Trump Fires FBI Director

President Trump has recently exercised a power of his as the head of the executive branch, by firing James Comey, the former head of the FBI.  According to both Comey and CNN, there are two main reasons that the President fired the former head.  The first, the former head had failed, and even refused, to assure President Trump of any continuous loyalty toward him.  The second, the current investigation on President Trump and any association with Russia in the recent presidential election has been accelerating, proven by the former National Security Adviser, Michael Flynn, receiving a subpoena from the Senate Intelligence Committee, demanding all "documents regarding his interactions with Russian Officials."  The White House's official statement claims that the real reason had to do with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein writing a report about how poorly Comey handled the Hillary Clinton Email investigation.  However, Trump's letter to Comey about the reason for firing him did not contain anything to do with the Email investigation.  You can read more about President Trump firing James Comey here, and more about the Senate subpoenaing Micheal Flynn here. 

I do not personally think that James Comey should be fired from the Head of the FBI for doing his job.  If the President did have a connection with Russia in the recent election that may have influenced his election, then I think that the people should know about it.  While the President is able to oversee parts of the bureaucracy and can fire and hire the heads of certain organizations at his discretion, I believe he should have a reasonable argument.  If the President did something illegal, he would not be allowed to just declare it legal, so why should he be able to hide something illegal by firing those investigating him.  Whether the President actually had connections with Russia is still yet to be proven, but I hope the truth is revealed.

Trump's Executive Order Leaves the Bureaucracy Angry

Recently, President Donald Trump signed an executive order, which led to the "freezing" of almost all federal hiring.  He has made clear that he has plans to downsize the bureaucracy, a plan that many bureaucrats and federal workers were not happy with.  Trump will likely be cutting the budget of many agencies in the bureaucracy which would force them to fire employees and become smaller organizations.  The bureaucrats however, could "strike back" against Trump through refusing to do certain things, lobbying Congress, or creating policies, using discretionary authority, that go against the President's wishes.  There are many unions representing bureaucrats that have already expressed concern about the executive order.  The unions are also trying to encourage their members to use the protection of the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 in order to release any documents or files that are unethical, illegal, or corrupt.  We will have to wait and see how President Trump's plans with bureaucracy unfold.  You can read more about it here.

Many presidents in the past decades have tried to cut down on the size of the bureaucracy and Trump is not the first president to enact an executive order "freezing" hiring.  Trump's plans for reducing the bureaucracy are not that different from plans that other presidents have tried and failed.  Reagan even increased the bureaucracy despite trying to reduce it.  I believe that there is a better method to reduce the size of the bureaucracy rather than directly attacking it.  Hopefully the President's plan will have a good effect on the nation and turn out well in the end.

President Trump Looks to Chinese President Xi Jinping for Support With North Korea

The United States president, Donald Trump, is facing many issues with the North Korean nuclear missile program.  The program has the ultimate goal of creating an ICBM, intercontinental ballistic missile, which would pose a great threat to the United States.  Trump has asked the president of China, Xi Jinping to try to persuade the North Korean government to stop the missile program.  China is the biggest ally of North Korea, so Trump hopes that China may have an influential effect on Kim Jung Un, the Supreme Leader of North Korea.  So far China has proven unsuccessful and North Korea has continued its missile program.  You can read more about it here.

The president of the United States of America has the enumerated power of being the nation's Chief Diplomat and handling the most important foreign relations.

I believe that asking China to try and persuade the North Korean government to stop the missile program is a good idea.  The country is becoming more and more dangerous as Kim Jung Un has tested more missiles than both his father and his grandfather and is slowly getting closer to developing an ICBM.  I do not however believe that the best way of dealing with the situation is through military action due to the fact it could spark the next world war or at the very least, another Korean War.  I believe a diplomatic path should be pursued in a calm and negotiating manner that does not cause any unnecessary bloodshed or conflict.

Democratic Party Plans to Filibuster to Prevent Gursuch

The Democratic Party has made it public that they have plans to filibuster before the vote for Neil Gorsuch to be confirmed into the Supreme Court.  A filibuster is a series of endless talking, that does not have to be related or even words, in order to delay a vote.  In order for Gorsuch to end the filibuster he will need to win over eight Democrats in order to have 60 senators vote for cloture.  Chuck Schumer is likely to be the one who is filibustering and is also one of the most public opposers of Neil Gorsuch while Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, is prepared to go as far as removing filibustering as part of the Senate in order to help Neil Gorsuch.  You can read all about the filibustering plans here or read my previous blog post to learn more about Neil Gorsuch.

Congress has many powers within America and the power to confirm Supreme Court nominees is one of the most important powers right now in the U.S.  The majority and minority parties are against each other and the Senate may be using some of it's other powers to change, or delay, the vote for Neil Gorsuch.

I think that the Democratic Party's plans to filibuster may provide just enough time to sway the votes of a few undecided voters within the Senate and change the outcome of the vote for Neil Gorsuch's confirmation.  I also believe that the plans to end filibustering aren't well thought out and are being pushed hastily with only one goal in mind.  If the filibuster is not stopped by a vote of cloture then that could buy the democrats almost a day, if not more, of time to do whatever they can to stop Gorsuch.  If they manage, then President Trump will have to nominate someone else and hopefully the cycle does not repeat if it does not need to.

President Trump Nominates Neil Gorsuch for Supreme Court

President Donald Trump has recently elected Neil Gorsuch as a nominee to fill the seat that was left empty after Justice Scalia's death.  Neil Gorsuch is a very conservative individual who believes in strict interpretation of the Constitution and that it was not meant to be altered for by how society changes.  He has had connections with Supreme Court justices in the past, Scalia and Kennedy.  Some people believe Gursuch is nothing more than a "fly-fishing Scalia fan" while President Trump says "'the qualifications of Judge Gorsuch are beyond dispute.'"  If the Senate decides to confirm Neil Gorsuch, then the Supreme Court will consist of 5 conservative judges and 4 more liberal judges.  You can read more about it here.

The Supreme Court has the power of Judicial Review and the power to interpret the Constitution in the way that they think is necessary.  If Neil Gorsuch becomes the new justice, than the Court will lean Conservative on nearly every issue.

I think the Supreme Court should be made up of more independent judges that tend to look at cases on a case by case basis.  Things in America are changing everyday and no matter what the Supreme Court does, that will not be prevented.  Since Gorsuch already has connections within the Supreme Court, it will give him an edge in all of the cases for the other justices to vote in a similar way which will make the court disproportionate for possibly decades.  I fear that with the new justice, he will take more care in what Trump desires instead of what should be done.

International Women's Day in Afghanistan

March 8th is celebrated worldwide as International Women's Day, but in Afghanistan, this means something very different.  Afghanistan has a history of misogyny and discrimination toward the women of the nation but has recently began to give women more rights.  International Women's Day isn't just celebrated on March 8th, but instead spans throughout the duration of March.  Despite the progress that has been made in the recent years to equalize Afghanistan, International Women's Day serves as a reminder for how much further women have to go to be truly equal.  Afghanistan still remains "one of the worst places in the world to be a woman" and is still fighting a domestic war with itself.  Women in Afghanistan didn't have women's suffrage until 2011.  Despite everything that is being done by women and to help women, discrimination still plays a huge part in the daily life of an Afghan woman.  You can read more about the Afghanistan International Women's Day here.

American women have many more freedoms, liberties, and rights than women in other countries and have have many of those rights since the mid to late 1900's.  However, regardless of all the progress that has been made in places like America, discrimination still exists, and has a much larger effect in countries like Afghanistan, which was under Taliban rule until 2001.

I think that it is great that Afghanistan is working so hard for equality but it's horrible that there is a need for so much effort to go into it.  There are many people in Afghanistan who turn a blind eye to the violence and discrimination against women.  The Feminist movement had to fight hard in the U.S and that as without the government being changed at the same time.  There hasn't been fair treatment to women in Afghanistan in a long time and I hope women are given the equality that all people should have very, very soon.

Trump Blames Obama for Protests and Leaks

President Trump has recently accused ex-president Barack Obama for causing protests and leaking secure intelligence.  He also recently gave his State of the Union address to Congress about his plans and his concerns about the nation.  President Trump said in an interview with Fox News, "'I think President Obama's behind it because his people are certainly behind it,'" and also claims that "'it's just politics.'"  Aside from this claim, he has not been willing to submit any evidence or proof about why he beliefs that Obama is the source of the protests and leaks.  In his speech, he spoke about his plans to increase defense spending by $52 billion and says that it will be paid for by a "'revved up economy.'"  You can read more about his accusation and his State of the Union address here.

The media is the gatekeeper and influences what problems people talk about and has a huge effect on public policy.  By writing an article about President Trump blaming Obama, the media provides the public with an interesting and controversial topic to talk about.

I believe that President Trump has no reason to blame Obama for the protests and leaks since he doesn't have any evidence to back up his accusation.  He seems to be trying to get more media attention and create more drama.  He shouldn't accuse anyone of such a serious thing until he is willing to at least have an arguable reason for it.  Saying it's Obama's fault simply because he thinks that it is "his people" are behind it is a terrible reason.  He also needs to start thinking reasonably about his new defense spending and his plans for the future of America.

Major Democratic Super PAC has Plans to Launch Ad

The Democratic Super PAC Priorities USA Action will be launching the first paid ad since the Democratic party lost the presidential election.  The ads will be run on social media to inform voters about local political events in the area.  The ad will direct voters to the site of the Indivisible group.  From there they will be given information on upcoming events and what they should do while they're there.  The party hopes to "'provide even more scenes of grass-roots activism by everyday citizens'" and organize the unhappy citizens in the recent mass protests.  The Super PAC, Priorities USA, was responsible for raising $192 million dollars to support Hillary Clinton's campaign.  Read here for more information.

This is a method that Super PACs can, and do, use their money to influence politics and people's political views.

I do support the Super PAC using the money to inform citizens, however, I fell like it should not be necessary.  It is the media's job to provide news and information to citizens.  While I am not against this plan, I am not in support of it.  The money raised by the Super PAC is to "fight back against the Republicans" and that is not what politics should be focused around.  The Super PAC should instead be trying to benefit America as a whole, regardless of political parties.  The parties themselves should be more focused on helping America than just fighting the other party.

Sanders Rejects Third-Party Offer

Senator of Vermont, Bernard "Bernie" Sanders recently ran in the 2017 presidential election.  He has received offers and been encouraged to start a new political party.  Sanders, while he does not support the new president, Donald Trump, believes that he can be worked with despite being a "pathological liar."  He also still believes in the Democratic Party despite the conflicts within the party and stands firm behind a Democratic party reform.  Because of his faith in the Democratic party, he has decided to reject the idea of starting a new political party.  He has officially decided to remain a proud member of the Democratic party.  Read more about it here.

The forming of third parties and new political parties has a large effect on American politics, especially if the members are well known.  If a new political party is formed than it could lead to a new realignment period.  

I believe that Bernie Sanders should have left the Democratic party and started anew.  He had many followers this last election and, while he may be far left, has very valid points.  I think that America needs to have more political parties and have more that two main options.  If a new political party was formed with a well known politician backing it, then maybe there could be a chance that they may become a permanent part of politics.  Many people believe that something needs to be done about the two-party system and I do not think that a replacement party is what is necessary.  I stand behind the belief that America needs to expand its political options and allow third parties to become a regular and influential part in daily politics.

European Nations Against Trump's Immigration Ban

Recently, president Donald Trump placed a ban on immigrants from Libya, Sudan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, and Iran.  European nations have been under pressure to enact a similar proposal.  Many countries have refused, stating that the ban goes "basic European principles."  Multiple leaders have completely rejected the idea and refused to even consider banning refugees of war from entering their countries.  Several countries believe that the executive order was not made to fight terrorism but simply to prevent the refugees from entering the country.  The majority of European leaders have decided to refuse the ban and continue to allow refugees and Muslims to enter their nations.  One of Berlin's mayors, Michael Müller, even spoke against building a wall, as the Berlin Wall "destroyed the prospects of millions."  You can read more about it here.

This new immigration ban is a big change in our history because America's political culture seems to revolve around an equal start and began with open borders which have stayed open, though regulated.

I believe that the European leaders made the right decision.  It was a very, very controversial to enact this ban to begin with and I believe that it was a bad idea.  By refusing the follow in the footsteps of the American president, the other leaders have maintained a place for the refugees of the war afflicted nations somewhere safe to live and continue with their lives.  Almost all of American history has been influenced by refugees or immigrants and we have always called ourselves "the Land of the Free," so I think we should give refugees a fresh start, free of discrimination and prejudice because of where they were born or their religion.