Dear Editor,
Shall we start a BELIEVE IT OR NOT WITH THE SECOND TERM
President Donald Trump introduced on April 3, 2025 a gold “Trump Card” Featuring his face on
the front.
The $5 million “gold card” program is aimed at wealthy immigrants (note not Migrants) seeking
U.S. residency. The announcement aboard Air Force One, offers “green card-plus” privileges to
individuals who invest $5 million in American businesses. It will replace the existing EB-5 visa
program, which required lower investment amounts and job creation.
The initiative is set to become available in less than two weeks.
Having read history books before they became censured; one or another of us has lost it. The
direction we are going is mindful of the downfall of the Roman Empire
Clyde L. Younger
Watertown Resident
President Trump has monetized an invaluable commodity—American citizenship—reaping FIVE BILLION DOLLARS to the US Treasury (over 1,000 reportedly sold so far), and this is a bad thing? That’s $3,000 per US taxpayer. As Mr. Younger reminds us, this was not a new program, but an improvement on an existing one. My only quibble is that he might have underpriced it. But he’s the billionaire dealmaker and I’m not. Also, as the top 1% in income pay around 25% of the federal income tax bill (the top 5% pay 45%), these wealthy new immigrants will be the geese that lay the golden eggs for years to come. Talk about paying their fair share! Contrast these newcomers (who come from all corners of the globe) with the illegal aliens who have filled refugee centers and residential hotels, while also siphoning off other government benefits meant for Americans in need. By adding contributors and subtracting takers, President Trump is erasing the national debt from both ends. That’s what he means by “winning”.
I think you messed the math up there. $5b / 150M (taxpayers) is $30, not $3000.
Yes, I did! I blame inflation!
Trump is monetizing the U.S. He is scouring the world to rake in money, which is a characteristic of how the merchandiser-in-chief has approached his second term, where he has initiated a global trade war and is treating ties with close allies such as Canada and Mexico as largely transactional relationships with the world as one large business. Trump is trying to monetize America’s power in all possible ways. In February, Trump affixed his Sharpie signature to an executive order ordering the creation of a sovereign wealth fund within the next year, saying it could potentially buy the video app Tik Tok. If created, the sovereign wealth fund could put the U.S. along side other countries, particularly in the Middle East and Asia, that have launched similar funds as a way to make direct investments with government dollars.
Typically such funds rely on a country’s budget surplus to make investments, but the U.S. operates at a deficit, so a wealth fund would require congressional approval. Neither Trump nor administration officials gave details on how the fund would operate or be financed, but Trump has previously said it could be funded by “tariffs and other intelligent things.” Treasury Secretary Bessent said, “We’re going to monetize the asset side of the U.S. balance sheet for the American people.” How Trump’s fund would be structured and funded is unclear. What is clear is that Congress would likely have to authorize new funding (taxpayer dollars?) given the lack of an existing surplus to tap. Other states like Texas, Alaska, and New Mexico have their own wealth funds which help fund priorities like education and tax relief. They frequently rely on revenue raised by natural resources like oil or land. Trump says he expects his tariffs to bring in $6 trillion in revenue in the next decade, which could amount to the largest tax hike in U.S. history. Even adjusting for inflation, economic experts say that amount would be triple the tax increase put in place in 1942 to pay for fighting World War II. Oh, but concerned taxpayers, please know Trump’s tariffs aren’t a tax increase, but a tax cut. Why? Because Trump repeatedly asserts that tariffs will not be paid by American consumers but by businesses in other countries or the countries themselves. These are some of the same countries that Trump is now trying to stiff into submission as the stock market plummets and millions of ordinary Americans see their retirement investments disappear.
I think you missed my point. Trump is placing his face on the “Trump Card”. Yes, the EB-5 program has been in existance for some time. Can you explain who is responsible for the laws of this country re. Immigration. Is it Congress or the President. In addition if you remember, during his first term, he visited Mt. Rushmore Trump tweeted a picture depicting him as the fifth presidential bust on the monument. Governor Noem said she had a meeting with Trump in the Oval Office inviting him to come to South Dakota sometime; stating we have Mount Rushmore. Governor Noem said this followed by “Do you know it’s my dream to have my face on Mount Rushmore?” Later he told the media that he was joking. However, privately Governor Noem greeted him with a four – foot replica of Mount Rushmore that included a fifth presidential likeness: his.
Sorry if I misunderstood (if indeed you are addressing me). If your point is that President Trump puts his name and likeness on things, I have no counter. If your point is about the separation of powers, the Executive branch, Trump, can and must carry out the laws passed by the Legislative branch, Congress. If we’ve grown unaccustomed to that arrangement, we can and must blame President Biden (or those who wielded his autopen) for dereliction of duty. In no way does the Judicial branch figure into the picture, except, in rare cases, the Supreme Court. Certainly, no district court judge has any authority over the President. President Trump has demonstrated the patience of a saint, but even saints are sorely tested from time to time. The safety of the American people and the integrity of the Constitution are far more important than any resentment of his oversized ego.
Monetizing??? – more like a shakedown which is and always been his M.O.. I guess if Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk had had that kind of cash, then she would not have been kidnapped off the streets. Who cares about guilt or innocence or due process when you have 5 million Gs? We will have all kinds of international Oligarchs with their expertise in general racketeering, sex trafficking, war crimes and cybersecurity hacking here in no time. It’s like selling indulgences. Meanwhile, we in the United States will end up paying an average of 75.00 more a week on groceries if the planned tariffs go into effect. Sounds like a good way to kill industry.
I re-ran the numbers after my mistake yesterday, and five million dollars times one thousand buyers is still five BILLION dollars to the US Treasury. So, yes, monetized. Bigly. For what Biden was giving away, throwing away, even flying plane loads of foreign nationals from their soil to ours, then sending busloads to unknown destinations in the heartland in the dead of night. At no cost to them, but incalculable cost to our country and its people: more racketeers and sex traffickers than you could count. By just stopping that madness, President Trump has probably saved more than $5b. The Trump gold card is just the latest shiny bauble to enrage people, like a Tesla side mirror or DNI Gabbard’s smile. With $5m, Ms. Öztürk would have been qualified to apply, but I don’t think she would have passed the vetting. We have more homegrown violent campus radicals than we need without importing more. Does your concern over her detainment extend to a lone Jan. 6 defendant tracked by cell phone data over a trespassing misdemeanor? I read next to no interest in guilt, innocence, or due process then.
He’s selling citizenship in HIS name while refusing to follow the Constitution to protect the due process rights of protected Americans who have been deported against federal law and the intervention of the courts. And people on this thread are celebrating that fact.
This person is celebrating that the rule of laws enacted by the people’s representatives matters again. And that the power invested in people’s elected executive trumps that of a partisan judge appointed by an equally partisan predecessor. Presidents Biden and Obama are history; the judges they leave in their wake do not constrain the sitting president. I would agree if the tables were turned.
What you are arguing is that the three branches if government are not co-equal? Therefore Obama and Biden should not have been subject to rulings by judges appointed by Reagan or the Bushes? And so judgeships should be decidedly political appointments?
This is not how a system of checks and balances work nor what the framers had in mind. Federal judges have a lifetime appointment for a reason. That is to keep politics at as far a remove as possible.
You are espousing a superior Executive branch, which is not what is outlined in the Constitution. In fact your interpretation is decidedly un-American. We had a revolution to escape the rule of a King.
The framers did not have lawfare in mind either.
Federal judges keeping politics out of it? I don’t think so. Oh, I see. Only Republican-appointed judges do engage in politics, as so-Special Counsel Jack Smith would say. That went well.
Keep going at it.
There are 94 district courts in the US, comprising around 670 judges. There is one President. He alone is invested with the authority and the responsibility to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”, to “be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States”, to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”. Not 670 presidents, one. The proper venue to decide disputes is at the Supreme Court, as the Constitution carefully lays out, not in a Washington, D.C. district court over a Texas matter. The Supreme Court agreed with the Constitution (despite ACB’s nonsensical dissent), and reversed Judge Boasberg’s partisan error. They also suggested ways of reasonable compromise. The other 669 judges should take note; the Constitution also allows for impeachment. More “co-equal” than all is the American public and its elected representatives. Not appointed, elected. Their choice was clear, their voice shall be heard.
We have three co-equal branches of government for very good reason. Checks and balances. The framers were wiser than the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
BTW, the arsonist in chief got less than a majority of the vote, so claims of an overwhelming mandate are nonsense.
I always love hearing reinterpretation of our Constitution and laws on these pages.
Exactly! The Brits having been trying to wrestle power from the king since the late 900s, the French had to guillotine the king after 1300 years of rule to wrestle power, but Americans did it in less than 200 years! And now we want to revert??? The framers knew what it was like to live under a monarch, we don’t and probably wouldn’t.
Paul, we are always happy to share our wisdom. Thanks for reading!
Revert to what? Last I checked we had elected a President, and Congress, and Senate in our Constitutional Republic. I like it very much as it is now. I would not change it for the world.
Oh, the glory.
(CNN)
—
The Supreme Court on Monday allowed President Donald Trump to enforce the Alien Enemies Act for now, handing the White House a significant victory that will let immigration officials rely on a sweeping wartime authority to rapidly deport alleged gang members.
We’re celebrating, all right. Good luck in finding forum conveniens from now on.
And those are not “protected Americans” being deported. They are illegal aliens, some of which are also criminals. More celebrating here!
The Supreme Court also outlined a procedure involving due process. Due process is a basis of the American system which the Trump Administration finds inconvenient. Trump would, if he could, simply round up his “enemies”. Due process is what separates us from a purely authoritarian regime–for now.
Sure. Good luck in Texas.
There is a reason why the opposing side keeps filing in DDC, MA, and other, similar woke Districts. Not quite due process with those Democrat-appointed left-leaning judges. Is it?
Let the chips fall, you know the rest.
What happens when the executive branch starts to disappear veterans and Republican senators who speak out, priests and CEOs who get on the “wrong” side an issues or previous supporters like the Koch brothers? What happens when its your friend or relative or you? Or anyone perceived to have committed a crime? People should realize that attendance at an event, gathering in a public space, asking questions about matters that should be transparent, telling someone to f-off, calling someone every expletive in the book, exposing actual corruption or favoring ideas that don’t align with the administration are not crimes. If being at the scene of a crime makes you guilty, then we should all be in jail. This is the policing thoughts and freedoms. When you hand over power to a single entity, you live by that entities ‘whims. Whims flip really quickly and are not necessarily be logical or sensible. This is why no one should be above the law. I may not like your stance on religion but if you are not burning people because of it, then you don’t belong in jail.
You belong in jail when you damage other people’s property. Like, you know, Teslas?
And “calling someone every expletive…” may not be a crime, but it is rather classless and ignorant. Well, À chacun son goût !
I’ll worry about President Trump “disappearing” anyone on the “wrong” side of an issue when it happens. You have my word because I raised holy hell when President Biden did so to non-violent Jan 6th protestors. In reality, not fantasy, President Trump is overseeing the deportation of illegal aliens (by self-deportation or arrest and removal); the arrest of violent protestors and vandals; the end of government-sponsored corruption and waste in agency budgets; termination of funds to universities which allow gangs to terrorize minority students (by faith or ideology); zero tolerance for male-on-female violence in what we once quaintly called “women’s sports”; and that’s just before lunch. No wonder people are upset: he’s doing exactly what he said he’d do. What politician is so mad as to do that?
Someone above referred to Mr. President Trump as “the arsonist in chief”. Unlike the leftists lunatics burning Tesla cars, or Antifa burning cities, I am not aware of any instance where our President was or is any sort of pyromaniac idiot. If you got proof to the contrary, let’s see it. Conversely, just stop spewing this immature non-sense.
And before you go there, this was no metaphor:
arsonist
noun
A criminal who illegaly sets fire to property.
Similar: incendiaryfirebug
One who has committed the act of arson, or illegally setting fire to property.
A criminal who illegally sets fire to property.
Yes, it was meant as a metaphor and yes, Trump is burning down the American house with all of us inside. He has set off a global economic crisis in which many may be hurt. His administration has shown contempt for due process and rule of law. He has fomented hatred of other human beings. I stand by my words.
So predictable.
Still not a metaphor. A poor attempt at one, maybe. Mr. President Trump is doing nothing illegally. Show proof to the contrary or (fill in the blanks).
Oh please! Trump is doing plenty that is illegal. He is exactly the person that the framers worried about and why they crafted a government with checks and balances.
Prove it. Conversely, silence is preferable to false, tired allegations fueled by anger after the Democrats miserably lost the elections.
The courts are overturning many of his “executive orders” on a daily basis. That is the tip of the iceberg! And of course MAGA continues to deny his actual criminal and civil convictions! He’s a prince!!
He’s a convicted felon. How’s that for a start?
Well, I am glad he’s not a princess…
Every case is being appealed; DC woke judges don’t matter that much anymore.
And stay on topic. The discussion was about Mr. President Trump allegedly committing illegal acts NOW and demonstrating what such acts are. Your comment (convicted felon) means nothing and starts nothing.
Uncharacteristically sloppy, Paul. They are not “overturning” his executive orders (no reason for quotation marks); they are staying them pending further review. But you make my point with exquisite brevity: 670 judges (so tempted to use quotation marks) cannot do the work of one president. So says the US Constitution.
So glad that his felonious past and present mean nothing to you people. This cult of personality for him despite every horrible thing Trump does is exhausting.
Courage, Paul!
Us “people”? Still waiting for proof of the “felonious…present”. Oh, the horror. And, we are not exhausted. In fact, we’re quite vigorous!
Hey, at least we are not a poster boy for this:
“Dunning-Kruger effect, in psychology, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of people in general. According to the researchers for whom it is named, psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger, the effect is explained by the fact that the metacognitive ability to recognize deficiencies in one’s own knowledge or competence requires that one possess at least a minimum level of the same kind of knowledge or competence, which those who exhibit the effect have not attained. Because they are unaware of their deficiencies, such people generally assume that they are not deficient, in keeping with the tendency of most people to “choose what they think is the most reasonable and optimal option.”
What amazes me is the lack of humanity in these posts. And the mental gymnastics required to develop excuses for the inexcusable.