Sanctuary cities and Trump the Alinskyite
Aside from the very specific charges connected with the whole Russiagate story, or anything about Trump’s politics, the Trump opposition has consistently followed certain basic themes in characterizing Trump’s performance as president in terms of his personality and capability. These are not mutually exclusive nor meant to be exhaustive, but they’re the main ones I’ve noticed:
(1) Trump is abysmally stupid.
(2) Trump is a crook.
(3) Trump is losing his mind or has lost it.
(4) Everyone in the Trump administration is about to desert him.
(5) Trump is a mean son of a bitch.
The MSM’s and Trump’s opponents’ reaction to Trump’s proposal to send illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities has featured mostly number five on the above list: Trump is a mean mean man. Just two examples should suffice; they are very typical of the genre [emphasis mine]:
Mayors from across the country were quick to respond to Trump’s latest portrayal of immigrants and sanctuary cities as threats.
In New York City, where nearly 40 percent of the population are immigrants, Mayor Bill de Blasio said Trump’s immigration policy was rooted in cruelty.
“He uses people like pawns,” de Blasio said in a statement. “New York City will always be the ultimate city of immigrants – the President’s empty threats won’t change that.”
In Philadelphia, known as the city of brotherly love, Mayor Jim Kenney said in a statement that his city “would be prepared to welcome these immigrants just as we have embraced our immigrant communities for decades.” He said the White House was demonstrating “the utter contempt that the Trump Administration has for basic human dignity.”
In turn, one can look at each of those statements, so similar to each other, and note how both mayors conflate “immigrants” with “illegal immigrants” as though the two types of arrivals are identical. This is entirely characteristic of the left as well; they want you to think the two groups are identical, too. But if a city failed to make a distinction between, for example, “shoppers” and “shoplifters,” its merchants might have a few objections after a while.
In addition, there’s the obvious question one might ask: why would it be “cruel” or “contemptuous” of “basic human dignity” to take people from camps across the border to a supposedly flourishing city that welcomes them? Nor is anyone penning them up in those cities; they are free, apparently, to go anywhere they wish in this land of opportunity.
And here I thought the word “sanctuary” meant “offering safety and refuge.” So, maybe not?
What Trump is doing here is what he’s done many times before, following Alinsky’s Rule #4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” Actually, he’s following #5 and #6 as well, to a certain extent: “”Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon” and “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” He might need to worry about #7 at some point, “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag,” but that point has not yet been reached, and Trump is usually rather good at switching things up anyway.
Trump is an Alinskyite, a term describing his tactics rather than anything about his political orientation. Whether Trump’s a natural at it or whether he’s purposely studied it I don’t know, but I think his use of Alinskyite methods is something that ties the left in knots, because although they are also practitioners of the Alinsky art, they have long considered that they own it and are rather unused to anyone on the right using it against them. It miffs them.
On another level, I think when they are talking about how cruel and callous Trump is with this sanctuary city offer, they actually mean that they think he’s toying with them, using the illegal immigrants as a rhetorical device for effect, and that Trump knows that the mayors of these cities (all blue blue blue) want none of it.
However, if it ever came to it—and I doubt it will—the mayors just might feel that they must accept the influx of illegal immigrants in order to prove that they’re not hypocrites. Then Trump will have made them live up to their own set of rules.
Trump is a political animal, this is his natural instinct, and he has no restraints (moral or ideological) in unleashing it. He is just as good in it as Alinsky was, and this means very, very good. At the level of Macciavelli, this embodyment of a politician.
been saying that all along and finally the GOP including Trump and Mcconnell are catching up. GOP have been fighting the liberals the wrong ways. Don’t fight them, do a political jujitsu and expose their hypocrisy and lies by giving them what they want times a thousand. Liberals claimed moral high ground by irresponsibly making overly compassionate but impossible/insane demands knowing those reasonable republicans will turn them down and then deceitfully making the claim to the public that the GOP are turning down those demands because they are mean/racist/homophobic/sexist. Why not turn the table and make the liberals reject those impossible virtue signaling demands by giving what the democrats wants times infinitity and in ways that will hurt rich liberals.
They want illegal immigrants, instead of deporting them send them to sanctuary cities and build containment walls around those cities, they can’t claim racism since the walls are within the country.
They want high tax, sign an eo to impose a 100% income tax on everyone who are donors to democrats who demand high tax and registered democrats.
They want absolute equality? Trump should sign an eo to completely ban gender segregation in sports and force people of all gender to complete together at every level.
They want abortion, give them post birth abortion up to 10 years.
They want social media censorship and big government? nationalize facebook and every other social media and hand them to FBI for a more competent monitoring and call everyone who opposes greedy corporations who are against hate crime prevention.
they want medicare for all? give them medicare for all and make amazon/washington post pay for it, see if they still support it.
silicon valley wants refugees? bring in 10 millions refugees every year and send them all to bay area and build a wall around it to prevent them from entering into other states and force the hypocrite liberals to be anti-immigration for once.
Why did Obama put hundreds of thousands of immigrants with no skills and no desire for assimilation in red state locations, or at least with lots of “normal” residents. ie, not “progressive,” like Minnesota or Maine.
Dave:
You left out minimum wage. If $15 an hour is good, why not $30? Isn’t that better?
Otherwise, I agree completely with your list.
Trump has it right in this case. As illegal immigrants reach the end of their permitted stay in holding facilities, put them in buses, drive to the center of Palo Alto, and open the doors. Seattle would be a long bus trip, but that would be an excellent destination too.
But if a city failed to make a distinction between, for example, “shoppers” and “shoplifters,” its merchants might have a few objections after a while.
Here we go. The new DA in Dallas County in an open letter posted on the county website:
Theft of Necessary Items
Study after study shows that when we arrest, jail, and convict people for non-violent crimes committed out of necessity, we only prevent that person from gaining the stability necessary to lead a law-abiding life. Criminalizing poverty is counter-productive for our community’s health and safety. For that reason, this office will not prosecute theft of personal items less than $750 unless the evidence shows that the alleged theft was for economic gain.
F:
exactly, sign an EO to make the minimum wage of all sanctuary cities to be $100 per hour.
Give all daca full citizenship but in exchange for pardoning their violation of the immigration laws they had to surrender their voting rights. They will enjoy every right and entitlement a normal citizen would except voting for the democrats, they could still vote for republicans though since the amnesty was signed by a republican president but they are obligated to, see if the democrats still want them.
Christy – and here I was about to congratulate Neo on a brilliant analogy that pointed out the flaws in the Democrats position.
Mike K makes the best point, though, and I’m not seeing it in all of the palaver over at NRO and Federalist (you laugh! Read David French’s recent tear-jerker).
A lot of people keep claiming that it’s illegal for the President to direct the resettlement of, um, illegal aliens, but that is exactly what Obama and all his predecessors did. I haven’t seen a statute citation yet.
Dave on April 13, 2019 at 2:45 pm at 2:45 pm said:
…GOP have been fighting the liberals the wrong ways. Don’t fight them, do a political jujitsu and expose their hypocrisy and lies by giving them what they want times a thousand.
* * *
If Dave will pardon my use of his comment, this suggests what Neo was saying about the transgender activitst “who are sparking a backlash among a lot of other people who would otherwise not feel much hostility towards them.”
I think you’re mischaracterizing de Blasio’s statement. (And that of those mayors of the other cities mentioned.)
What de Blasio’s really trying to say is, “Why would TRUMP want to send anyone to live in MY city?”
(And if is, somehow, able to continue as commissar—I mean mayor—as it seems he will, he really does have a point. Yes, one might sympathize….)
another suggestion, since democrats care so much about women, why doesn’t the GOP help the democrats out by drafting a law that simply outlaw men from sleeping with more than one woman at a time within a year, or outlaw all extramarital affairs, since this law doesn’t affect most of the religious conservatives and respect women, lets see how the democrats and liberals like it, lets see which party truly care about women, lets how much women respecting democrat like Bill Maher loves this new law
Seattle is very big on not prosecuting many ‘low’ level felonies. It has lead to many homeless having been arrested 60-70 times in a short period of time and spending almost no time in jail. It’s the humane thing to do.
Until they kill or rape somebody.
the audacity of people like Bill Maher who treats women like sex toys to preach to evangelicals how they should be treating women is appalling. lets encourage young girls to not practice safe sex and have their reproduction organs destroyed before 25 with abortion as birth control by immortalizing abortion
Why do liberals like Bill Maher love abortion and want the government to pay for it?
Its because they hate condoms, love to ejaculate inside young girls in one night stands, and don’t want to pay for the abortions out of their own pocket.
Why would there be homeless people in Seattle? Why didn’t Bill Gates teach them how to code and hire them at microsoft and invite them to live in his mansions, what a bigot for refusing to help those who are in need?
These f**king tech people are so selective in their hiring process but want America to just accept everyone who wants to come regardless of credentials, why doesn’t Google hire everyone who wants to work there?
The Dems think that because they have most of the media in their pocket, they can be infinitely flexible in their narratives and all of the pivots required to capitalize on the news of the day. They perhaps fail to realize that eventually the logic of their many positions crumbles into nonsense. (Alternatively, they may realize that many people simply can’t follow any kind of logical thinking.)
Here is an interesting story about when Obama attempted to dump illegals into a small “red” town in southern CA called Murietta.
This is more along the lines of “Trump” than “sanctuary cities” but I thought it was an interesting observation along the lines of countering the hypocritical guilt-tripping of the Dems and some Republicans toward Trump’s supporters.
https://reformclub.blogspot.com/2019/04/todays-question-on-conlawprof-where.html
modern liberalism is utter nonsense because they basically want segregation, one set of special treatments for liberals (hiding behind minorities and using them as their cover and reasons for special treatments) and another set for conservatives. You can call for the death of a republican president without repercussion but insulting a democrat president and you are dead meat. When a liberal say bad things he would all be forgiven but saying anything remotely bad as a conservative regardless of intention means you are black listed and denied of employment and respect for life. when Trump hating Johnny Depp accused of hitting his wife obviously she was lying but no when a conservative is accused of anything no matter how ridiculous the claim is the woman must be believed.
Okay, I’m now officially in with the “Trump plays Go while his opponents play Checkers” crowd. You really need to RTWT to get in the flow.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/04/12/timing-after-trumps-sanctuary-cities-threat-appeals-court-stays-judges-order-to-bring-in-more-asylum-seekers/
The headline gives away the answer.
Brilliant.
The couple of times I have had real life conversations with Trump haters about what is so historically awful about him have basically come down to tone and that kind of thing. When not given time to form a response and then lightly challenged they really have a hard time coming up with specifics.
It really is pathetic to here some people this deranged.
Remember how Trump was going to send Rachel Maddow to some camp for being a lesbian? There are a whole bunch of examples of these kind of comments. And they suffer no consequences for their ridiculous hysterics.
The logic is really as simple as he’s awful because he’s awful.
Wandering about the UNM neighborhood of Albuquerque, I am so sick of seeing the “No Human Is Illegal” signs and bumper stickers.
I made some Sanctuary comments at the end of the earlier Barr topic. Worth reading IMO but I won’t repeat them here.
I defended Sanctuary as it began, but times have changed. I ended on this brilliant quote from Eric Hoffer, which I think should be carved in stone:
Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.
Got an answer to one of my questions, sort of.
And some good observations. Feel free to scroll down and skip them all.
😉
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2019/04/im-reading-how-to-resist-validating.html?showComment=1555169428775#c3705820873399150540
David Begley said…
I kept hearing the conclusion by the MSM that Trump’s idea was illegal. But I never saw any citation to the law until I read a story in USA Today. It cited the Hatch Act. It claimed it was Trump using the government to punish his political enemies and promote his campaign. That’s the best the Fake News could come up with!
One only needs to slightly look beneath the surface to see what frauds and shills these people are.
4/13/19, 10:30 AM
[it’s hard to not validate assumptions about things the Dems have actually said]
EDH said…
The most revealing sentence of the piece.
Whatever Trump thinks he wants, the problem for journalists is in finding a way to talk about it that doesn’t validate the President’s assumptions.
Tucker Carlson has a nice piece dissecting the issue.
Trump calls Democrats’ bluff on illegal immigrants
4/13/19, 10:50 AM
[this might be a legal hook for the left, but it deprives them of their virtue signalling cloak]
cronus titan said…
…
By the way, how fast we forget: Obama was fond of relocating illegal immigrants to red and purple states. 26 states successfully sued the federal government in 2015 to end the practice. Funny, the Democrat media complex thought the strategy of relocating illegal aliens to red states was awesome, not cynical.
4/13/19, 11:04 AM
[Sow. Reap.]
Unknown said…
The rhetoric of this issue is fascinating. I live in the Bay Area and watched the local news broadcast the soundbites of the local mayors. It was all “throat clearing” and tut-tuting and very difficult to paraphrase because it was nonsense. The point seemed to be they were morally superior to Trump. Also covered by the local news in the same broadcasts: the usual issue of a multiply deported immigrant back in San Jose where this time he broke into a woman’s home and murdered her and the local weasel politicians trying to explain how this has nothing to do with San Jose’s sanctuary policy.
4/13/19, 11:32 AM
PJ said…
I don’t know about Ms. Gessen personally, but there are lots of proponents of sanctuary cities who, because of either sincerely held religious beliefs or genuine commitment to political ideology, are not in on the hypocrisy of their political leaders. Those people are the most effective proponents of the sanctuary movement precisely because they truly believe in it, and they will react to Trump’s initiative just as Gessen suggests. The disillusionment of that class of true believers when the hypocrisy of their leadership is exposed is undoubtedly among Trump’s objectives.
4/13/19, 12:16 PM
I always have a hard time deciphering how many of these people truly believe this stuff and how many just say what they have to say. I think the old guard Democrats like Schumer, Pelosi and Feinstein don’t believe the open borders and Green New Deal stuff for one minute but don’t have the guts to stand up and say it.
I also think there are a good amount of low information leftists (mostly young) that can be swayed with logic (how are we going to pay for this?) but there is a group that are true believers no changing.
20% of the left?
I don’t know how it is an punishment when Trump is giving people what they wanted and begging to receive all along, unless they think that receiving illegal immigrants is bad, which is a direct contradiction of what they have been claiming that illegal immigrants were great for society both culturally and economically and essence for prosperity.
When liberals made the claim that illegal immigrants are gold then don’t complain about Trump giving you what you claimed to be gold and call that a punishment.
Whatever Trump thinks he wants, the problem for journalists is in finding a way to talk about it that doesn’t validate the President’s assumptions. –quote from Althouse commenter, EDH
AesopFan: Currently I’m rereading “The Philosophy of Andy Warhol (From A to B and Back Again)” and came across this choice bit:
____________________________________________________
…but almost every journalist never wants to know what you really think — they just want the answers that fit the questions that fit the story they want to write.
____________________________________________________
Most conservatives consider Warhol a weirdo-scamster who somehow managed to trick the world into worshiping his art. There’s truth to that … so far as it goes.
But not just anyone could pull it off. Beneath that bland, opaque, unattractive exterior was a deeply wounded person with an absolutely first-rate mind, who bootstrapped himself out of an immigrant working-class family in Pittsburgh to the heights of the snobby Manhattan art elite.
There’s a Trumpian moral to the Andy Warhol story.
Warhol did subvert the cool kids, then the elites, who excluded him. And he did it thoroughly with their own weapons. So thoroughly Warhol IMO brought down the temple of modern art. Decades later we are seeing the aftermath of his destruction.
Of course it wasn’t just Warhol, but I would argue Warhol was the tipping point.
Trump may well be in the process of subverting the Democrats to destruction with their Alinskyite weapons. We’ll see.
Trump proposing to send all the illegals to Sanctuary cities, counties and states is brilliant. But words are cheap. Do it Mr. President. Shove them down their throats and choke them on it.
“…but almost every journalist never wants to know what you really think — they just want the answers that fit the questions that fit the story they want to write.”
I have seen similar observations from pundits on the Right, mostly likely the Power Line Bloggers and VDH but I don’t remember for sure, and I think there were others as well.
Basically, if they call you (a conservative) for an interview or “reaction” they will fish around with questions to try and get the quote they want. If you don’t give them one, whatever you do say will never see print (or air-time).
And one cannot emphasize enough: never talk to a reporter (or the FBI) without taping your conversation. See: Roger Scruton’s recent treatment in Britain.
Of course, conservatives ought to know better by now!
AesopFan: Well, Andy published that remark in 1975. A pity conservatives didn’t read him back then!
In many respects — leaving aside the bizarre social circus he fostered, i.e. The Factory — he was a sensible, even conservative fellow. I can’t resist another Andy quote:
___________________________________________________
“But to become a famous artist you had to do something that was ‘different.’ And if it was ‘different,’ then it means you took a risk because the critics could have said it was bad instead of good.”
“In the first place,” I said, ” they usually did say it was bad. And in the second place, if you say artists take ‘risks,’ it’s insulting to the men who landed at D-Day…”
–“The Philosophy of Andy Warhol,” p. 179
The donald is a complex person. He is simultaneously infuriating and incredibly brilliant. He is a fighter, a bull in the china shop, but never since Reagan in my life, has a president attempted to implement his campaign agenda as djt has. He is a good substitute for my 2016 favorite Cruz. I still want to see Cruz in the Oval Office, or chief justice of the SCOTUS.
but never since Reagan in my life, has a president attempted to implement his campaign agenda as djt has.
parker: Obama gave it a shot.
I mean, short of reversing “the rise of the oceans” and that sort of thing.
Christy 4:10PM:
“unless the evidence shows that the alleged theft was for economic gain.”
Doesn’t theft by definition produce an economic gain, at least until you are caught?
I concur with parker, wholeheartedly.
I find the reaction of the Progressives to the idea of illegals being sent to sanctuary cities to be very delicious!
So 2 1/2 years in Trump has yet to deliver on his number one promise, or for that matter his number two. You ain’t got no wall, Mexico ain’t paying for it, and Obamacare is still the law of the land. North Korea is playing him for a fool to boot.
The lazy heir to a fortune gets into his office at 10 or 11, plays unprecedented amounts of golf, and has thus squandered the precious time when he had control of all three branches. Now its too late for a legislative compromise that would be to your advantage. He has lost the House.
In contrast, by this time in Obama’s Presidency, he had gotten Obamacare thru with a filibuster proof majority and had implemented a Keynesian Stimulus that started what will almost certainly soon become the longest economic expansion in US History.
Trump inherited this expansion when it was close to full-employment, proceeded to go deficit spending which predictably juiced up growth and the debt, and took full credit for a the former but not the latter, while simultaneous lying about a turnaround.
You guys soaked up this propaganda so he tried to do the same thing on his #1promise. He tried to pretend the wall was already built or, depending on the day, was being built and that Mexico had already paid for it.
But part of his base wasn’t buying this. There is no Trump Wall, anymore than there is a Trump turnaround, or denuclearization of Korea.
You ain’t got nothing. Just someone claiming credit for things he didn’t do. Just like he did in business.
Hey Manju, do you want me to sit with you when you get debriefed? Cause it is gonna be painful.
Let’s think about the practical mechanics of all these people moving in. What is the vacancy rate, what is the median cost of rent, where do they stay, how do they support themselves? All very interesting questions that too often are ignored.
We all know what it would take if one of us decided to move to a new city, for whatever reason. So how does any of this work for someone with no papers, no education, no savings, no English, no skills, no possessions, and so on? Common sense tells you this will all be a very big problem.
Pingback:Eye See You - American Digest
Trump brought the complete liberal media complex down and we are only seeing the beginning of its impact.
The President should start doing it – sending busloads to be released in far-from-the-border sanctuary cities.
And remind his critiques that Obama did it, too — and so they are mostly being partisan hacks. Plus, where should they be kept?
Manju, thanks for coming by and giving one of the more thoughtful critiques of Trump. Not yet success on the Wall, but fighting for it — Rep (against the Wall) Ryan was Speaker for first 2 years, so it’s no surprise the House didn’t fund it.
McCain chose to stop Trump’s repeal of Obamacare, which had some very unpopular features that have been repealed. There was no “Rep consensus” Health Plan alternative, more a Rep / Heritage / AEI missing intellectual leader. Trump’s desire to be popular with voters mean a much higher priced & benefit plan than most elite Reps would ever support — but likely one that allows Reps to get elected and re-elected, unlike most low-cost (more responsible) plans.
Obama’s expansion, funding such white elephants as Solyndra, was technically an expansion as you say, but the weakest since good records were kept after WW II. Obama claimed there was no “magic wand” to bring back jobs, especially mfg. jobs, to America. Trump’s tax cuts, and regulation cuts, and cuts in unfair trade deals (with Mexico, Canada, EU; China still in progress) has resulted in “magic wand” results of higher growth and especially higher mfg.
N. K. is talking, far more progress than Clinton, Bush43, or Obama — after Clinton allowed them to get a nuke.
Real conservatives mostly want the gov’t to leave them alone — “getting nothing” is therefore a big conservative win, unlike Chick-fil-a being banned in another airport. The PC-Klan is not interested in leaving Christians or conservatives alone, but Trump is at least not on the PC side, and in many cases is fighting it.
He’s using Alinsky type rules, and it’s looking fairly successful.
He should put more illegals on busses and send them to sanctuary cities. They claim to have the resources to take care of them, and it’s better to send them where they are “wanted” than to keep them in cages, like Obama did, near the border.
We have a alleged Klansman as the governor of Virginia now and he is a democrat. His deputy is a alleged rapist and the Attorney General is a racist, all democrats and still haven’t stepped down yet. Democrats are willing protect a Klans hood wearing democrat, a rapist and a racist only because they don’t want to yield the seat to a republican.
No wonder the democrats love Avenatti and wanted him to be the president, stealing from minorities, the disadvantaged and those whom they vowed to help is the democrat motto and Avenatti is the epitome of all of those things democrat represent. If Avenatti was black like Waters, Sharpton and Jesse Jackson he would have never been indicted.
Under Obama refugees were resettled in American cities without any public discussion I can find.
If your city was slated for 200 Syrian refugees, it was a done deal. Some communities weren’t keen but as far as I can tell they could do nothing.
If a city is waving the Sanctuary flag and going on about how immigrants make a city and its economy stronger, I don’t see how they can kick about getting more immigrants. Unless of course they are hypocrites.
Yammer debriefing Manju in some imaginary after life, if that isn’t hell for both, well, be careful what you wish for boys.
om,
In a perfect world, Manju would be strapped to a dentist chair while Artfldgr alternates between lectures on all Manju doesn’t know and reading Vogon poetry. All while “I’m Henery the Eigth I Am” is played on an endless loop.
A man can dream.
Fractal Rabbit:
🙂
Fractal Rabbit – you are so bad.
Yes. Yes, I am.
I’m pretty sure that members of Congress are getting bombarded by messages from their ordinary constituents, who are pretty likely, many of them, demanding that they do something to halt the invasion of illegal aliens pouring across our Southern border, and to reform and tighten our Immigration system, it’s laws, and procedures.
I know I’ve certainly been sending such demands.
Yet, members of Congress are just sitting there—to judge by the lack of any legislation up for a vote—doing absolutely nothing to remedy these major problems.
Various commentators have said that they thought that these Congress critter’s major donors want open borders, and have thus given them orders to sit on their hands.
But another commenter the other day gave his opinion that one other force, telling them to not do anything, might be drug cartel money.
According to one estimate I read yesterday, the drug cartels make an estimated $600 billion dollars per year from drug trafficking, and an additional $100 billion dollars a year from trafficking in people.
Even if these enormous amounts were ten times lower—say, respectively $60 and $10 billion a year—it would seem pretty likely to me that Cartel leaders would take some of those enormous profits, and use the money to pay off selected members of Congress, so as to insure that no legislation that would seriously diminish their profits, or even shut down their enormously profitable smuggling operations, would be passed by Congress.
Do I think some members of Congress would take such—probably well concealed—bribes?
What are major campaign contributions, and other incentives that large corporations financial and other moneyed interests might offer–like future employment–but bribes?
So, the answer is, you betchya.
I would not be at all surprised to learn that drug cartels are funding Congress through “dark money” like that being spent by this guy.
Lukas Mikelionis of FOX News has more on this:
Ex-Clinton official leads ‘dark money’ effort to boot Kavanaugh from teaching gig
A top aide to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign — now leading a liberal “dark money” group — is backing a student effort at George Mason University to get Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh fired from teaching a summer course over misconduct allegations.
What else are they funding ?
Snow & Mike – that could be an even bigger story than the Spygate conspiracy, and possibly connected to it.
Implications: (1) Clinton was one of the recipients of the under-the-table largesse (see how much the Left does to down-play the known and over-the-table “contributions”);
(2) Trump was not.
Fractal Rabbit on April 15, 2019 at 8:23 am at 8:23 am said:
You haven’t seen me debrief people after they rotate on the Wheel.
Great post. I agree that POTUS deploys Alinsky tactics effortlessly. DJT is also a disciple of The Art of War, Sun Tzu’s treatise. I believe this explains his successes.