Category: Donald Trump

Introduction to the Issue

The Trump travel ban includes a series of executive actions that were enacted in 2017 by the President of the United States. With the first order, significant restrictions on travel to the US were imposed on the citizens of Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, and Somalia (American Council on Education). However, legal challenges and protests that took place after the initial order prompted the second-order that amended some of the pro-second-order first order as well as removed Iraq from the list. The final adjustments to the ban were associated with imposing additional restrictions on the citizens of Chad, Venezuela, and North Korea, while Sudan was no longer included in the list. While the rationale behind the ban was associated with maintaining national security, it is problematic and exclusionary because it targets individuals of predominantly Muslim religion, which is discriminatory and goes against the established international guidelines on equality, inclusion, and the freedom to practice any religion.

It is important to have an in-depth understanding of the ban and its potential impact on the international community because there are already considerations to implement further orders associated with travel restrictions, as mentioned by Sabur for The Telegraph. The aim of the current paper is to explore the ban and review the implications of its enactment for the affected individuals and the global community as a whole. Furthermore, policy recommendations will be made for improving the situation and finding ways to reduce the extreme levels of discrimination that have been established by the policy.

The immediate context for imposing the travel ban on the citizens of specific countries is the declining economy of the United States. According to Trump, the government wants Americans to have the jobs and the healthcare. And its a very powerful order (qtd. in Pilkington and Rushe). Moreover, the current President is planning to attain re-election in 2020, and strengthening the economy, even during the pandemic, could guarantee him votes from the population. However, since the ban is applicable to the majority of Muslim countries, the question remains as to whether it was enacted to prevent immigration, in general, to give Americans jobs and healthcare or prevent Muslim immigration, which is a different issue in itself. For example, Iran was affected by the ban the most, with the number of immigrant visas declining in 2018 by 92% compared to 2017 (Niayesh). Policy recommendations are needed for addressing the issue because of the adverse influence on the lives of people who are prevented from seeking life opportunities in a country that can benefit from their knowledge, skills, and experiences.

Recommendations for Changing the Policy on Travel Ban

First Proposal: The Option to Appeal

The first policy recommendation is to decrease significantly the restrictions on traveling associated with the ban. While such a solution seems simple, the only way in which a Muslim travel ban could be fixed is that no travel ban should be imposed. Courts should oppose unconstitutional attempts to challenge the commitment of the US to freedom and equality among religions. The government action initiated by Trump has an intent to discriminate based on religion, and it is unconstitutional (Blackman). The proposed policy recommendation is associated with providing the opportunity of appealing the rejection of entering the US in court. Therefore, when individuals of Muslim backgrounds are refused from entering the country, they should receive a definite decision from the court as to whether the refusal holds ground, and there is no way in changing it.

While the process may take some additional time, it establishes a window of opportunity that immigrant individuals from other countries can use to their advantage. At this time, it is unlikely that the travel ban will get less strict due to the restrictions on entering the US associated with the COVID-19 pandemic (Godin). However, when the situation with the virus gets under control, and it is possible to travel to the US, the citizens affected by the Muslim ban should be given an opportunity to appeal the unconstitutional restriction on them entering the country. It is imperative to break from the radical rejection of immigrants and provide some leeway that is supported by the principles laid out in the Constitution.

Second Proposal: The Congress Action

The second policy recommendation includes the increased involvement of Congress in challenging the travel ban. Ever since the implementation of the policy, it remains a persistent moral stain on the United States, yet a potentially great moment for American democracy (Woodsome). At this moment, the system works against families living between the US and other countries, which means that they cannot be reunited. The prohibition of religious discrimination with the immigration system is a call for Congress to act according to the Constitution. The Republican members of Congress have the opportunity to join the Democratic representatives in supporting the No Ban Act or other initiatives targeted at ensuring that individuals are not subjected to travel discrimination on the basis of their religious background.

Third Proposal: The Public Action

For ensuring the reduced influence of the travel ban and improve the opportunities of immigrant individuals to seek a new life in the US, public action is imperative. The cooperation between progressive organizations that work toward preserving the constitutional rights of individuals. They should facilitate the Congressional oversight of the Muslim ban, including the requirements on appropriate reporting. In addition, public action and the efforts of non-profit organizations are imperative for reporting the waivers issued to the applicants of visas to facilitate better accountability. In this case, transparency is imperative for offering a foundation necessary for demonstrating the need for repealing the ban or significantly adjusting it (NIAC Takes in the Muslim Ban).

In the current situation with the pandemic, establishing accountability for the actions of the government in terms of refusing the entry of Muslim citizens will be complicated. To protect the country from the risks of further spreading of the virus, the government has the right to ban the entry of international citizens into the country. However, it is imperative for the public and relevant organizations to continue scrutinizing the travel ban. In light of the pandemic, the government can use the present state of affairs as a reason to continue rejecting the entry of Muslim individuals to the United States. It is imperative that the public is active and facilitates debate on whether such actions are representative of the United States spirit.

Discussion on the Problem

Had there not been a global pandemic of the COVID-19 virus, it could have been possible to facilitate more radical actions targeted at reducing the adverse impact of the Muslim travel ban. At this time, the government is imposing further restrictions on travel because of the spreading of the virus, and, with the American and global economy facing tremendous challenges, the ban can be used as another method of keeping work for the citizens of the country instead of giving it to immigrants. What such a perspective fails to address is that immigrants can offer an invaluable contribution to the economy of the US with their unique knowledge, experience, and skills. Discriminating against the potential great workers that can establish businesses or work for American companies is ineffective, especially at times when the economy is under significant scrutiny.

In addition to being ineffective and not offering any benefit for the American economy, the Muslim travel ban contributes to the exasperation of foreign affairs of the United States with other countries. The compelling need to provide for the nations security is rather a cover-up for the blatant discrimination against the representatives of the Muslim religion (Zurcher). Because of this, it is imperative to facilitate a policy adjustment that would integrate the option of appealing the rejection to enter the country. Such a change will not eliminate the ban completely, as a change in country leadership is necessary to achieve that, but facilitate accountability and transparency regarding the decisions of the government. According to Wofsy, the only way to fix the Muslim ban is not to have a Muslim ban. However, the appeal option is a window of hope and opportunity that will involve the US courts that will decide whether an individual has a moral right to enter the country as an immigrant. Since the ban goes against the anti-discriminatory provisions of the Constitution, a more open process is required.

Concluding Remarks

The travel ban established by President Trump in 2017 represents an attack on the human right of individuals to practice their religion since the citizens of Muslim countries are the ones that are mostly affected by the policy. Families got separated as it has become harder for them to get reunited because of the ban, with the numbers of immigrant visas being issued reducing by more than 70% for the majority of affected countries. Even having a waiver that is given to those undergoing hardships and requiring to be with loved ones in the United States does not guarantee to enter the country. This way of excluding people based on their religious beliefs should be challenged by the population of the US as well as the global community.

Unfortunately, solving the travel ban is only possible by eliminating it. The three policy recommendations are all targeted at decreasing the adverse impact of the ban and challenging the system that prevents the entry of immigrants who seek work opportunities or want to reunite with their relatives. For some, the Muslim ban is an effort to reduce the inflow of individuals who pose a potential threat to national security, but the reality is far from that. Regular people that have no connection to radical ideas associated with Islam are being affected the most. While the current pandemic limits any possible challenges to the travel ban, it is important not to forget about its impact and continue raising awareness of the discriminatory policy.

References

1. American Council on Education. Trump Issues New Travel Ban, Clarifies Potential Impact on Student Visa Holders. ACE, 2017. Web.
2. Blackman, Josh. The Legality of the 3/6/17 Executive Order, Part III: The Establishment Clause. Lawfare, 2017. Web.
3. Godin, Melissa. Why Public Health Experts Say Trumps Travel Ban Wont Curb the Spread of COVID-19 in the US. Time, 2020.
4. NIAC Takes on the Muslim Ban. Niacouncil.
5. Niayesh, Vahid. Statistics show that Trumps Travel Ban Was Always a Muslim Ban. Quartz, 2019.Web.
6. Pilkington, Ed, and Dominic Rushe. Operation Reopen America Are We About to Witness a Second Historic Failure of Leadership from Trump?The Guardian, 2020. Web.
7. Sabur, Rozina. Donald Trumps Immigration Ban: Who Is Affected and What Will the Impact Be? The Telegraph, 2020. Web.
8. Wofsy, Cody. Why the Only Way to Fix the Muslim Ban Is Not to Have a Muslim Ban. ACLU, 2017.
9. Woodsome, Kate. One Man Cant Change the Travel Ban, but Congress Could. The Washington Post, 2020. Web.
10. Zurcher, Anthony. Big Win for Trump and His Travel Ban. BBC News, 2017. Web.

The editorial board at New York Times Editorial Board on November 15, 2022, voted to reject the decision of having President Donald Trump running again for the United States presidency in 2022. In this editorial, they address some of the major weaknesses that the former president had when he was in power. The editors claim that President Trump failed to unify the country and to fight vices such as racism and misogyny. The editorial also points out the open contempt that he had towards journalists when he was in power. They believe that another term of his presidency will demonstrate that the American society is not committed to addressing these social vices. The piece also criticizes his foreign policies, stating that his presidency threatened the relationship that the country has enjoyed with its allies in Europe and other parts of the world.

The editorial is strongly opposed to the possibility of Donald Trump getting to power again. This is a liberal view as the editors feel that the president will reverse some of the gains made towards creating a society where everyone feels entitled to the benefits that the nation has to offer. The editorial reflects a liberal view where retrogressive beliefs and practices that disenfranchise a section of the society, are eliminated. They believe President Trump will not support such policies (The New York Times Editorial Board, 2022). I support arguments put forth in this editorial. I believe the country deserves a leader that will unite the nation and promote diversity. Social work values supports diversity as a tool that make a society strong, as the editorial explains. There is the fear that these values will be disregarded under his rule.

The editorial by Gray, a senior editor at Telegram, on November 4, 2022, contradicts the opinion presented in the editorial above. In this editorial, the argument presented is that the current President Joe Biden has failed the United States. He explains that during the tenure of President Trump, Russia did not date invade Ukraine because they considered him a tough leader (Gray, 2022). However, they did so when President Biden came to power because they know that he is weak. The editor feels that President Bidens policies are even more divisive, making Trump a better president for the country.

The editor supports the possibility of President Donald Trump getting back to power. The point of view presented in this editorial is conservative as it seeks to promote status quo as championed by the former president. It reflects a conservative perspective of the issue as it emphasizes the need for America to use its military power to dictate global policies. For instance, the current regime opted to avoid a direct confrontation with Russia when it invaded Ukraine because of various reasons. There was the concern of the cost of war to the country in terms of money and human casualties, the length of time that the war would have taken, the possibility of nuclear conflict between the United States and Russia, among many other challenges. Some of the US military generals who advised the president against direct involvement in the war were appointed to their current positions by the former president. It means that there was a legitimate and bipartisan reasons why the president avoided the war. My personal opinion is that this editorial fails to take into accounts various social welfare challenges the country faces that cannot be solved by divisive politics of the former president.

References

Gray, F. (2022,). Biden is deluded if he thinks he can beat Trump again. Telegraph. Web.

The New York Times Editorial Board. (2022). America deserves better than Donald Trump. The New York Times. Web.

Introduction

Donald Trump, the current President of the United States of America, is planning to run again in the 2020 election with the same platform and will likely become the Republican nominee. The Democrats are currently in the middle of choosing a contender among a variety of options. Joe Biden, who served as Vice-President in the Obama administration, is among the most prominent candidates. Both presidential candidates acknowledge the existence of inequality in society, but they come from different backgrounds and offer dissimilar solutions. They put a different emphasis on racism, sexism, and classism, respectively. This essay tries to compare the two candidates platforms and determine how they would influence the oppression in peoples lives.

Racism

Joe Biden highlights issues of racial discrimination in his campaign explicitly but does not clarify the specific measures. Joes vision (2019) promotes the idea of making it easier for Americans of color to vote and having their voices count equally in the nations democracy. The campaign also supports the messages of inclusivity, tolerance, and diversity, all of which benefit people of races other than Caucasians. With that said, there is no description of the specific issues affecting people of color or the measures that will be taken to help them. As such, it is challenging to quantify the specific benefits that may result from Mr. Bidens election.

Donald Trumps campaign website directs the user to the website that lists the current administrations various achievements with the implicit promise that the President will achieve more of the same should he be elected again. Recent President Donald J. Trump accomplishments (2019) highlights the unemployment rates of Asian and African Americans, which have hit a record low in 2019 and achieved the lowest disparity with white people ever. As such, minorities are becoming equal in the workplace, and their increased economic viability likely contributes to their social life, as well. Overall, Mr. Trump is willing to help anyone who shows an inclination to work, regardless of their race.

Sexism

Joe Bidens website does not mention women or sexism in its central positions. While this omission may be assumed to be an oversight or the candidates focus on issues he believes to be more prominent, his past complicates the situation. Mr. Biden has a history of sexist accusations, which have continued into 2019 with stories such as that published by Elsesser (2019), who calls him a benevolent sexist. This variety of the trait stems from a belief that women are less capable than men instead of an active dislike. As a result, Mr. Biden is likely to be patronizing to women, a tendency that may express itself in his policies as President.

Donald Trumps attitude to women takes the same direction as race, with a significant focus on economics, jobs, and self-help. As Law (2019) records, his State of the Union Address contained claims that women had filled 58% of all new jobs in 2018. The ability for women to find jobs should normalize their presence and make sure that they are treated as equals. Additionally, Recent President Donald J. Trump accomplishments (2019) mentions a significant amount in grants to recruit, mentor, train, and retain women in the workplace. However, there is no mention of other aspects of womens lives where sexism may be an issue.

Classism

Joe Biden explicitly opposes the upper class of extremely wealthy people and promotes the existence of a middle class in the United States. Joes vision (2019) mentions the ability to own a home, send children to college, and save and get ahead regardless of ones starting position. As such, the candidate intends to revitalize rural America, improve peoples ability to obtain an education beyond high school, and protect workers rights. However, there is no mention of how he intends to achieve these expensive changes or reduce the wealth disparity in the nation. Nevertheless, if he succeeds, most Americans will be able to lead considerably better lives.

Donald Trump is known for his populistic tendencies, creating jobs, lowering taxes, and promoting general national prosperity. It could be argued that a good economy benefits the extremely rich, a category that includes the current President, the most. However, according to Recent President Donald J. Trump accomplishments (2019), Mr. Trumps efforts have created jobs, increased average wages, improved trade, and reduced drug usage. All of these results have improved the livelihood of the lower and middle classes. As for the wealthy, one may argue that any attempt to reduce their wealth would lead them to avoid the ramifications by relocating to another country.

Conclusion

A comparison of Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump may not be entirely fair, as one has to rely on promises and the other uses current achievements to establish his position. However, on the whole, the two presidential candidates appear to be addressing different varieties of issues related to oppression. Mr. Trump expects minorities to overcome their issues when given equal opportunities in the workplace. By contrast, Mr. Biden wants to improve the social status of minorities and reduce the disparity between the wealthy and the poor but has some issues with sexism accusations. As such, Mr. Trumps position should slowly keep reducing oppression in society, and Mr. Bidens approach may reduce it significantly in some aspects and increase it in others if it succeeds.

References

Elsesser, K. (2019). Joe Biden, rubbing noses and benevolent sexism.Forbes. Web.

Joes vision for America. (2019). Web.

Law, T. (2019). Read the full transcript of President Trumps State of the Union address.Time. Web.

Recent President Donald J. Trump accomplishments. (2019). Web.

The presented political meme includes two pictures of Donald Trump with the upper caption reading Youre hired! with the following caption stating Youre fired!. The meme was inspired by a series of appointments and quick dismissals from the office that followed numerous politicians during Trumps time in the office. It seems that whoever opposes the presidents current political agenda or whose affiliation somehow discredits the President either gets removed from the position or switched to a less important role. The apparent inability to choose appropriate individuals for the position and standing by ones decisions is being satirically parodied in this choice of captions and pictures.

On September 10, 2019, President Donald Trump fired John R. Bolton, his third security advisor, stating that his incompetent approach led to the worsening of relationships between the US, North Korea, Iran, and Afghanistan. Boltons approach was deemed as either too hard-lined or too soft, depending on the source. As it stands, the new candidate for the position of national security advisor is still being deliberated, but the President is steadily running out of capable candidates for the position.

This is not the first individual to suffer from Mr. Trumps contradictory decisions. Lu and Yourish report that the current office has already beaten the record for achieving the largest cabinet turnover during Trumps first term. The current list of replaced personnel is as follows (Lu &Yourish):

• Communications chief  six replacements, with Stephanie Grisham being the seventh and holding office for the past 68 days;
• Secretary of homeland security  three replacements, with the current acting secretary being Kevin McAleenan;
• Chief of staff  two replacements, with the current one being Mick Mulvaney;
• Press secretary  two fired, the current post occupied by Stephanie Grisham;
• Secretary of veteran affairs  three replacements;
• National security advisor  four replacements, candidate pending;
• Administrator of small business  two replacements;
• Director of national intelligence  two replacements;
• Attorney general  two replacements;
• Secretary of defense  two replacements;
• E.P.A administrator, Budget director, Secretary of Interior, Secretary of labor, secretary of state, C.I.A director, and Chief economic advisor positions  one replacement each;

These shifts in position are causing the country serious problems in the the economy as well as internal and international politics. One of the biggest issues is that most people placed in the position of power have little previous experience of holding office (Young). Such a situation means that a period of acclimatization must pass before the new candidate gets used to the new realities of their position. Typically, this period takes between 3 months and a year. Frequent changes in the cabinet mean that the entire organization is stuck in a loophole when one minister gets replaced by the other by the end of their trial-and-error period. As a result, the command structure gets paralyzed by ineptitude.

Another issue with such a strategy lies in the undermining of leadership and interpersonal relationships between employees. When a leader is being replaced every 1-8 months, subordinate divisions become disillusioned with the realities of their leadership and allow themselves to ignore, boycott, or bypass orders they feel are faulty or irrelevant (Young). There is no reason to fear retribution, as, by the time the new secretary or director gets to deal with it, they are going to be replaced.

Such an approach does not earn the President any respect in the international arena. It demonstrates a crippling lack of leadership and an inability to choose a loyal and competent team to help one govern a country as large and powerful as the USA (Young). As a result, diplomatic relationships suffer, as most foreign dignitaries do not feel confident to negotiate with any representatives from the US, knowing that chances are they might be replaced within a short period of time, potentially by a candidate with a diametrically opposing view on the scope of agreements. Trumps controversial policy towards China and Iran exemplifies this trend.

Lastly, there are economic consequences of switching personnel often. Aside from the obvious effects of decreased efficiency of the organizations that have their leaders switched out every several months, every replacement comes with a generous severance package that has to be paid to the individual who gets replaced, thus increasing the expenditures on personnel and wasting money that could have been used elsewhere (Young). Instead of using it to better the lives of many Americans, the White House uses it to fix its own blunders.

To summarize, President Trump did not approach the elections alone  he came with a crew of solid specialists whom he could trust with governing the state. As the meme demonstrates, the words about having a team of professionals was yet another lie used to sway the public vote in his favor. By switching his ministers and representatives like gloves, Mr. Trump shows a lack of leadership and people skills, which is one of the most important qualities in a politician and a president of a nation as large and multicultural as the US.

Works Cited

Lu, Denise, and Karen Yourish. The Turnover at the Top of Trump Administration.The New York Times. 2019, Web.

Young, Neil J. Why Trumps Unprecedented Cabinet Turnover Matters.Huffington Post. 2019, Web.

President Donald J. Trump has had a long history of controversial behavior and conflicts with various organizations. Some of the highly publicized issues surrounding him have involved accusations of interference by foreign powers, which could be devastating for his presidency if proven true. Mr. Trump has been the target of a probe that tried to check the claim that his presidential campaign collaborated with the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election until the middle of 2019.

However, the investigation produced no decisive results that could confirm the relationship, effectively exonerating Mr. Trump via the presumption of innocence. However, in November 2019, a story surrounding Russias neighboring country, Ukraine, emerged and ultimately led to an impeachment inquiry against the President. This paper will describe the contents of the accusations and present the arguments of both sides.

The Events in Ukraine

Hunter Biden, the son of 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden, worked in Ukraine as a non-executive director of a natural gas company named Burisma Holdings between 2014 and 2015. During that time, he may have earned a high salary, disproportionate to his age and experience, which led local authorities to investigate the companys conduct and the reason for the hire.

According to Ivanova, Tsvetkova, Zhegulev, and Baker (2019), Joe Biden called for the removal of the prosecutor who was heading the case, which ultimately occurred, and the mans replacement dropped the case. When President Trump learned of the incident in 2019, he publicly voiced his suspicions of corruption. The statements he made called both Hunter Bidens employment and his fathers actions into question. He asserted that the then Vice-President of the United States used his influence to pressure Ukraine into ignoring his sons misconduct.

Such behavior is not unusual for Donald J. Trump, who is known for his presidential campaign promise to put his opponent, Hillary Clinton, in jail. However, as Ivanova et al. (2019) mention, the Ukrainian government responded to the claim by reviewing prior investigations into Burismas owner. A White House whistleblower then emerged, claiming that the President cooperated with his lawyer to pressure the nation into indirectly attacking his political rival.

Ivanova et al. (2019) highlight the claim that he withheld military assistance until the inquiry was restarted, which would qualify as a quid quo pro. If the claim is true, Mr. Trump has committed an impeachable offense and should be removed from office. As such, the Democratic party has started an inquiry into the matter, trying to obtain concrete evidence of wrongdoing.

The Pro-Impeachment Argument

Trumps alleged actions regarding Ukraine are the primary focus of the impeachment inquiry. The proponents of the action claim that he abused his power as the President of the United States, putting the personal goal of reelection before the needs of the country. An attack on Hunter Biden is an indirect attack on his father, whose involvement can severely tarnish his reputation. Moreover, Joe Biden is among the most popular Democratic candidates at the moment, making it likely that he will receive the partys nomination.

As such, by ruining his opponents reputation and providing examples of wrongdoing while in a position of power, even if unproven, Mr. Trump could sway a significant portion of the voter base. As such, the core of the inquiry is that he abused his position to force Ukraine into bringing up the case, hoping that no one would learn of the action.

Mr. Trumps overall behavior is a secondary clause that will likely be used in the articles of impeachment. Bade, DeBonis, Viebeck, and Olorunnipa (2019) note the committees claim that the President used his powers to block inquiries into the Ukraine matter by Congress. Impeachment supporters say that these alleged actions highlight his unsuitability for the Presidency. They further support his history of antagonizing his political opponents and many media organizations.

They assert that Mr. Trumps actions damage the prestige and dignity of the Presidential office and set a dangerous precedent for the interference of the executive branch with the legislative one. With this view in mind, one can assert that the Ukraine affair is the culmination of years-long misconduct by the President. As such, his removal is overdue, and the Ukraine affair is a pretext that provides a specific and strong reason for it.

The Anti-Impeachment Argument

The primary argument against impeachment is that the event that serves as its most significant cause did not occur. As Kan (2019) notes, the whistleblowers information centers on a phone call between Mr. Trump and the President of Ukraine, which the administration proceeded to release and which did not contain any indications of a threat. The United States is among the most important partners for Ukraine, which is the target of frequent power struggles between world powers.

As such, it may have complied with requests by the nations top officials without any additional leverage. This assertion also reinforces Mr. Trumps assertion that Joe Biden used his influence to protect his son from the inquiry by Ukrainian law enforcement officials. The public call to remove the prosecutor would have served as a sufficient indication for Petro Poroshenko, who was Ukraines President at the time, to take action.

The second argument against impeachment tries to frame Mr. Trumps history of confrontations in a different light. As Kan (2019) notes, the impeachment inquiry is being conducted by Democrats behind closed doors, with minimal or no transparency. As a result, the proceedings are highly partisan and have little to no Republican support. Impeachment, in its current state, will likely never pass through the conservative-controlled Senate, which makes it meaningless for its constitutional purpose.

As such, one can argue that the proceedings are another event in a series of Democratic attacks on Mr. Trump and people associated with him. The party, along with various left-wing media aligned with it, has been accused of attacking him whenever he does anything, a phenomenon that led to the popularization of the term fake news. As such, impeachments opponents claim that, along with the other controversies involving Mr. Trump, the inquiry is an attempt to damage the Presidents popularity before the 2020 election.

Conclusion

Both sides of the impeachment argument essentially agree that it is the result of long-standing animosity between President Trump and the Democratic party. Supporters of the act claim that the conflicts that emerge are proof of his dangerous character. Its opponents respond that Democrats and the media have been escalating these issues on purpose. The current President of the United States is a divisive and adversarial figure, but his presidency is associated with significant positive achievements.

With regards to the information surrounding impeachment, there appears to be no confirmed factual evidence of wrongdoing by the President, while the matter that attracted his interest warrants further investigation. As such, the procedure is essentially based on subjective perceptions of Mr. Trumps behavior and may not be intended to remove him but rather to serve as a political attack.

References

Bade, R., DeBonis, Viebeck, E., & Olorunnipa, T. (2019). Democrats expected to unveil articles of impeachment against Trump, focusing on abuse of power, obstruction of Congress. The Washington Post. Web.

Ivanova, P., Tsvetkova, M., Zhegulev, I., & Baker, L. (2019). What Hunter Biden did on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma. Reuters. Web.

Kan, J. (2019). Impeachment inquiry may result in unreliable conclusions without due process: Legal analyst. The Epoch Times. Web.

When Donald Trump, as the Republican frontrunner, started sharing his attitudes towards various political and economic strategies in the country, American society was considerably reshaped. Some people found it effective to support the politician in order to protect the nation and promote its global prosperity. There are also individuals who oppose the chosen position due to its radical nature and unpredictable outcomes. Waterboarding urgency turns out to be one of such debatable issues, with a variety of opinions to be present.

Trump Position

Donald Trump was a well-known political figure even before he became the 45th President of the United States. His positions on health care, education, foreign policies, and immigration were sharp and rather provocative. Trump aimed at protecting Americans by reducing the presence of immigrants in the country, as well as the outside impact of international relationships. Millions of people were eager to support him, and his idea to revive waterboarding as an obligatory norm in preventing terrorism was frequently discussed. Trump used peoples memories about the 9/11 attacks and the Muslims celebrations on rooftops in New Jersey (Jacobs, 2015).

Despite the fact that the Bush administration found it ineffective and illegal after being applied to an al-Qaida suspect, Trump demonstrated his evident interest in using this interrogation method (Jacobs, 2015). Even if it is impossible to obtain information or achieve the initial goals, such torture is what terrorists deserve.

Pros of Waterboarding

Although politicians consider waterboarding as an aggressive form of interrogation, one should remember that ordinary people might also apply this tactic. According to Balfe (2019), after the 9/11 attacks and the implementation of waterboarding to torture suspects, some individuals found it interesting to challenge themselves using the same method. Amateur waterboarding turned out to be a common activity among young, mostly white, men to check their limits (Balfe, 2019).

Therefore, it is correct to say that this technique is mild, with no scars or severe health risks being observed. In addition, as Trump said, waterboarding is a good method to gather information from the enemy and predict national or international threats. Finally, if this so-called torture could save lives during the war or in another military event without taking a life, many people should find it allowable. Trump used personal motifs and rather aggressive tactics to justify waterboarding, but his position had a right to exist.

Cons of Waterboarding

At the same time, a number of negative attitudes and facts cannot be ignored in the current discussion. Despite the possibility to measure health risks, waterboarding remains a significant intervention in human life. If it is applied for military or political purposes, it could be somehow justified and approved. However, as soon as it was allowed, it would be hard to control civilians. For example, Cox (2018) mentioned a shocking situation when parents used waterboarding as a form of punishment for their 12-year-old daughter in 2017.

Perhaps, such an event could be avoided in case families knew or heard nothing about such possibilities. A simulation of the risk of drowning is dangerous, either physiologically or psychologically. Human emotions are unpredictable, and the decision to renew waterboarding has multiple consequences.

Conclusion

The discussion about waterboarding promoted by Trump several years ago has its impact on modern society. While some groups of people understand the appropriateness of this interrogation technique for military or terrorist-preventing purposes, waterboarding becomes a dangerous activity for the world. If politicians find it necessary to use it, they should not tell about their intentions out loud. Their responsibility is keeping peace, comfort, and safety for citizens instead of demonstrating their ambitions and aggressive intentions.

References

Balfe, M. (2019). Survival strategies while engaging in deviant behaviors: The case of amateur waterboarding torture. Deviant Behavior. Web.

Cox, R. (2018). Historicizing waterboarding as a severe torture norm. International Relations, 32(4), 488-512.

Jacobs, B. (2015). Donald Trump on waterboarding: Even if it doesnt work they deserve it. The Guardian. Web.

Leadership: Donald Trump

A leader is a person who influences the actions of others in a group. As such, leadership may be considered the act of influencing the behavior of others in a group in order to achieve a specified goal (Thomas 6). One of the outstanding global leaders is Donald Trump; his high status and appraisal are proved by his exclusive achievements in his career. There is a lot to be learned from his leadership skills in terms of business management in the contemporary turbulent business environment. His leadership style seems to be visionary in regards to his managerial skills and the ability to focus on the future rather than focusing on past events. Donald disserves accreditation for his stupendous leadership and for his triumphant success.

The success of Donald Trump as a leader

According to Bender (1), success is not a matter of chance, but the result of proper planning and the development of a winning habit irrespective of past conditions. On this basis, Triumph Donald can be considered as one of the successful leaders judging by his managerial behavior. The following are some of the reasons behind the success of Donald Trump:

1. Donalds main focus was on the current situation and events. He highly discouraged people from focusing on the past since people can do nothing to correct mistakes that were committed in the past. He also mobilized all his energy and attention on current tasks since too much focus on past activities is subject to future replication (Thomas 231). Moreover, Donald had the ability to focus on things that were beneficial at the present moment, and let go of all the thoughts and ambitions that would not allow him to achieve his objectives.
2. Donald Trump never got discouraged if a failure occurred when he was moving on the right track. According to Thomas (146), success can not be achieved without failure. By encouraging people not to fear failure if they were moving towards the achievement of their goals, Donald can be considered as a prospective leader, who did not focus on the means, but the end results.
3. From his undertakings, it is evident that Donald was passionate about his work, which eliminated any sort of boredom. Since developing passion involves a liking in the work that one does, Donalds passion increased his energy and motivation in carrying out a task. As a result of being passionate about the activities he was undertaking, he remained motivated which kept him moving forward.
4. Furthermore, Trump used to do things practically; he tried to avoid theoretical work. Thomas (68) postulates that leaders must be willing to involve themselves in the practical execution of activities in order to learn new tricks, hence, Trumps strategy of executing problems practically places him as a successful leader.
5. Donald was a good reader which enlarged his thinking capacity. While reading many articles about business success, he developed dreams concerning his career. The biggest hurdle to success is the failure to dream (Bender 2). However, over-dreaming enlarges the scope of perception of things, and it makes a person mobilize the necessary resources in order to achieve the set objectives. In other words, by means of building castles in the air it is easier for one to build a prosperous foundation for the future.
6. In addition, Trump chose to lead others in all the activities that he undertook. According to Thomas (46), a leader should work tirelessly and selflessly towards the achievement of the set goals of a group. He/she should have the drive to influence the behavior and the direction of actions of all members of a group. By choosing to lead, all subordinates in his business were motivated to emulate him, and reduce to zero all their efforts in their work.

Strengths and weaknesses of Donald Trump as a leader

People naturally have strengths and weaknesses that influence their adjustment in various environments (Bender 2). Leaders are no exception and may have various strengths and weaknesses. Some of the strengths of Donald Trump included his ego being a driving force in a person that propels him/her to take the necessary steps towards the accomplishment of a task. Donalds ego was a clear requirement for his success. In this regard, a leader, who has the proper ego usually, has the power to keep it going until the mission is accomplished. A leader who has proper planning skills has the impetus to keep on moving forward regardless of any challenge that may be encountered.

It is important to note that Donald Trump did not have a lot of weak points, which was due to his ability to focus on what he was best at (Bender 5). Despite being Black by origin, he was able to remain focused regardless of some issues of racial bias emanating from his competitors in the United States of America. Trump has been recognized as a true pillar of business success, and he has been recognized all over the world. Most companies in the United States have also adopted his name in marketing their brands through advertising celebrities.

Works Cited

Bender, Marylin. The Empire and Ego of Donald Trump. The New York Times. 1983: 5. Web.

Thomas, Nelson. Your Attitude: Key to Success, New York: Heres Life Publishers, 1984. Print.

Donald Trump is a former president of the United States, whose image has been largely impacted by social media. Being an active user on Twitter, he has made controversial statements which abide by conservative worldviews and are unaccepted by liberal standards. Trumps media presence has been widely discussed in the context of his behavior both before taking the post and during the presidency. Trump is the focus of this essay as a prominent case of a worldwide discourse regarding the negative effects of media on a politicians image.

Social media has significantly helped Trump during his rise to power in 2016. His presidential campaign was unconventional, while his victory was surprising. According to Francia (2017), Trump focused the press attention on himself through his postings on Twitter. He gained publicity from employing free media without having to spend millions of dollars on advertising (Francia, 2017). Trumps Twitter account was a way for the future president to clearly share his opinions and be open to the public, which was a factor in his success.

However, during his presidential term, Trump has gained much attention to his controversial statements that are not favored by liberals. The development of leftist thought has brought many critiques to Trumps persona, and this has indirectly ruined his career. Over the period of 5 years, the political dynamics of America have changed. Although there has always been a balance between Republican and Democratic thoughts among Americans, there are slightly more democracy supporters now than in 2014 (Wide Gender Gap, 2018). This trend plays a role in Trumps defeat in the recent elections, and it has partly been influenced by the former presidents controversies.

In his career, Trump has made many discriminatory statements against women. For example, the former president repeatedly referred to the diplomat Marie Yovanovitch simply by the term woman, without ever calling her by the last name (Prasad, 2019). This is an example of gendered language, which does not suggest the value of Yovanovitch as a politician and undermines her professional success (Prasad, 2019). The media focus on Trumps opinions towards women has brought much attention to the public.

Furthermore, ethnic minorities are also commonly discriminated against by Donald Trump. His infamous border wall is another example of such behavior, which for a while has been a target of media discourse. Trump frequently stated that it is a measure of national security. However, this is not how the mass media portrays it. For instance, Lee (2019) called the construction a monument to white supremacy (para. 14). Many other platforms described the wall in a similar light, seeing Trumps statements regarding it as a mere excuse to mask the politicians racism towards Mexicans.

Trump openly states his opinions, which are often questionable and, therefore, are the target of the media. The combination of his image and the changing environment of the United States led to his failure to be re-elected for the second presidential term (Bryant, 2020). To maintain his career, Trump would need to adapt his public statements to the current political setting. This would mean a drastic shift to a more liberal, although dishonest, ruler. Considering Trumps discriminatory statements, it is fair to assume that he is not a democratic leader. His judgments shed light on the true person he is, who should not be a countrys president. This is why the punishment of being impeached twice and losing the 2020 election fits Trumps wrongdoings.

Social media can have a substantial impact on ones career. Internet and press can prove beneficial in providing attention to a public image, and it can be an effective way of advertising, or, in the case of Donald Trump, political campaign promotion. Nevertheless, there are also negative effects of the internet on a persona. Once the controversial actions or opinions of a celebrity become known to the public, they are the center of discourse. In a changing environment, such behaviors of the past are less appropriate than they were before. The focus of media on such celebrity attributes, subsequently, can ruin ones career.

References

Bryant, N. (2020). US election 2020: Why Donald Trump lost. BBC News. Web.

Francia, P. L. (2017). Free media and Twitter in the 2016 presidential election. Social Science Computer Review, 36(4), 440455. Web.

Lee, B., Jr. (2019). This isnt a border wall: Its a monument to white supremacy. Bloomberg. Web.

Prasad, R. (2019). How Trump talks about women  and does it matter? BBC News. Web.

Wide gender gap, growing educational divide in voters party identification. (2018). Pew Research Center. Web.

Introduction

For a very long time, the United States of America has been offering a safe haven for people running away from persecution, tyranny, and violence. Today, more people are being uprooted from their countries by wars as well as crises. The United States act of providing resettlement t these refugees provides them with a lifesaving humanitarian imperative that should be copied by many countries worldwide. Each year, the president of the US holds some consultations with Congress to set the annual refugee admission targets. The capping of refugee settlement or setting a ceiling for refugee admission by the president is called Presidential Determination. It is often issued before October 1st, the start of a new fiscal year in the United States.

My Position

Before former President Donald Trumps tenure, the average yearly ceiling was above 95,000 admissions. However, other presidents had also set their ceilings at different levels. For instance, former president Barrack Obamas set refugee admissions were 110,000 for the year 2017. Former President Donald Trumps administration lowered the annual refugee admission target to only 15,000 for 2021. This is the lowest number ever to be set by an administration since the US Refugee Admissions Program was created in 1980, becoming the fourth-lowest consecutive target in the history of the US. This was a dangerous trend that I feel needed to be urgently reversed so that the targets could be increased once again.

Luckily, following the four years of low-record refugee arrivals, the current president of the US, Joe Biden, has been presented with an opportunity of restoring the countrys bipartisan tradition of refugee admission. I can also say that the president has made a move in the right direction by signing an Emergency Revised Presidential Determination, which has raised the target for the fiscal year 2021 to 62,500. This followed the Americans call for his administration to restore the countrys welcoming legacy. The president also raised this target by removing the previous administrations discriminatory approach that targeted people from the Middle East and Africa, leaving many families separated.

Reasons for My Position

There are so many reasons why I agree that raising the refugee admission target to the country was a good move by the president. First, people are fleeing their war-torn countries across the world at record levels. On average, 24,000 people fled their homes in 2019 each day. This represents about one percent of humanity being displaced by force. Out of these displaced people, approximately 26 million are refugees forced to seek safety by crossing an international border. There are no signs of the refugee crisis coming to an end soon because of the deterioration of conflicts in Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Iraq, South Sudan, and Afghanistan. Therefore, when the US welcomes these people and gives them this opportunity, it plays a role in providing a basic global humanitarian need.

Secondly, refugee admission into the United States reflects the values of Americans. Every president in the US ensures that the country is a leader during times of crisis. Therefore, they have rejected any ideology that contradicts American values and supported refugees seeking liberty. The American values seek to uphold human dignity, commitment to stop and prevent discrimination, and the right to equal treatment. Therefore, the sitting administration must continue to safeguard these values by providing unwavering welcome and support to refugees who have fled displacement crises like those in Afghanistan, Syria, and Somalia.

Thirdly, through refugee resettlement, American strategic interests are advanced abroad. As the country welcomes more refugees, it helps its allies host more than they should. Currently, the poorest countries in the world are hosting the majority of the refugees, with low and middle-income countries hosting about 85 percent of the worlds refugees. It is also important to note that they are already affected by malnutrition and severe food insecurity as they do this. Therefore, if the US fails to lead the way in welcoming refugees, other countries may close their borders and force refugees to return. This will, in turn, affect regional stability as well as security, including the US missions security in the affected regions. For this reason, I support the current administrations decision to raise the ceiling for refugee admission if other countries are to be encouraged to do more.

Additionally, the admission of refugees is good for the countrys economy since some refugees are entrepreneurs, others taxpayers, and others consumers, who create jobs and contribute to the countrys economic growth. The countrys resettlement programs design ensures that refugees are helped to quickly achieve self-sufficiency. In addition, some refugees have become ambassadors, company CEOs, as well as influential cultural and economic figures like Sergey Brin, the co-founder of Google. Further, during the COVID-19 crisis, refugees took part in sustaining essential industries that kept the country and its communities afloat, like the food and healthcare industries.

Conclusion

I recommend that the country continue raising the ceiling for refugee admission because of the benefits that it can get from this action. The countrys administration can achieve this by ensuring that the consultations between the president and Congress are held open with the global humanitarian need in mind. Secondly, the president should avoid discrimination like the one witnessed in the previous administration that targeted people from specific regions. It is important to note that these regions are the worst hit by wars leading to displacements. Therefore, the president and the entire countrys administration need to show the leadership it has shown in the past so that more countries can be encouraged to do so. Moreover, in his Presidential Determination, I suggest that the president reviews the current refugee capping. This would enhance a true reflection of the actual numbers of refugees seeking settlement in the US and offer admission to those refugees that would get that opportunity.

Reference

Kerwin, Donald. The US refugee resettlement programA return to first principles: How refugees help to define, strengthen, and revitalize the United States. Journal on Migration and Human Security 6.3 (2018): 205-225.

Trumps Tariffs and Ford Motor Company

There are many problems that we face as a nation. We are on the edge of a total U.S. economic meltdown. The significant problem that I have researched is the trade tariffs and Ford Motor Company not being able to make cars in the U.S. There are several problems here that will need to be addressed. There are also several possible solutions that could save the company money in the long run. Ford Motor Company will see if it is lucrative to continue building in China or find another low-wage country to continue production. If the tariffs and interest rates on steel continue to climb, they will have no choice. We need to take a strong look at the history and franchise of Ford Motor Company and how this affects our economy and nation as a whole. We also need to take a look at Donald Trump’s trade tariffs and what exactly the details include affecting many automakers. Several questions will arise, such as where these automakers will go to further production and what they will cost.

Ford Motor Company

Ford Motor Company is an American automaker headquartered in Dearborn, Michigan. It was founded by Henry Ford; the company sells automobiles and other commercial vehicles under the Ford brand. As of today, Ford is the second largest U.S. automaker, right behind General Motors, and they are the fifth largest in the world. During the year 2008, Ford employed 213,000 employees and produced 5.32 million automobiles at around 90 plants around the world. According to USA Today’s Detroit Free Press staff, Donald Trump’s China tariffs will cost Ford 1 billion U.S. dollars.

Jim Hackett, who recently spoke with Bloomberg Television, said the company faces a huge loss in profits from the president’s tariffs. He is also quoted as saying, “The metals tariffs took about 1 billion in profit from the U.S- and the irony is we source most of that in the U.S today anyways,” “If it goes on longer, there will be more damage.” It is clear that Ford and other companies are not happy with the recently imposed tariffs. This will affect the company’s bottom line and potentially hurt profits across the board. There are many companies that rely on importing and exporting as a way of doing business. However, with this disruption in the way the U.S. does business with the rest of the world, it could be costly in the long run for companies worldwide.

Trump

Donald Trump is the 45th and current president of the United States of America. His socially awkward behavior and disruptive tariffs have caused quite a stir in the global market. Trump’s unorthodox strategy is the complete opposite of any other administration that has held office in the White House. It seems as though his main objective is opening up the Chinese market and preserving a U.S. advantage over China to demand dominance on the world stage. It could potentially be preserved that Trump’s strategy in threatening tariffs on Chinese imports is addressing his goal of reducing the U.S. trade deficit with China. He also wants to bring back manufacturing jobs to the U.S. It is seen that the U.S. trade deficit is domestic and not external.

The fact is that Americans consume more than they produce. This is the sole reason why we must rely on foreign countries because we consume so many products, and we don’t have the resources to replenish all that we consume. If we get into a trade war with foreign countries, it could potentially threaten our economy and directly impact many of our large corporations. We must take a look at how we have been successful as a country over the past decades and what we have done right in order to maintain stability. Trump seems to be more interested in making enemies and not seeing the bigger financial picture that has kept our nation running on all four cylinders. Trump will need to stop tweeting and making the wrong decisions based on personal feelings and not what is best for America.

It seems that Donald Trump has been targeting China specifically due to the fact he believes the U.S. has been treated unfairly and China has been profiting off the U.S. market. He has been on many news outlets displaying and verbally denouncing China; they have been using U.S. products and counterfeiting many of our goods. Due to the fact Trump’s administration believes China is one of the most notorious for sales of pirated and counterfeit goods, they are taking retaliatory action against China. According to the South China Morning Post, Gao Feng, commerce ministry spokesman, is quoted as saying, “We have to question the objectivity and credibility of the relevant US department in issuing its report.” “The Chinese government has always attached great importance to the protection of intellectual property, the results of which are obvious to all.”

Tariffs

We first must look at what a tariff is and how it affects countries on a global scale. Tariffs also affect our economy, given the employment or unemployment rates worldwide. A tariff is defined as a tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports. This is also known as a duty or trade barrier. The main purpose of a tariff is to protect jobs and production for citizens. Tariffs are also put in place to ensure that a certain number of the specific product or good is limited to entering the country. According to Investor’s Business Daily, as of 2018, President Trump was the first ever president to wage war and use tariffs as a way to try and disrupt the flow of trade. He initially did this with the reasoning of trying to reduce the U.S. trade deficit of 566 billion. He also thought this would increase production and manufacturing jobs. President Donald Trump enforced 25% U.S. tariffs on 50 billion dollars worth of Chinese imports.

This outrageous tax caused China to retaliate and impose a tariff of its own. This is basically what started the slow decline of Ford Motor production, therefore leading Ford to manufacture cars on foreign soil. This could also lead to mass layoffs in the U.S. for Ford Motor Company employees. This plot by Donald Trump has not been a welcomed tax for many other companies, including corporate giant Walmart. The implementation of these tariffs will affect Walmart and other retailers in a negative way.

It will essentially result in a combination of higher prices and lower profits. The immediate effect on the customer is that they would pick up the tab if an increase is imposed. An example of this is if Walmart’s tariff was to increase by $6, they would pay $3, and the customer would pay the other half, essentially increasing the price of goods and costing the customer more to purchase products. This will directly affect the customer’s wallet, and Walmart’s profit will decline. Overall, Trump has imposed a total of 35% and 250 billion dollars’ worth of tariffs on Chinese goods.

References:

1. “Ford Go Further.” Ford Corporate. (2018). https://corporate.ford.com/articles/global-auto-shows/ford-china-collaboration.html
2. Staff, J. (2018). Ford Says Trump’s China Tariffs Could Cost Company $1B. Detroit Free Press. https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2018/09/07/ford-trump-china-tariffs-cost/1226175002/
3. Wang, J. (2018). How Trump’s Trade War Went From 18 Products to 10,000. Quartz. https://qz.com/1327460/its-official-the-us-china-trade-war-has-now-begun
4. Graham, B. (2018). Trump’s Tariffs: What They Are And How They Will Work. Investor’s Business Daily. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trumps-tariffs-what-they-are-how-they-work/
5. Graham, B. (2018). Trump’s Trade War Turns Walmart Strategy Upside Down. Investor’s Business Daily. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trumps-trade-war-turns-walmart-strategy-upside-down/
6. China questions credibility of US report on fake goods after Donald Trump’s ‘fine’ threat. (2018). South China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2157490/china-questions-credibility-us-report-fake-goods-after