• http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/25/politics/trump-transgender-military/index.html
• https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2017-08-26/fate-of-transgender-already-in-military-unclear-under-order
• http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-pentagon-transgender-ban-20170825-story.html

Discussion Questions

1. Do you agree with Donald Trumps decision to let Chief Mattis make the final decision on whether the uniformed transgender can stay in the military?
2. Do you think Trump really wants to give the power to the Pentagon Chief or is he only doing that so the blame is on him if something goes wrong?
3. What do you believe should be done in this situation?
4. Even if Chief Mattis lets the prior uniformed soldiers stay enrolled in the military, do you think they would even want to stay since they were dishonored and had their job threatened?

I chose this current event because my July post consisted of the beginning

of this issue and I thought it would be a good continuation of

the one, I did last month and I wanted to see if anything

else regarding the controversy 

came up. 

Sebastian Gorka Leaves the White House

Sebastian Gorka is a military and intelligence analyst for America. He serves President Trump as his deputy assistant. Or at least he did. Gorka has made the decision to resign.



Gorka has supposedly left because of his dissatisfaction with the state of the government. He feels the people in the White House are not doing their job correctly. Gorka's letter states, "the individuals who most embodied and represented the policies that will 'Make America Great Again' have been internally countered, systematically removed, or undermined in recent months".

Gorka was known for being seen on television in order to defend and promote Trump. He would often argue with hosts and reporters. Gorka did not see himself having a bigger role than that and then decided to resign. Other officials argue that Gorka did not resign and was actually forced to leave.

Unsurprisingly, Sebastian Gorka is not one of the first advisers to leave the White House. A few other people that have resigned or have been forced to leave include Steve Bannon (chief strategist and senior counselor), Anthony Scaramucci (White House communications director), and Reince Priebus (White House chief of staff).

Further Resources:

More Information on Gorka's Letter and Departure -CBS NEWS
List of the White House's Departures -ABC NEWS
More Information of Sebastian Gorka's Departure -CNN

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you believe Gorka was resigned or forced to leave the White House? Why?
2. Why do you think so many advisers have left the White House?
3. Does this issue relate to Trump's difficulty to lead as President?

Tensions Rise between North Korea and United States' Allies

          North Korea has currently been working on their missile program. They recently launched 3 missiles in between North Korea and Japan's peninsula. Thankfully, the missiles landed in the ocean and no one was harmed. Even though the missiles were not intercontinental, they went went against the requests given by the U.S. to stop testing missiles. This made tensions rise between the two opposing armies. South Korea is investigating what types of missiles were fired (nuclear, ballistic, etc.) and whether or not further testing will provide damage or harm to other surrounding countries.

Kim Jung Un Plans to Invade South Korean Islands

          Kim Jong Un is attempting to raise military strength to invade a neighboring South Korean Island. He is simulating war scenarios to prepare for and a full scale invasion on the island. He is satisfied with the training results and missile tests and believes he can easily win over the island to the South Korean military. However, the U.S. intends to fight back against the invading forces and protects its allies to keep trust between them in case of extreme measures.

For further reading:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/world/north-korea-is-reported-to-have-launched-another-missile-heightening-tensions/2017/08/25/4569a10c-89e5-11e7-96a7-d178cf3524eb_story.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/world/846077/North-Korea-v-USA-latest-news-live-updates-Kim-Jong-un-launch-missiles/amp

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you think the U.S. should be worried about these missile tests?

2. Do you think Japan was the intended target? If so, why?

3. What precautions should the U.S. and its allies take to prevent the invasion?

President Trump's Pardon

President Donald Trump has recently set his sights on the power of pardoning and has taken to twitter to show his "fans" the lucky person who he has decided to pardon. He says that former sheriff of Maricopa county Arizona, Joe Arpaio, was "convicted for doing his job". The media has taken to this story because pardoning such a controversial person may in fact bring down his popularity even further. Trump's colleagues have also begun to pay attention to this pardon in the works, especially Senator John Maccain who stated that "Mr. Arpaio was found guilty of criminal contempt for continuing to illegally profile Latinos living in Arizona based on their perceived immigration status in violation of a judge's orders,". Clearly what Arpaio was doing was not just "his job" and in fact went against the law and the Constitution itself. Arpaio was convicted of criminal contempt after disobeying a federal judge's order to stop racial profiling individuals suspected of illegally entering the States. He showed no remorse for what he had done and continued to do which shows he should not be pardon because he would probably go back to profiling Latinos if he had the chance. What's also interesting is that Arpaio was a huge proponent during Trump's campaign and he often voiced his positive opinions on the rising candidate. Many people are starting to believe that Trump is only pardoning Arpaio because he's a die hard Trump supporter and shares many political beliefs with Trump himself. Trump seems to believe Arpaio is a worthy candidate for a presidential pardon, but the rest of America thinks otherwise. 

1. Is President Trump's pardon constitutional? Why or why not? 
2. Should Arpaio ultimately be pardoned? Why or why not? 
3. Do you agree with Trump's pardon? Why or why not? 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/08/25/politics/sheriff-joe-arpaio-donald-trump-pardon/index.html

https://www.google.com/amp/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_59a17023e4b05710aa5c7fdc/amp

North Korea's Failed Missle Shots

North Korea fired three short-ranged missles, two failed mid-air and one blowup shortly after launch. The missles were fired from the earstern coast all within a thirty minute time period and reached around 155 miles at the most. These are the first known launches since July, when North Korea successfully flight tested a pair of intercontinental ballistic missles that could supposably reach the U.S. when perfected.

Commander David Benham, spokesman for U.S. Pacific Command, said they were not targeted at the United States or Guam, despite all the threats made previous. But this does not mean future missile launches won't be. He also said that the launch came five days after U.S. and South Korean forces began annual military exercises that the North claims are a rehearsal for war. President Trump did say that if needed, he would unleash "fire and fury," and now he has a reason to. But, North Korea isn't the only posing threat anymore. South Korea has also been testing new missiles of its own, including the 497 mile-range Hyunmoo-2. Although the missile has not been operationally deployed yet, it is considered a key component to the so called "kill chain." 

The Hyunmoo-2 in a test launch

Discussion Questions: 

Do you think North Korea's missles were targeted for the U.S. without warning?

What do you think Trump will do about the situation?

Link to article:

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/08/25/north-korea-short-range-missiles-failed-after-launch-us-military-says.html

First Hurricane Test for Trump

 As Hurricane Harvey is quickly approaching the coast of Texas, President Trump is also preparing for its impact.  Hurricane Harvey is heading towards Texas as a Category 3 storm, the worst that the United States has seen in 12 years.  Chuck Grassley, a senator from Iowa, just recently tweeted to President Trump saying,"..keep on top of Hurricane Harvey don't make same mistake Pres. Bush did w Katrina." To try and prevent another fatal disaster, the president, governors, mayors, and additional local officials have charged into action.

                        

                         

With this being the first natural disaster test of his presidency, democrats are expected to blame Trump for whatever happens to go wrong. However, the state of Texas seems to be prepared for the worst. Brock Long, the administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency told CNN that the "FEMA is already in the state of Texas. [They've] pre-positioned incident management teams, lifesaving, life-sustaining commodities. [They] have search and rescue teams in the state. And [they] are ready to support our state partners."  President Trump added on that he would be there to support both Texas and Louisiana with additional efforts.

Ex-FEMA chief to Trump: Don't let Harvey become your Katrina

The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees FEMA,  is also without a permanent secretary since retired Gen. John Kelly was promoted to White House chief of staff.  As a temporary replacement, Elaine Duke, Kelly's deputy, is stand-in secretary. In her press briefing on Thursday, Sarah Huckabee Sanders expressed how the White House feels very confident to have Gen. Kelly supporting the president with Hurricane Harvey and that there is "probably no better chief in staff for the president during hurricane season." She also goes on to say that "the President has been briefed and will continue to be updated as the storm progresses, and certainly something he's very aware of and will keep a very watchful eye on, and stands ready to provide resources if needed."

Further Resources and Background Information

The natural disaster test: Trump braces for Hurricane Harvey- by CNN

President Trump prepares for Hurricane Harvey- by USA Today

Trump's focus as monster storm hits Texas- by The Washington Post

Trump Administration Prepares for Hurricane Harvey- by The New York Times

Discussion Questions

• What do you think Trump's response will be if disaster does strike? Will he listen to other officials around him, or will he take matters into his own hands?
• Since Trump was so harsh on Obama with Hurricane Sandy, what will Trump do to better his response? Or will he do the same thing Obama did?
• When will Trump decide on a new secretary for the Department of Homeland Security?
• Will the absence of an official secretary make recovery for the hurricane more difficult?
• What do you think democrats will say about Trump's actions? 
• Do you think this hurricane will affect Trump's presidency as much as it did for President Bush?

Why I wrote about this topic

I chose to write about this topic because it is the first real test of Trump's presidency.  This hurricane could make or break his term, just like Hurricane Katrina did with President Bush. Being able to rebuild the country back up from a natural disaster is an extremely important responsibility as president, and it is up to Trump to keep the citizens of Texas and Louisiana as safe as possible.

Visa Ban

President Donald Trump and the Trump Administration is ready to inflict visa restrictions on four Asian and African nations who refuse to take back their citizens that have been deported from the United States. In an August 2016 speech, Trump made it clear that he was not going to put up with illegal citizens or nations that refuse to take back their citizens. President Donald Trump states, "There are at least 23 countries that refuse to take their people back after they've been ordered to leave the United States, including large numbers of violent criminals. They won't take them back. So we say, 'OK, we'll keep them.' Not going to happen with me, not going to happen with me." 

Donald Trump delivers his immigration speech at a rally in Phoenix on Aug. 31, 2016.
(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

Recalcitrant Country - having an obstinately uncooperative attitude toward authority or discipline. 

DHS (Department of Homeland Security) is going to effectively suspend travel to the United States from the four designated countries; Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea and Sierra Leone. Section 243 (d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states, “Discontinuing Granting Visas to Nationals of Country Denying or Delaying Accepting Alien.” The State Department is to stop granting travel visas in recalcitrant countries when DHS requests.

There have been instances all over the United States where an individual from a foreign country has been convicted of a crime, served his or her sentence and was released. This is due to the fact that their nation refuses to take them back. Therefore, there are criminal aliens are still walking the streets. However, Homeland Security has been able to drastically cut the number of counties that refused to take back their citizens, resulting is an immigration success for Donald Trump. 

Links for a Further Understanding:

US to Sanction Four Countries for Refusing Deportations - from www.CNN.com

US to Limit Visas From Four Nations That Won't Take Deportees - from www.usnews.com

DHS Seeks Sanctions on Countries that Refuse Deportees - from www.usnews.com

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you agree with how the Trump Administration is handling the Nations that refuse to take their citizens back? If not, why? 
2.  Do you think the United States should keep criminal illegal immigrants in jail until they are deported back into their country?
3. Do you agree with Donald Trumps stance on illegal immigrants? 
4. What can the United States do to prevent things like this from happening? 

Trump May Use His Power of the Pardon for Arpaio

As most of you know, Trump recently had a long winded, rage filled speech in Phoenix.  In his speech, he hinted at the idea of pardoning Sheriff Joe Arpaio from his sentence.  For those of you that do not know who Mr. Arpaio is, he was arrested for racial profiling when being convicted of contempt of court after a judge told him to stop racial profiling and he refused to follow the law.  So as some say that he deserved his punishment for not following the law, President Trump has a different view on Mr. Arpaio.  He sees Arpaio as a hero because he claims that he should not be sentenced after serving for the country for 50 years and was "working to keep people safe."  But Vanita Gupta, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, would excuse "racist and illegal policing" if the pardon becomes a reality for Mr. Arpaio.

Also, this pardon will definitely cause protests because it is another case involving civil rights injustices and makes Trump look even worse because he feels Arpaio did nothing wrong.  In the country we live in today, anytime people feel something is wrong, they will protest.  So that brings up the question, will the pardon result in more violence through protests or will letting him go really help the stop of illegal immigration and inspire others to do the same?  This case seems to look like a double edged sword because while Trump wants to protect the borders, our country already has major division within.

Another problem with pardoning Arpaio is that he went against what a judge ordered him to do and would end up getting away with it in the end with a pardon from the president.  There is a federal law in place and Arpaio completely ignored it and it is against the law to repeatedly say that you will "continue to keep doing what he had been doing," as the judge found, and then purposely disobey the judge's order.   Now if Trump pardons Arpaio this stirs up whether the law in place is truly in place for others going through a similar case if the president doesn't care that Arpaio did not follow this.  Arpaio easily could have appealed the judge's orders and could have asked him to possibly reconsider, but he purposely did not and that is the federal crime he would serve time for unless of course President Trump does what most do not want him to do, and pardon the sheriff.

For more information on this topic check out these sites

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/24/politics/why-joe-arpaio-was-found-guilty/index.html

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/347907-pardoning-joe-arpaio-undermines-respect-for-the-law

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a57201/arpaio-pardon/

Discussion Questions:

Should President Trump pardon Joe Arpaio?

Will a pardon cause further division in our country and more protests?

Do you think Arpaio acted within the law?