Donald Trump

[GUT]

John D. Gartner, a practicing psychotherapist who taught psychiatric residents at Johns Hopkins University Medical School here in Baltimore, provides his professional assessment of President Donald J. Trump. And it's a scary diagnosis --

http://www.usnews.com/news/the-repor...-him-dangerous

Yeah well, I'm not a big fan of psychotherapists opinions to be honest, I've seen far too many of them as witnesses.

[ChrisGeorge]

Yeah well, I'm not a big fan of psychotherapists opinions to be honest, I've seen far too many of them as witnesses.

Understood... also just noticed that Hercule Poirot posted the same article further up the thread. Still, just in his first week in office, Trump has shown a number of alarming signs about what his presidency is going to be like that you don't have to be a psychoanalyst or psychotherapist to see what the man is about.

Just appearing before the memorial wall at the CIA and talking about how many times he has been on the cover of TIME magazine alone is very telling!

[jason_c]

Once again posters are going ott with regards to Trump. This is a temporary measure. It lasts for 90 days. After these 90 days I can virtually guarantee Trump will back down to a moderate position of "extreme vetting".

Trump began his Primary campaign by saying he would ban Muslim immigration into the US, he then watered this down to "extreme vetting". As President he starts with this relatively draconian measure. In the near future he will back down to a more middle of the road policy. Here's a link from 2015 which includes a video of Trump advocating a ban on Muslims entering the US. His stance on banning Muslim's changed soon afterwards to extreme vetting.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/08/donald-trump-muslim-ban-republican-party-chaos

As with the 20% tariff on Mexican goods this 90 day ban is Trump's opening negotiating stance.

[jason_c]

Yeah well, I'm not a big fan of psychotherapists opinions to be honest, I've seen far too many of them as witnesses.

If psychotherapist's opinions are bad psychotherapist's opinions on subjects who they have never met or interviewed must be all but useless.

[GUT]

If psychotherapist's opinions are bad psychotherapist's opinions on subjects who they have never met or interviewed must be all but useless.

Totally agree.

[Mayerling]

Yeah well, I'm not a big fan of psychotherapists opinions to be honest, I've seen far too many of them as witnesses.

Actually GUT I'm not too fond of the profession either. In the Crime Victims Board we had to pay bills for Victims suffering trauma due to the crimes. If it was a crime where there was a murdered love one, or the Claimant had been savagely attacked and injured, I could see a definite case of post traumatic stress involved, but instead I was seeing people who found their wallet was picked or that their bag tampered with (no real feeling of contact, and even no contact at all). The idea was there was a sense of violation. The seriously injured I could see needing the help, but for some of these incidents I just noted the number of visits to some psychotherapist or psychiatrist, at a certain rate per hour (which turned out to be negotiable downward - apparently these doctors would accept any rate!!) and never managed a final cure. In thirty years I never saw any claimant absolutely cured if they were seeking psychiatric/psychological help. Tells you something doesn't it?

Jeff

[GUT]

Actually GUT I'm not too fond of the profession either. In the Crime Victims Board we had to pay bills for Victims suffering trauma due to the crimes. If it was a crime where there was a murdered love one, or the Claimant had been savagely attacked and injured, I could see a definite case of post traumatic stress involved, but instead I was seeing people who found their wallet was picked or that their bag tampered with (no real feeling of contact, and even no contact at all). The idea was there was a sense of violation. The seriously injured I could see needing the help, but for some of these incidents I just noted the number of visits to some psychotherapist or psychiatrist, at a certain rate per hour (which turned out to be negotiable downward - apparently these doctors would accept any rate!!) and never managed a final cure. In thirty years I never saw any claimant absolutely cured if they were seeking psychiatric/psychological help. Tells you something doesn't it?

Jeff

Ahhh Jeff, but victims compensation (maybe any compensation) is different. You tell someone they're going to get money if ..... and suddenly.....

[Mayerling]

Ahhh Jeff, but victims compensation (maybe any compensation) is different. You tell someone they're going to get money if ..... and suddenly.....

Ah GUT, I suppose we have to be COMPASSIONATE 'TIL IT HURTS!!!!!!!!!!

Jeff

[Limehouse]

Once again posters are going ott with regards to Trump. This is a temporary measure. It lasts for 90 days. After these 90 days I can virtually guarantee Trump will back down to a moderate position of "extreme vetting".

Trump began his Primary campaign by saying he would ban Muslim immigration into the US, he then watered this down to "extreme vetting". As President he starts with this relatively draconian measure. In the near future he will back down to a more middle of the road policy. Here's a link from 2015 which includes a video of Trump advocating a ban on Muslims entering the US. His stance on banning Muslim's changed soon afterwards to extreme vetting.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/08/donald-trump-muslim-ban-republican-party-chaos

As with the 20% tariff on Mexican goods this 90 day ban is Trump's opening negotiating stance.

It's all very well stating it's a temporary measure, but if you are a law-abiding citizen who has already been thoroughly vetted and granted a visa to live and work in the USA, why SHOULD you be detained or excluded for 90 days and what are you supposed to do in the meantime when you cannot work or see your family? How are you to live without income for 90 days? How does you family live without income? Will you have a job to return to?

This measure is nothing but Trump flexing his muscles to the world. He is a bully whose dictates so far have been ineffective, illogical and discriminatory. This is not the way to keep terrorists out of the USA.

I can see this issue having a very negative effect on the citizens of the USA. It could well prevent tourists from selecting the USA as a place to travel to because many people object to Trump's high-handed approach and will not give the USA their custom whereas others will be afraid of spending good money on air tickets only to find themselves barred from entering the country.

[Limehouse]

Hi Limehouse,

As an immigrant myself and a holder of a green card for a large number of years until I became a U.S. citizen in December 1994, I can feel for those individuals who hold green cards or visas and now find they are being turned away once they land in the United States. Obviously we all need to be vigilant against possible terrorists but this abrupt and ill thought out executive order by Trump is causing inordinate and unnecessary problems for numerous innocent people.

Best regards

Chris

Thanks for your response Chris. Perhaps Trump could look to people like you who have become USA citizens and contributed positively to everything the USA stands for instead of seeing 'terrorist' in every foreign face. Also, he might want to reflect on the number of people who have died at the hands of USA citizens in the numerous gun-related attacks. Is he going to ban guns or put a more restricted policy in place to save innocent USA citizens from suffering gun-related deaths? I doubt it!

Kind regards,
Julie

[Steadmund Brand]

Not to mention the fear of this ban actually radicalizing many people in those countries who until now really had nothing against the USA, now they see it as a place that "hates them for just being them"... Scary, but that is what I fear

Steadmund Brand

[Pcdunn]

So... apparently a Twitter account called "Rogue White House Staffers" has begun leaking inside info about what went on last week.

http://bgr.com/2017/01/30/donald-trump-vs-white-house-rogues/

I'd love to know if this is all for real. Sadly, very easy to believe it is…

[jason_c]

It's all very well stating it's a temporary measure, but if you are a law-abiding citizen who has already been thoroughly vetted and granted a visa to live and work in the USA, why SHOULD you be detained or excluded for 90 days and what are you supposed to do in the meantime when you cannot work or see your family? How are you to live without income for 90 days? How does you family live without income? Will you have a job to return to?

This measure is nothing but Trump flexing his muscles to the world. He is a bully whose dictates so far have been ineffective, illogical and discriminatory. This is not the way to keep terrorists out of the USA.

I can see this issue having a very negative effect on the citizens of the USA. It could well prevent tourists from selecting the USA as a place to travel to because many people object to Trump's high-handed approach and will not give the USA their custom whereas others will be afraid of spending good money on air tickets only to find themselves barred from entering the country.

The policy towards banning green card holders has already been withdrawn. This was either a minor screw up or Trump playing 3D political chess. No matter what, Trump is already moving to a more centrist position; his opening gambit already withdrawn. I can virtually guarantee he will make the same poliical move again and again and again.

Yes, I agree this policy may have negative effects on the US, but new policies usually bring a variety of positives and negatives with them. This new policy of a 3 month ban is no different.

[Karl]

Not to mention the fear of this ban actually radicalizing many people in those countries who until now really had nothing against the USA, now they see it as a place that "hates them for just being them"... Scary, but that is what I fear

Steadmund Brand

That is a very real risk.

[Harry D]

Wasn't it the Obama administration who outlined the countries for this executive order?