Part of why Trump was elected is his lack of filter. He says what is on his mind, he’s not afraid of being politically incorrect, and he’s a sarcastic motherfucker.

The next few years will show us one way or the other, with North Korea, with China, with Iran, with Mexico, with Israel/Palestinians whether a guy who doesn’t act “Presidential” can make big things happen for the USA.

The tax cuts were enormous. We’ll see how the tariffs work out but even Schumer is congratulating Trump for them. I think NK could work out pretty well too.

When Trump makes politically incorrect jokes to either get his point across, or to rattle his opponents, I think it only advances his agenda when media insist on taking a literal interpretation.

MET Police special forces infiltrate unions and blacklist workers is “real” news. Taking a joke Trump makes and quoting it like a serious statement of intention, like “Trump says we should try out China’s Xi-style ‘President for life’” is what we call fake news.

Just like Trump joking “maybe Russia can recover those 30,000 emails Hillary deleted” the people who vote for Trump laugh and get the point — the obvious crime that gets ignored - while Trump haters consider the statement an actual endorsement. It’s nothing more than a Rorschach test.

He says a lot of politically incorrect and stupid stuff. But here, he didn't say something politically incorrect. He literally said he was going to oppress someone.

Sure, but the point is that Trump is an effective mud monster... 'dirt' doesn't stick on him because imho, his voter base knows he is a mud monster and only care if he is effective or not.

Take the whole Trump cheating on his wife with a porn star and now a Penthouse Pet of the year. His voter base has barely blinked.

Personally I think Trump knows exactly what he is doing when he says and does certain things that cause his political opponents to waste their time and energy being outraged.

He's controlling the news cycle and the media is playing right into it.

Ok, but the point I was trying to make has been completely lost here.

If the London metro police chief cheats on his wife that is one thing. If he plots to use his power granted to him by the public to oppress someone, anyone, that is very bad.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think one of the biggest problems with the UK is that is has no single constitution... when you study for the 'Life in the UK' test the study material clearly state that the UK's constitution is the various institutions of Government. I think this always leads to corruption because there is no definitive document that clearly spells out what rights a citizen has. Like the right to bear arms or not, the US constitution was a masterstroke of genius by the American forefounders because it clearly spells out the minimum rights an American citizen has from the state. Seen through the lens of limiting the power of the state, is it any wonder why the right to bear arms is the second amendment right after the right to free speech? I'm sure they knew you have no rights if you can't defend them.

As for the UK, I have no idea how it can reform, or even if it can, its institutionalised propensity for corruption. The only way freedom and rights are wrestled out of the hands of the state is through willingness to die for it. Catalan is a great recent example, collectively there is a want for succession from the Spanish crown, but an unwillingness to die for it... and that is precisely why I don't think they will ever get it.

Similarly, I don't see the British public at large rising up... they are too placated and do not the means to do so. It might seem shocking but in the UK there is no right to freedom of speech.