Ten oz

Trump has been photographed and recorded millions of times over the decades. He has made thousands of public appears throughout his life. There are countless photos and videos of him standing next to other famous people who have known heights. Trump is obviously not 6'3. If we only had a hundred pictures or a single short video to look at than maybe one could say he is just wearing flat shoes or is photographed at a bad angle but decades of countless photos...come on. Jeb Bush and Trump participated together in 8 debates during the primary. You are arguing that at every debate Jeb Bush was just wearing shoes that made him look taller or that the video crew titled the camera in a way that made Trump appear shorter? It isn't like I am claiming Trump is actually 5'3 or some crazy number of inches below 6'3; just that he obviously isn't 6'3. I would prefer to not litter the thread with links to videos and photos but there are millions out there. Trump appears to just a little short than everyone listed as 6'2 he stands next to from entertainers like Steve Harvey to other politicians like Mitt Romney. I find it next to impossible that video and photos would consistently be wrong over and over for decades.

I am not claiming he he was ordered. Rather my responses regarding him following unlawful orders was playing out if he had been. I do not pretend to know his motives for lying.

Nope, I suggest you read through this thread. I have repeated said Trump's height (I haven't even mentioned his weight) is irrelevant. I am upset about a Navy Rear Admiral following an unlawful order to lie. The White House's doctor is a political appointee. Trump asking them to lie is unlawful. Them lying is unlawful. it is a problem. From Trump asking Comey to let the stuff with Flynn go to him tweet about the Justice Department investigating his political rivals there is a serious pattern here of Trump abusing his position and those around him kowtowing. It is a serious problem.

All of that is true but I think racism plays a bigger role. If a immigrant from Norway came over and did everything the same as an immigrant from Haiti this administration and most Republicans in general would applaud the Norwegians and have problem with the Haitian. It doesn't really matter how an immigrant behaves, how many jobs they create, how hard they work, how many govt subsides they use, or etc. Only thing that seems to matter is their ethnicity. Trump made that point crystal clear with his shithole comment. In that discussion Democrats where trying to support Haitians who have already be legally in this country for 7 yrs. They are all vetted, documented,and have built lives here in the U.S. yet Trump wants to through ALL of them out regardless where they work, how much they pay in taxes, etc while at the same times Trump welcomes an imaginary group of new immigrants from Norway. Obviously nothing about what an immigrant does as an individual matters to Trump. Where they come from is what matters, all that matters.

If the senior brass isn't willing to refuse unlawful orders than we are all f@*&^%. He could have just said Trump's health is good but that he won't discuss specific details which aren't relevant to the public. Trump's height isn't actually important. The Doctors willingness to lie over something so trivial is very disheartening. I also don't believe he would have gone to court martial for saying no as that would only create a public record of him stating under oath Trump ordered him to lie. At worst he'd be forced to retire at the end of his current tour which is likely to happen anyway given the attrition rates of senior commissioned personnel. Either way the Doctor had a duty to not lie.

No doubt

Per the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 90 one must obey all lawful orders. Key word being lawful. I don't believe it an order to lie about ones height is a Lawful order. "The order must relate to military duty, which includes all activities reasonably necessary to accomplish a military mission, or safeguard or promote the morale, discipline, and usefulness of members of a unit and directly with the maintenance of good order in the armed forces. MCM, pt. IV, 14c(2)(a)(iii). The order can affect otherwise private activity. United States v. McDaniels , 50 M.J. 407 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (order to not drive personal vehicle after diagnosis of narcolepsy); United States v. Hill , 49 M.J. 242 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (no- contact order issued by military police had valid military purpose of maintaining good order and discipline in the military community and to protect the alleged victim while during the investigation); United States v. Padgett , 48 M.J. 273 (C.A.A.F. 1998) (order requiring 25-year- old service member to terminate his romantic relationship with 14-year-old girl had valid military purpose); United States v. Milldebrandt , 25 C.M.R. 139 (C.M.A. 1958) (order to report, while on leave, financial conditions unrelated to the military did not have valid military purpose). An order that has for its sole object a private end is unlawful, but an order that benefits the command as well as serving individuals is lawful. United States v. Robinson , 20 C.M.R. 63 (C.M.A. 1955) (use of enlisted personnel in Officers’ Open Mess at Fort McNair)." http://www.ucmjdefense.com/resources/military-offenses/the-lawfulness-of-orders.html

That is an excellent point. Much of the U.S. literally use to be Mexico. Hispanics are ingenious while blacks and Asians were forced to immigrate to work as labor. That history looms big over the way many internalize this issue.

As does his draft card. However one is measure at DMV. At least I have never been measured at DMV. They always just ask me what my height and weight are and enter that as my height and weight. Given Trump's long history of exaggeration and vanity it is easy to believe he has been rounding his height up higher for years. The Navy Admiral should be on the outside of that though. He isn't one of Trump's hand picked political loyalists. I find it a bit breath taking that the Doctor would lie. We can't trust anything apparently. I mean absolutely nothing and no one.

Looking at photos of Trump in public over the decades it appears he is probably 5'11 or 6 feet even. I am 6 feet even measured in bare feet to the top of my bald head. In shoes most people take me for 6'1. I Saw Obama in person back in 2012. He walked past me at an event. I took him to be the same height as I am. From the photos and videos I have seen Trump is clearly not any taller than Obama. Actually considering Trump has the big puffy hair and Obama doesn't I would assume Trump is half an inch shorter than Obama. To my best guess that makes Trump shy of 6 feet. Definitely not 6'3. Again, I don't care how tall Trump is in and of itself. I don't care Trump lies about his height. Lost of people lie about they height. I am upset that a Navy Rear Admiral came out and lied about Trump's height.

What is the claim of those who want to end DACA? The only arguments I have heard articulated are that DACA was never meant to be permanent. Same argument made to throw out the 200,000 people here legally from El Salvador since 2001. While true it is also nonsensical considering those making the argument could simply make it permanent. More over it was their opposition in the first place which kept it from being permanent. So the argument is circular. A honest explanation from the opposition doesn't seem to exist; least I haven't seen one.

Navy Rear Adm. Ronny L. Jackson is the White House's Doctor. Is he lying and if so is that even legal? Can a Navy Rear Admiral knowingly lie to the public? Obviously they can conceal information in the best interest of national security but I struggle to understand how lying about the President's height is in the best interest of national security. It really pisses me off that this administration is so fundamentally dishonest that they'd lie about something so irrelevant.

I agree. The whole "wait in line" argument is nonsense. The systems have different lines for different groups of immigrants. I agree. Let's hope they don't fold. I find it unconscionable that we'd deport individuals who were raised in the this country and have called it home for over a debate. When we discuss DACA specifically we are talking about individuals who attend and graduated from schools here in the U.S. and do not know another other nation as home.

Like other western countries the birth rate in the U.S. In 2017 fertility rates reached record lows. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/health/united-states-fertility-rate.html The U.S. economy and the global stock markets are centered around growth models. Without increases in customers across the board (agriculture, electronics, education, etc) markets begin to fail. Immigration is vital to the U.S. economy as they help grow the population which in turns creates more demand for housing, food, services, and etc. Should the Democratic party hold the line and fight to protect DACA?

Yes, I am trying to focus on whether or not immigration is and has been good for the U.S.

630 × 354 - motherjones.com - Jeb Bush's height is listed as 6'3 - Don King, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton are all listed as 6'2 - Obama is listed as 6'1 I understand that this is stupid and conspiratorial - to claim the Trump and his doctor are lying about Trump's height . I also understand that the above photos are not empirical proof of anything as camera angle, shoes, posture, and etc all impact how tall someone looks. That said I am troubled by the idea that a military doctor would bold face lie to the public. It troubles me that I can't trust anything that comes from my govt. Even something silly as Trump's height. Trump has been a public figure for decades. He has been photographed standing next to millions of people. If we look at any number of those photos over the decades it is plainly obvious Donald Trump is not 6'3. Jeb Bush is 6'3 and Jeb Bush has been next to Trump numerous at debates and is clearly taller. We all saw it time and time again. If the doctor lied about Trump's height can we trust anything the doctor said? Does it matter or should the Presidents doctor be able to just lie? Or do you guys believe Trump is 6'3? 4608 × 3072 - vox.com

The primary sticking point for Congress passing a budget is securing an agreement for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Through DACA 800,000 people have been living in the U.S. with work permit working and going to school since 2012. To be eligible for DACA one had to have lived in the U.S. continuously since 2007 , arrived in the U.S. younger than 16yrs of age, have no criminal record, and were enrolled in or graduated from High school here in the United States. Requests to be protected by DACA had to be made through Immigration services. The President and majority of Republicans want DACA ended, all 800,000 deported, and money to start building a physical wall across the Mexican boarder. Democrats are fighting for a deal to continue the protections for those coverage by DACA and do not want any money to go towards a wall. I have followed politics for decades. Immigration only became a divisive partisan issue in the last 10yrs or so. In 1986 Reagan gave amnesty to everyone who had been in the country since 1982 as part of his Immigration Reform Act; 3 million people. Bush unsuccessfully fought for a guest worker program which would have provided immigrants a pathway to citizenship. Bush also authorized the 200,000 refugees from El Salvador into the country legally that the Trump admin is now attempting to deport. Among both parties the debate use to be about security and waiting in line. Everyone agreed immigration was inherently good for the nation as the U.S. was a nation of immigrants. Those who pushed against more protections for undocumented immigrants did so from a position that those immigrants had bypassed the legal system. In 2018 the nature of debate has greatly changed. Those who came here legally as refugees from Haiti and El Salvador are being asked to leave. The military has suspended the Military Accessions Vital to National Interest (MAVNI) program which enabled immigrants to legally become citizens in trade for service. The Presidents travel ban seeks to limit the ability of targeted Muslim groups to legally travel to the U.S. It appears that Republicans do not care whether immigrants are legal or illegal anymore. The goal simply seems to be less immigration period. Is immigration inherently good; is the U.S. a nation of immigrants? Should the Democratic party fight for the 800,000 people protected by DACA? Is race the primary driver of the Republicans current hard line on immigration; we just need more people from Norway as POTUS suggested? In this environment are there anyways to meet in the middle?

In 2018 we literally have that opportunity with the house. Sadly the majority will keep their jobs.

That really shouldn't be a politician's job.

If my whole life was public and I ran for office it would be very easy for a opponent criticise things I have done. What a Politician advocates for in real-time should be more heavily considered that what they may have done in decades past. Provided those actions of old are not prosecutable. Obama admittedly used drugs in his youth. He was still and excellent President in my opinion. If Oprah runs I will evaluate her message and policy ideas. I am nervous about her running because I believe they are millions if her fans which might take a Oprah or nothing position which may hurt Democratic turnout if she failed to win the nomination. That said if she has good ideas and rallies her fans around the party and not just herself than it could be a really good thing.

Saying everyone has a lean lumps together those who diligently try to ensure they are producing a truthful and transparent product with those who knowing just obfuscate reality and push a specific ideology. I don't think that is fair. There are journalists and researchers out there who go out of there way to produce unbiased work. That is one of the reasons why quality editorials and papers list the numerous materials sourced. As for PBS specifically I have not personally follow it. As Swansont mentioned Republicans have made various attempts over the years to cut their funding. I suppose it is possible that as part of the GOP's attempt to bring PBS down they infiltrated it on some level.

We can enforce safety. Discouraging "wrongdoing" is a relative goal. What each individual considers to be wrongdoing varies greatly. All obvious crimes which people mostly all agree are crimes like rape, murder, vandalism have a safety component to them where people, property, or the environment is being protected. Laws which are not directly about safety tend to be divisive laws that are more detrimental to the targeted groups than they are good for society at large. For example outlawing gay marriage has no obvious safety component. One must do mental gymnastics to explain how two individuals marrying impacts the safety of other individuals. In my opinion the enforcement of law should only be about safety. At attempt to use law to provide punishment, justice, at as a deterrent, and etc miss the mark; those goals are not possible. What might discourage you from doing something may not discourage me. What punishment might be a slap on the wrist to you may induce anxiety or depression in me. Laws can keep us safe but can't accurately moderate behavior; encourage or discourage anything.

Laws do not fall from the sky. Often those in power attempt to deify laws in an attempt to maintain the status quo. The Constitution for example gets treated with religious scale reverence and our founding fathers are view as perfection incarnate. Reality is laws are made by humans. Laws are can be poorly designed, ill conceived, burdensome, or cruel. Society should always be willing to reconsider and change laws. None should ever be deified. This may have made more sense in philosophy. There is not a pointed political position here. Perhaps something in the subtext be nothing clear. Philosophical I think retribution, revenge, punishment, justice, and etc are all selfishly flawed ways at finding catharsis following victimization. Justice is impossible. In WW2 the Nazi's were stopped but was that just for all those who had been killed? Did the Emancipation Proclamation provide justice for all those who had already died? Wrongs never can be reversed. Arresting a rapists and imprisoning them doesn't repair the emotional and physical damages imposed on their victims. In my opinion viewing the execution of law as means of dulling out justice is an error. At best laws simply protect us. When evaluating crime protecting society should be the primary focus and not avenging those who have been wrong. Only people who pose a threat to society should be placed in jail and only those things which endanger society should be outlawed. One can seldom ever be compensate for damages. My stolen car can be returned but the psychological impact of it being stolen in the first place will always remain. Tit for tat punishments resolve nothing. Things like free speech at worst are only an inconvenience to those who disagree with the speech. If we exclusively view law through the filter of safety physical (person/environment/property) speech does threaten anything and no law should restrict it. Things like protests potentially could damage the environment or property by overwhelming infrastructure so it makes sense laws would restrict them.

CharonY, Black and Asian suicide rates are mostly unchanged. Since 2000 they have not risen or fell by more than half a percent. The change in trend has been among whites. https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/ I see 2 different conversations being blurred together here.There is a conversation about recent increase and a conversation about suicide in general. All recent increases are among the white population. It is one and perhaps the only thing which regarding recent increases. That said if we look at suicide overall it impacts every community. Even groups which have not experienced increases still are experiencing suicide. No group has fallen to zero. So what is the OP asking; why the increase or why does suicide happen period? I don't see how we can address the increases without acknowledging it is specific to race. I have a theory about the increase among whites. It is based on my own experiences traveling within the country. I cannot and am not claiming it as fact. I grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area. I worked in the San Francisco financial district for the first 6yrs of my working adult life. Then I moved to Boise Idaho for 4yrs. There was a lot of culture shock moving from someplace like San Francisco to Boise. One of the biggest culture shocks was the prominence of conservative talk radio. In San Francisco people typically had on music around the office. As a young person I thought AM radio was just weather and local news. I wasn't aware of the laundry list of conservative talk radio personalities. At work, in the local coffee shops, and seemingly everywhere I went conservative talk radio was always on in Boise. As a result of the continues stream of the divisive content I noticed a lot of people were visible put into bad moods over what they were listening to. Sometimes it was subtle as an eye roll or shaking of the head but other times it was vocal complaints about the state of the nation or society at large. It was a very different reaction than I had seen among those listening to music around the office in San Francisco where foot tapping or head nodding to the beat was the common interactive response. Since that time I have lived in San Diego, Newport News VA, and am currently in Washington DC. I have consistently noticed that people who follow conservative punditry have a worse (less happy) overall demeanor. You show me someone listening to Rush Limbaugh all day and I will show you someone who is easily displeased. Conservative punditry is more explicitly angry and dissatisfied than liberal punditry and followers seem to listen for longer portions of their day. There are no Conservative equals to Bill Maher, John Oliver, Trevor Noah, Samantha Bee, John Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and etc. Liberal media is inherently more comical and less serious. Not only that but known of the media personalities I named host shows which are longer than an hour. Bill Maher isn't hosting a 4 hour daily radio show in addition to his TV show like Sean Hannity and Laura Ingram are. Those who follow conservative media get larger and more negative doses. So who is following conservative media; white people. 90% of blacks, 70% of Hispanics, and 70% of Asians identify as liberal. Conservatives in the U.S. are overwhelmingly white. I believe that as conservative media has grown over the years it has negatively impacted the daily disposition of its core audience. That impact is felt beyond political ideology. Being raised by an moody parent, married to a dissatisfied spouse, sibling to someone who's constantly angry, neighbor to an asshole, and etc all has an impact on the overall quality of ones life. Doesn't matter is an individual white person follows conservative media or not. All white people are more likely to have those in their life who are. The result is more depressed and suicidal white people. Other groups (minorities) are less likely to have regular interactions with large groups of people who follow and are influenced by negative conservative media. If you think this theory is crazy try listening to Mark Levin a couple hours everyday for a month and then tell me if you feel more or less positive overall.

It has been Studied. A Princeton Professor named Anne Case has done a couple papers about the growing mortality of white males. Her approach doesn't exclusively look at suicide though. It includes suicide along with drug overdoses and other "deaths of despair" and has charted them out across the country. I didn't copy and paste the charts because they are large but I linked the research below. "The states with the highest mortality rates from drugs, alcohol and suicide, among white non-Hispanics aged 45-54, are geographically scattered. In 2000, the epidemic was centered in the southwest. By the mid-2000s it had spread to Appalachia, Florida, and the west coast. Today, it’s country-wide. The authors suggest that the increases in deaths of despair are accompanied by a measurable deterioration in economic and social wellbeing, which has become more pronounced for each successive birth cohort. Marriage rates and labor force participation rates fall between successive birth cohorts, while reports of physical pain, and poor health and mental health rise. Case and Deaton document an accumulation of pain, distress, and social dysfunction in the lives of working class whites that took hold as the blue-collar economic heyday of the early 1970s ended, and continued through the 2008 financial crisis and the subsequent slow recovery." https://www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/mortality-and-morbidity-in-the-21st-century/ https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/23/521083335/the-forces-driving-middle-aged-white-peoples-deaths-of-despai In my opinion I don't see any reason to look at this issue universally based on income, access to healthcare, and etc. The rates of increase simply are not universal. This epidemic is specifically impacting white males. Other groups are not experiencing the same increased rates. Anne Case's work does list economic factors as a contributor as you have with the primary difference being it is only a contributor for White Males. Per the CDC the top 10 States with the highest rates if suicide are: Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, and Oklahoma. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045217 It is worth noting the Wyoming is 93% white, Montana is 90% white, Utah is 91% white, and Idaho is 93% white. There is not a single State with suicide rates below the national average that are 90% white or greater. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/ID,UT,MT,WY/PST045217