Trump’s Appointee Choices

In the days leading up to the recent Presidential popularity contest, I tried to make my posts nonpartisan, attempting not to single out any one party’s candidate(s). But now that Donald Trump is the President Apparent (not “Elect” just yet, despite most news services referring to him as such), his plans and policies are fair game: what he does will affect Americans.

The Zelman Partisans have noted (repeatedly) that his historical take on RKBA (as opposed to his recent words) is…

Let us say, “Troubling.”

Current reports have it that former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani is on The Donald’s short list for Secretary of State, and possibly Attorney General.

Freedom lovers in general, and RKBA supporters specifically, should be extremely concerned. As even Bloomberg’s anti-gun The Trace has it…

Rudy Giuliani Has the Kind of Gun Control Record That Gets Presidential Appointees Savaged By the NRA
Would the NRA and Senate GOP apply to Giuliani the same unrelenting pro-gun litmus test they’ve applied to President Barack Obama’s nominees for the better part of a decade? Or would they retreat from their principled, uncompromising gun-rights stance in deference to a new Republican administration’s nominee?

A shame it took the antis to point this out. Yes, Giuliani backed waiting periods, background checks, “assault weapons” bans, licensing, registration, and seizures, all on both the state and national levels.

Giuliani also constructed NYC’s “stop & frisk” program. The one that was found to be unconstitutional. These days, “unconstitutional” is a pretty high bar, with virtually anything allowed. “Stop & frisk” was tossed not merely because it violated the highest law of the land, but because it didn’t work: the vast majority of stops resulted in no prosecution whatsoever; weapons (the main justification for the program) were found in only a tiny fraction of one percent of stops. Minorities were overwhelmingly selected for searches. “Stop & frisk” couldn’t even meet the incredibly lenient “unconstitutional but necessary for public safety” test applied by moronic courts.

Consider: Weapons bans and restrictions, quasi-legal searches, racial/ethnic targeting, confiscations, preferential licensing

Where have we heard that before?

President Apparent Donald Trump’s choices of high level appointees almost seem designed to validate the worst pre-election fears of those who noted the man’s past disregard for human/civil rights.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

2 thoughts on “Trump’s Appointee Choices”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *