Talk:First presidential transition of Donald Trump

RFC: Should location of transition office be provided in "location" section of infobox?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The infobox template has a "location" field. We have typically used this to put the street address of an organization (see Museum of Modern Art, Blair House, Brookings Institution,) etc. The street address of the transition committee, 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue (which is in the same building as the Clinton transition committee), has been published by Politico and the Washington Post, among others. Should we include it here or should we make an exception to custom to remove it or make it generic to refer only to a general area? An IP editor representing themselves to be a proxy of the transition committee has requested it be removed due to "security concerns." LavaBaron (talk) 21:09, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Survey

• Keep Street Address as per convention. If certain articles are granted exceptions to our SOP it becomes difficult to track. There can't be legitimate security concerns with posting the address to Wikipedia as long as the address is still listed on the websites of the Washington Post, Politico, etc. Besides, this is located on what is probably one of the most heavily defended and fortified intersections in the world. Any attack on the transition office would have to come from a national armed force, and I'm sure the PLA's 15th Airborne Corps don't use WP for recce or intel. LavaBaron (talk) 21:09, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
• Keep Street Address - I agree entirely with LavaBaron. Besides, the street address is already a matter of public record - Wikipedia does not publish new information; it republishes knowledge already in the public eye. If someone was truly serious about posing a threat to the transition offices, there are plenty of other places where they could find the address. As a matter of policy, I think WP:OWNERSHIP is quite clear when it says "a person or an organization that is the subject of an article does not own the article, and has no right to dictate what the article may say". Specto73 (talk) 21:25, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
• Remove street address. Wikipedia practice has always been to remove the street address at the request of the organization, should they for whatever reason want to discourage visitors, the most notorious example being the Wikimedia Foundation article itself. ‑ Iridescent 21:27, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Good point. Just one note of clarification - the IP editor in question is not a proved representative of the Trump transition committee. Their IP address geolocates to Iowa. If there is an unambiguous request, and there is precedent, I have no objection. However, there should be a formal request that unambiguously originates with the organization itself, is filed via OTRS ticket for verifiability, and posted here as an administrator ruling. Otherwise we're dealing with things happening in the shadows and smoke-filled backrooms which is antithetical to WP. LavaBaron (talk) 21:33, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

• Leaning towards removal / indifference to keeping it. Frankly I don't see a need to provide a number on the street for an office such as this. Should we also provide the floor number? We don't provide the address for the Presidential transition of Barack Obama or the Planned presidential transition of Mitt Romney. Why? because it's just not interesting. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:32, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I wrote the article Planned presidential transition of Mitt Romney so I can affirmatively say the reason I didn't provide the address is because I didn't know it. No other reason. LavaBaron (talk) 21:34, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Maybe that's an indication of how important it was. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:36, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

• Remove street address per Iridescent, since we don't list the WMF's street address... Geogene (talk) 22:33, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

I thought you were "suspending" your activity on Wikipedia because you didn't like the WMF messing with the U.S. constitution or something? [1] Does this mean you're lifting your embargo? LavaBaron (talk) 22:46, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

• Keep Street Address: Nobody owns an article here but I don't consider that private information nor "security concerns". The public already know this and should not visit here. KGirlTrucker81 ^{talk what I'm been doing} 23:19, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
• Keep The location can be easily found elsewhere anyway. Having it here isn't a security issue.74.70.146.1 (talk) 00:53, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
• Keep unless there is an OTRS verified request We have previously removed the location for other organisations but this has happened only after verifying the request. In this case, the address has been published by Washington Post. If the IP can send a request to OTRS and the authenticity of the request can be verified, I would not be opposed to removing it. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:14, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
• Keep unless there is an ORTS verified request An unverified request from an anon is meaningless. Besides, it's not exactly an undisclosed location; it's half a block from the White House complex. There is also the possibility that it's not really there. The address is a virtual office space.[2] There are short-stay office spaces and cubicles starting at $35 a day. John Nagle (talk) 05:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
• Keep. needs an OTRS verified request. Now going to check on the Ten Downing Street article. -Roxy the dog™ bark 10:28, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
• Remove street address - because listing a specific street address doesn't increase the readers' understanding of the article's subject matter. I'd suggest using the "Headquarters" parameter in infobox instead to list the city as in Presidential transition of Barack Obama.-- Isaidnoway (talk) 17:13, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

It's an important part of the historical record. Given the importance of the U.S. presidency, everything associated with it is important. The place where Clinton and/or Trump developed the apparatus that ultimately ruled the U.S. for 4-8 years is an historic location and a record of it should be preserved. (Also, the GPS coordinates are in this article already and reveal the exact location anyway.) LavaBaron (talk) 19:29, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Do you think you could find a reference that actually verifies the content you have added, as it stands now, I'd have to change my !vote to failed verification, because the WaPo ref says: If they accept, Clinton and Trump staffs will ride the same elevators to their offices...and goes on to say...In keeping with his unorthodox campaign, Trump may steer clear of Washington for transition planning. “You wouldn’t believe the amount of office space in New York,” Lewandowski said. He said it’s “highly likely” the transition will use GSA space, but may seek it instead in New York, where the campaign is headquartered now, - (note that Lewandowski is no longer the campaign manager), The other source says: Once the Government Services Administration turns on the lights for the transition offices. So it doesn't sound like it's definitive to me that the Trump campaign has actually moved into those offices, hell, it doesn't even sound like the lights are on yet.-- Isaidnoway (talk) 20:54, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

That's nice. But we can debate what the address is later. This RfC asks if a street address should be provided, not what the street address is. LavaBaron (talk) 22:27, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

More info: this is just short term leased space until Election Day. Then the winner gets office space in a GSA government office building at 1800 F Street NW, where the real work of transitioning takes place. [3] John Nagle (talk) 22:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Great find, John Nagle. LavaBaron (talk) 22:50, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Then why did you put 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue in the infobox with those sources that don't support the content, if the debate will take later on what the specific address is? And also, why did you cite that specific street address (1717 Pennsylvania Avenue) and ask up above: Should we include it here or should we make an exception to custom to remove it or make it generic to refer only to a general area? - if the debate is going to be later on what the specific address is.-- Isaidnoway (talk) 04:39, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm not debating it. You're debating it. And we'd prefer you start a different thread to do it in. Thanks. LavaBaron (talk) 07:37, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

• Keep We wouldn't want incompetent terrorists to go to the wrong address. However, remove if formal request received from affected transition team. After all: "1-7-15 The two masked men brandishing automatic weapons had the wrong door. They were looking for the offices of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical weekly. After learning from a pair of maintenance workers that their target was two doors over, the gunmen killed one of the unfortunate duo." Terrorists are not the only ones who make "honest" mistakes: 4-28-13 Police in Fort Worth, Texas, are blaming “poor lighting” after two officers went to the wrong home in search of a possible burglar and ended up shooting a 72-year-old man dead in his garage. The officers, were responding to a burglary alarm on May 28 when the tragic mistake occurred. 4-25-13 Lebanon, TN: A 61-year-old man was shot to death by police while his wife was handcuffed in another room during a drug raid on the wrong house. Police admitted their mistake, saying faulty information from a drug informant contributed to the death of John Adams Wednesday night. They intended to raid the home next door. 6-9-16 Stockbridge, GA: David Powell, 63, was shot late Tuesday or early Wednesday when police arrived outside his home and he went outside, with a gun, to see what the commotion was about. Police said Powell refused their instructions to put down his weapon. Henry County police were responding to a call to 911 reporting gunshots and a woman crying for help. A preliminary review of the 911 call indicates “the officers were at the wrong location,” said the GBI, which is investigating the shooting. Activist (talk) 14:40, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• Remove per Iridescent and WP:COMMONSENSE. There is no encyclopedic value and that isn't a permanent location like a museum. Just because a location is known does not mean it should be on Wikipedia. Mr Ernie (talk) 12:24, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
• Keep. Not Censored superseded all other considerations except a BLP violation, or a real threat. If there is a real threat, it should go through LEGAL or OFFICE, who can deal properly with such matters in a way that prevents inappropriate discussion. Individual OTRS agents do not have authority to decide policy, just to facilitate interactions between WP and the outside world. DGG ( talk ) 19:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
• Weak remove Little to no encyclopedic value. Plus I doubt everyone is operating out of that office, given Trump HQ is in NY. Instaurare (talk) 18:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
• Keep per DGG and I sincerely hope Activist's comments above were meant as humour. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 13:12, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep Much as I admire them, I'm not remotely as able as Lewis Carroll or Dean Swift, but I would hope satire and sarcasm are allowed (and hopefully recognized as such) here. Activist (talk) 07:56, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

IP 65.152.141.197 is the General Services Administration

operating out of the 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue address. The geolocation is just showing a proxy server. Which of course makes it possible, even likely that it is someone from the transitional team. Doug Weller talk 14:54, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Has anyone considered just asking them if they're happy having the address listed? I can think of plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons why they wouldn't want it listed; if it's just an administrative office rather than a public-facing campaign facility, presumably they don't want supporters turning up out of the blue to offer their support, or opponents turning up to heckle. The Ten Downing Street comparison above isn't really relevant, as that's a public building (presumably should Trump win, we'd decline any request to conceal the fact that he lives in the White House as unreasonable). A closer British equivalent would be the Labour Party (UK) article which lists the address as their public contact address in Newcastle rather than their actual address of 105 Victoria Street, London, as the latter is an administrative office and not set up to handle visitors or large amounts of incoming mail. ‑ Iridescent 15:21, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

I'll be happy to ask. Since we don't have an email or phone for the transition office I guess I'll have to send them a letter if I can find their street address. I wonder where I can find that at? Oh I know, I'll check their Wikipedia article! LavaBaron (talk) 17:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

It's where to send a resume if you want a job with the incoming administration. Each new administration has to fill about 4,000 high level jobs in a hurry. They have to have a public point of contact for such HR functions. John Nagle (talk) 20:19, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Frankly, it is none of their business what we post about them in WP, provided we don't disclose actually private information or engage in libel or misrepresentation. Just like everyone else. I also point out we have learned to be very skeptical about edits coming from official government ip addresses. Altogether too many of them have been from out-of-control staffers. DGG ( talk ) 19:23, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Is this a case of "I don't like it"?

Why are these well sourced claims about notable information being disappaeared wholesale, without any effort to at least include some of the material? There is no way you can tell me none of this is relevant to this article. I am being persecuted unjustly. 63.143.192.228 (talk) 22:57, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Your additions violate WP:LEDE, that's why. LavaBaron (talk) 23:00, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

How so? What aspect of LEDE do they violate?63.143.192.228 (talk) 23:02, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

MOS:INTRO, Relative Emphasis, and Scope of Article LavaBaron (talk) 23:05, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

You are completely wrong. This is the most notable aspect of his transition thus far: that thousands of protests have been organized against it. There are over 10,000 references I could add here. Looks like this is indeed a case of "I don't like it, make it go away!" Deleting my material won't make the protests end, friend. 63.143.192.228 (talk) 23:07, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Your objection is noted. LavaBaron (talk) 00:13, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

It is notable and noteworthy but 63.143.192.228 (talk · contribs) should instead post a draft version here to the talk page and we can all discuss it and tweak it. The prior methodology of instead repeatedly adding it in, after all the objections, is not the best way to go here. Maybe you could try collaboration and see if it works to get a compromise version. 69.50.70.9 (talk) 00:51, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I hadn't noticed the existing article at Protests against Donald Trump. Perhaps a link from this article to that one would be enough. That article is huge with over 200 sources LOL. So yeah, a simple link to there should suffice. 69.50.70.9 (talk) 00:53, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Update history of Chris Christie and his close associates Bill Palatucci and Richard Bagger

Chris Christie joined the as head of the transition planning team of Donald Trump, after he endorsed the presidential candidate when Christie dropped out of the race in the primary. Christie brought along two of his close associates — Richard Bagger and Bill Palatucci. After calls for Christie's impeachment as Governor and felony convictions in U.S. federal court for high-ranking members of his staff in the Bridgegate scandal, Christie was dropped by Trump as leader of the transition team, in favor of Mike Pence. On the same day, Bill Palatucci and Richard Bagger were also both removed by Trump from the transition team; they each then returned to working in the private sector.

---

Please add above to update article content. Sources are from: The Washington Post, The Guardian, The New York Times, and CNN.

Please also remove the two close associates of Chris Christie from the infobox (Bill Palatucci and Richard Bagger) as they are no longer associated with the transition team at all and both returned to the private sector.

Thank you ! 69.50.70.9 (talk) 00:49, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

References

 Done IP editor - I made this change with a slight textual modification. Let me know if this form is okay. LavaBaron (talk) 03:28, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Toggled request as done — Andy W. (talk) 03:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, looks great! Probably should say a teeny bit more about Bridgegate, and also fix the link to Fort Lee lane closure scandal so it doesn't go to Bridgegate which is a less specific page about other things also. 69.50.70.9 (talk) 04:00, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry - fixed wikilink. LavaBaron (talk) 04:09, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Much better, thank you ! 69.50.70.9 (talk) 05:05, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Greatagain.gov - content under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License

Please add:

---

Content at the Greatagain.gov website was made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. The website explained: "Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Content includes all materials posted by the Trump Presidential transition. Visitors to this website agree to grant a non-exclusive, irrevocable, royalty-free license to the rest of the world for their submissions to this website under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License."

---

Thank you ! 69.50.70.9 (talk) 09:25, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. -- Dane2007 ^talk 01:12, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Okay then. What do people think about adding this small bit of vital info to the page? 69.50.70.9 (talk) 02:08, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Why? Calibrador (talk) 02:03, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

It's important to know so that we can use media files posted to the site for upload to the Commons, but is it vital to include in the article itself? LavaBaron (talk) 04:13, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Seems noteworthy for a very brief mention being it is same policy used by Obama Transition website. 69.50.69.34 (talk) 17:00, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

The problem is, the noteworthiness of mentioning the website has a CC v 4.0 license can't be in the eye-of-the-beholder. If there are secondary sources discussing it, that would be one thing, but us observing it through a primary source (the website itself) and then declaring it noteworthy, is problematic. LavaBaron (talk) 21:35, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

• Mike Masnick (15 November 2016), "Trump Transition Website Has Some Copyright Problems -- Both In Copying Content & In Claiming Copyright", Techdirt, retrieved 15 November 2016
  • @LavaBaron:You raise some good points, here is a secondary source with commentary and discussion about the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. 69.50.70.9 (talk) 23:54, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

OK, I added a sentence sourced to Politico since it actually contacted the copyright holder for comment. LavaBaron (talk) 00:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, LavaBaron, can you also add that it is Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License ? 69.50.70.9 (talk) 01:19, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done ... I'll get to your other request shortly. LavaBaron (talk) 08:01, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Employment of relatives in Executive Branch against US Federal law

• 5 U.S. Code § 3110 - Employment of relatives; restrictions -- Title 5 of the United States Code
  • https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/USCODE-2010-title5/USCODE-2010-title5-partIII-subpartB-chap31-subchapI-sec3110
  • https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3110
  • https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title5/pdf/USCODE-2010-title5-partIII-subpartB-chap31-subchapI-sec3110.pdf

Media analysis:

• Could Donald Trump's kids serve in his administration?, CNN
• Donald Trump Jr. for Interior secretary?, The Washington Post

69.50.70.9 (talk) 22:19, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

References

• I'm not sure what the request here for addition is - IP editor could you clarify? To say "if X did Y, he would break the law" when X hasn't done Y, seems to skirt WP:CRYSTALBALL. LavaBaron (talk) 04:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Trump Transition just asked for top security clearance for his family members. Seems to be moving quickly in that direction. 69.50.69.34 (talk) 17:01, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Can you provide recommended text or wording? LavaBaron (talk) 21:28, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@LavaBaron:Recommended text and wording:

CBS News reported that the Trump Transition team asked the Obama Administration White House for top security clearances for his children — however regulations discouraging nepotism within the government prevent the President of the United States from hiring family members to work in the executive branch.

With secondary sources to back it up using both CBS News and International Business Times. 69.50.70.9 (talk) 00:05, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

The issue I have with this is the sources say that there is no exclusion to family members receiving security clearances, only working in the government. As established in this article (or maybe it should be), the transition group is a private corporation. Your suggested wording strongly implies (without technically saying so) that a law has currently been broken, which the sources don't support LavaBaron (talk) 00:14, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@LavaBaron:Recommended text and wording:

CBS News reported that the Trump Transition team asked the Obama Administration White House for top security clearances for his children during the transition period. Regulations discouraging nepotism within the government prevent the President of the United States from hiring family members to work in the executive branch.

LavaBaron, better? 69.50.70.9 (talk) 01:18, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

New article: Donald Trump Requests Security Clearance for Son-in-Law Jared Kushner, NBC News -- "While it's unclear when Kushner would receive security clearance, the legality of such a move is murky as well, as it raises questions about whether Trump is contravening the anti-nepotism law that bars presidents from appointing family members to cabinet positions or formal government jobs." -- Getting more and more relevant and covered by thousands of sources now. 69.50.70.9 (talk) 03:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

IP editor - OK, OK, I get it. I'll get to this as soon as possible. I'm not the Trump Transition Wikipedia Curator. LavaBaron (talk)

No problem, and thank you. 69.50.70.9 (talk) 05:44, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Mike Rogers out from transition team amid purge of Chris Christie allies

• Damian Paletta and Carol E. Lee (15 November 2016), "Intelligence Expert Mike Rogers Leaves Trump Transition Team Amid Shake-up - Former House Intelligence Committee Chairman seen as Chris Christie ally; Ben Carson turns down cabinet post", The Wall Street Journal, retrieved 15 November 2016

"Mr. Rogers, a Republican who represented Michigan until last year, held a central role overseeing the national-security transition process for Mr. Trump’s team since before last week’s election. But he is considered a close ally of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, and multiple people close to Mr. Christie were removed from the transition team in recent days amid a major shake-up."

Significant development. 69.50.69.34 (talk) 17:04, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

And also: Trump Transition Shake-Up Part of 'Stalinesque Purge' of Christie Loyalists, NBC News. 69.50.69.34 (talk) 17:13, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Former Congressman Mike Rogers, a national security expert on the Trump transition team, was additionally another close associate of Chris Christie who was also removed a few days after Christie's departure.

@NotTheFakeJTP: Please add that to update the page. Thank you ! 69.50.69.34 (talk) 18:02, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@69.50.69.34: Add it where? SPERs require a specific "change XX to YY" format. Thank you. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@NotTheFakeJTP:Please add at bottom of section Presidential_transition_of_Donald_Trump#Procedures_and_protocol. Thank you ! 69.50.69.34 (talk) 18:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done LavaBaron (talk) 21:31, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Looks great, thank you. 69.50.70.9 (talk) 00:06, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

References

Miscellaneous Recent Developments

Presidential daily briefings were offered on Nov 9th rather than "provided" as stated in the article. They were finally availed upon on Nov 15th http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/15/politics/trump-getting-first-presidential-daily-briefing-tuesday/index.html (71.233.204.242 (talk) 02:49, 16 November 2016 (UTC))

 Done I've made this change. Thank you. LavaBaron (talk) 05:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Infobox

The infobox makes it appear that this article is about one or more nonprofit organizations. However a reader would reasonably expect this title to refer to the transition process, funded by the U.S. government. Which is it? - Brianhe (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Business interests section

Hi everyone,

This article that I created: Conflicts of interest of President-elect Donald Trump looks like it will be deleted as an attack page. While I disagree, I respect any decision made and wanted to ask what people think about adding the specific potential conflicts of interest to this page about the presidential transition?

Map shows the number of companies owned by Donald Trump that are operating in each country:

  1-3

  4-8

  9-15

  Over 15

• Trump International Hotel, Washington is leased with the General Services Administration, which specifically prohibits elected officials from deriving benefit from the lease.
• Deutsche Bank is owed $365 million for a hotel in Washington DC, a hotel in Chicago, and a golf course in Florida. There is a $14 billion fine being negotiated with Deutsche Bank and the Department of Justice for matters unrelated to Trump, that he as President would have power to influence.
• The Internal Revenue Service receives a new appointed head by the President of the United States every five years, the next head due November 13, 2017. Trump is currently under audit by the Internal Revenue Service.
• The National Labor Relations Board sometimes has had disputes with the Trump organization, and Trump will be appointing the members of the organization.
• The Trump organization's foreign investments around the world will be affected by policy decisions while Trump is president. The organization has business holdings in at least 20 countries.
• The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China currently rents space in Trump Tower.
• Trump favors completing the Dakota Access Pipeline, and owns stock in the company building it.

Victor Grigas (talk) 14:34, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

*In my opinion, the fact that this has been a concern SHOULD be mentioned in the article, with sources documenting that experts have expressed concern and a few of the most important examples.  However a list of everything that someone has been mentioned anywhere is a little too much.  Remember that until he takes office these are only POTENTIAL conflicts.Kitfoxxe (talk) 15:48, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2016

National Security: Yleem Poblete was named as advisor for National Security. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/former-house-foreign-affairs-chief-of-staff-named-to-trumps-nsc-landing-team/article/2608666#.WECl2Oyl8kA.facebook Saraiblack (talk) 13:12, 4 December 2016 (UTC)