• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)

Status
Not open for further replies.
tomahawk6 said:
The intelligence community used to be A political,that all changed with Obama. If I were POTUS I would not believe what they told me unless it could be corroborated. priority one would be to flush the democrats out of State,Defense,CIA and Justice for starters.

Corroborated by who and just how would they do that? Will you only believe them if Russia comes out at says "OK America, you got us! Hahaha. Yea, we totally were screwing with your election. Our bad!"

The intelligence community has tools at its disposal to collect information that nobody else has. If you can't trust the official assessment of 17 agencies then you might as well just them all down.

Besides, which situation so you think is more likely:

A.  Russia interfered with the election, by covert and electronic means, of one of its main advisaries in world affairs, withbthe aim of creating a situation whereby a more favorable leader is elected; or
B. Sensing that their new President wasn't going to be the kind of guy they want running the country,  17 individual and independent intelligence agencies came to a secret consensus whereby they all agreed to completely fabricate an intelligence product about Russia interference in the election, and lie about its authenticity to the entire world. Realize that in order for this to work,  you would have to assume that there wasn't one Trump supporter amongst all the heads of these agencies and all their deputies who would stand up and say "woa woa wao, that's not true, we never found that", or even some lowevel analyst who works on the Russia desk who wouldn't stand up and say "wtf? I don't work on all the Russia products but I know about them all, and we don't have any project working on Russian election interference. Wtf?" Finally,  you'd have to ensure that the 17 agency heads thwere not only anti-Trump to begin with,  but that they were all so morally bankrupt that not one got the cold shoulder and said "you know what,  I hate Trump, but for my integrity and my conscience I cannot support a lie of this magnitude."

So, which of these two situations sounds more likely? A state actor performing as they have for decades (albeit with new means), or corruption and collusion on a level we have never seen before?
 
Lumber said:
kP4Yax1.jpg

Thank-you for that, Lumber.

"The fake news media is going crazy with their conspiracy theories and blind hatred. @MSNBC & @CNN are unwatchable. @foxandfriends is great!"
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831830548565852160

"Information is being illegally given to the failing @nytimes & @washingtonpost by the intelligence community (NSA and FBI?).Just like Russia"
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/831840306161123328

Regarding the "failing" New York Times,
https://www.google.ca/search?q=new+york+times+failing&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-CA:IE-Address&ie=&oe=&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&gfe_rd=cr&ei=xlukWPX5POWM8QeXzZawDQ&gws_rd=ssl#q=%22new+york+times%22+failing&tbs=qdr:y

 
tomahawk6 said:
... If I were POTUS I would not believe what they told me unless it could be corroborated ...
Just curious:  who would you believe, then?  Corroborated by who?  What other mysterious source of what's happening out there would be available to you?
 
milnews.ca said:
Just curious:  who would you believe, then?  Corroborated by who?  What other mysterious source of what's happening out there would be available to you?

Vladimir assures me nothing happened!  NSA got it wrong again!  SAD!
 
I don't doubt Russian involvement to stir the pot during the election, not exactly new I know lot's of Chiliens that still hate the the US for their involvement in undermining elections as well. The question is: "Did the Russians leak information that already existed or did they fabricate it?". If the information leaked was the fault of the party in the first place, then they did the US a favour in the long run. Moral of story, don't do stupid crap and expect to hide it. 
 
POTUS took to twitter today about leaks from the intel community.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/president-trump-goes-off-intelligence-community-continued-leaks-far-left-agents/

 
tomahawk6 said:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/president-trump-goes-off-intelligence-community-continued-leaks-far-left-agents/

I did not see that blog on the chart provided by Lumber.

I read this about it in The Washington Post ( which is on the chart ),

Washington Post
"Blog known for spreading hoaxes says it will have a correspondent in Trump White House"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/20/blog-known-for-spreading-hoaxes-says-it-will-have-a-correspondent-in-trump-white-house/?utm_term=.02e427ce092a


 
mariomike said:
I did not see that blog on the chart provided by Lumber.

I read this about it in The Washington Post ( which is on the chart ),

Washington Post
"Blog known for spreading hoaxes says it will have a correspondent in Trump White House"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/20/blog-known-for-spreading-hoaxes-says-it-will-have-a-correspondent-in-trump-white-house/?utm_term=.02e427ce092a

There is always a question of "Point of Aim" versus "Point of Impact". You may need to adjust your sights for windage.
 
Draining the swamp looks to be a more and more urgent priority:

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/former-obama-officials-loyalists-waged-campaign-oust-flynn/

Former Obama Officials, Loyalists Waged Secret Campaign to Oust Flynn
Sources: Former Obama officials, loyalists planted series of stories to discredit Flynn, bolster Iran deal
BY: Adam Kredo
February 14, 2017 3:26 pm

The abrupt resignation Monday evening of White House national security adviser Michael Flynn is the culmination of a secret, months-long campaign by former Obama administration confidantes to handicap President Donald Trump's national security apparatus and preserve the nuclear deal with Iran, according to multiple sources in and out of the White House who described to the Washington Free Beacon a behind-the-scenes effort by these officials to plant a series of damaging stories about Flynn in the national media.

The effort, said to include former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes—the architect of a separate White House effort to create what he described as a pro-Iran echo chamber—included a small task force of Obama loyalists who deluged media outlets with stories aimed at eroding Flynn's credibility, multiple sources revealed.

The operation primarily focused on discrediting Flynn, an opponent of the Iran nuclear deal, in order to handicap the Trump administration's efforts to disclose secret details of the nuclear deal with Iran that had been long hidden by the Obama administration.

Insiders familiar with the anti-Flynn campaign told the Free Beacon that these Obama loyalists plotted in the months before Trump's inauguration to establish a set of roadblocks before Trump's national security team, which includes several prominent opponents of diplomacy with Iran. The Free Beacon first reported on this effort in January.

Sources who spoke to the Free Beacon requested anonymity in order to speak freely about the situation and avoid interfering with the White House's official narrative about Flynn, which centers on his failure to adequately inform the president about a series of phone calls with Russian officials.

Flynn took credit for his missteps regarding these phone calls in a brief statement released late Monday evening. Trump administration officials subsequently stated that Flynn's efforts to mislead the president and vice president about his contacts with Russia could not be tolerated.

However, multiple sources closely involved in the situation pointed to a larger, more secretive campaign aimed at discrediting Flynn and undermining the Trump White House.

"It's undeniable that the campaign to discredit Flynn was well underway before Inauguration Day, with a very troublesome and politicized series of leaks designed to undermine him," said one veteran national security adviser with close ties to the White House team. "This pattern reminds me of the lead up to the Iran deal, and probably features the same cast of characters."

The Free Beacon first reported in January that, until its final days in office, the Obama administration hosted several pro-Iran voices who were critical in helping to mislead the American public about the terms of the nuclear agreement. This included a former Iranian government official and the head of the National Iranian American Council, or NIAC, which has been accused of serving as Iran's mouthpiece in Washington, D.C.

Since then, top members of the Obama administration's national security team have launched a communications infrastructure after they left the White House, and have told reporters they are using that infrastructure to undermine Trump's foreign policy.

"It's actually Ben Rhodes, NIAC, and the Iranian mullahs who are celebrating today," said one veteran foreign policy insider who is close to Flynn and the White House. "They know that the number one target is Iran … [and] they all knew their little sacred agreement with Iran was going to go off the books. So they got rid of Flynn before any of the [secret] agreements even surfaced."

Flynn had been preparing to publicize many of the details about the nuclear deal that had been intentionally hidden by the Obama administration as part of its effort to garner support for the deal, these sources said.

Flynn is now "gone before anybody can see what happened" with these secret agreements, said the second insider close to Flynn and the White House.

Sources in and out of the White House are concerned that the campaign against Flynn will be extended to other prominent figures in the Trump administration.

One senior White House official told the Free Beacon that leaks targeting the former official were "not the result of a series of random events."

"The drumbeat of leaks of sensitive material related to General Flynn has been building since he was named to his position," said the official, who is a member of the White House's National Security Council. "Last night was not the result of a series of random events. The president has lost a valuable adviser and we need to make sure this sort of thing does not happen again."

Other sources expressed concern that public trust in the intelligence community would be eroded by the actions of employees with anti-Trump agendas.

"The larger issue that should trouble the American people is the far-reaching power of unknown, unelected apparatchiks in the Intelligence Community deciding for themselves both who serves in government and what is an acceptable policy they will allow the elected representatives of the people to pursue," said the national security adviser quoted above.

"Put aside the issue of Flynn himself; that nameless, faceless bureaucrats were able to take out a president's national security adviser based on a campaign of innuendo without evidence should worry every American," the source explained.

Eli Lake, a Bloomberg View columnist and veteran national security reporter well sourced in the White House, told the Free Beacon that Flynn earned a reputation in the Obama administration as one of its top detractors.

"Michael Flynn was one of the Obama administration's fiercest critics after he was forced out of the Defense Intelligence Agency," said Lake, who described "the political assassination of Michael Flynn" in his column published early Tuesday.

"[Flynn] was a withering critic of Obama's biggest foreign policy initiative, the Iran deal," Lake said. "He also publicly accused the administration of keeping classified documents found in the Osama bin Laden raid that showed Iran's close relationship with al Qaeda. He was a thorn in their side."

Lake noted in his column that he does not buy fully the White House's official spin on Flynn's resignation.

"For a White House that has such a casual and opportunistic relationship with the truth, it's strange that Flynn's ‘lie' to Pence would get him fired," Lake wrote. "It doesn't add up."

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer stated in his daily briefing that "the evolving and eroding level of trust as a result of this situation and a series of other questionable incidents is what led the president to ask General Flynn for his resignation."

A third source who serves as a congressional adviser and was involved in the 2015 fight over the Iran deal told the Free Beacon that the Obama administration feared that Flynn would expose the secret agreements with Iran.

"The Obama administration knew that Flynn was going to release the secret documents around the Iran deal, which would blow up their myth that it was a good deal that rolled back Iran," the source said. "So in December the Obama NSC started going to work with their favorite reporters, selectively leaking damaging and incomplete information about Flynn."

"After Trump was inaugurated some of those people stayed in and some began working from the outside, and they cooperated to keep undermining Trump," the source said, detailing a series of leaks from within the White House in the past weeks targeting Flynn. "Last night's resignation was their first major win, but unless the Trump people get serious about cleaning house, it won't be the last."
 
Thucydides said:
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/former-obama-officials-loyalists-waged-campaign-oust-flynn/

Gentlemen, I'm not familiar with some of the blogs posted in Radio Chatter. This is another one I did not see on the chart posted by Lumber, so I looked it up,

Media Matters for America
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/06/23/david-brock-advises-media-of-the-washington-fre/199835
"If credible media outlets regard the unethical practices of The Free Beacon as valid, all of journalism will be debased."
 
Media Matters is a far left Soros funded organization. Of course I lean to conservative blogs such as gatewaypundit.  :camo:

http://www.aim.org/aim-report/media-matters-or-does-it/
 
dapaterson said:
Vladimir assures me nothing happened!  NSA got it wrong again!  SAD!
And Vlad also offers good political advice via Twitter ...
If the Democrats want @GOP to launch an investigation into my election hack they should say I used a server in Benghazi.
Thucydides said:
Draining the swamp looks to be a more and more urgent priority:

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/former-obama-officials-loyalists-waged-campaign-oust-flynn/
Ah, so it's the fault of former Obama types that Flynn ... mis-remembered speaking to assorted Russians (fave line from "In The Loop""I can't recall - it was a busy time"), and didn't quite present the whole story to the boss in a timely fashion?  Thanks for clearing that up for me.  #GasLightingIsSuchAHarshTerm
 
One will believe whatever fits their narrative or their leanings.  I find extreme Trump supporters no different than those on the far left.  They express their views and base their opinions on whatever supports their side regardless of evidence or source and nothing will change their minds.

The far left decried the round up of "immigrants" by ICE snatch squads.  Unfortunately they failed to mention that these "immigrants" were in the US illegally and that those targeted were criminals (an unfortunate side effect was also catching harmless ones associating with them). 

Also the media went crazy about the Joe Trudeau thing and to be honest it looked more like he just tripped up on his words.  Not a big deal.

But, I have no doubt that it is amateur hour at the White House.  We can talk about draining the swamp all we want but until you get the right people to do that you'll be doing it with a bucket full of holes.
 
tomahawk6 said:
Of course I lean to conservative blogs such as gatewaypundit.  :camo:

I shall add it to my reading list!  :)

In MSM news,

Washington Post
Donald Trump is freezing out the mainstream media. That should terrify you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/15/donald-trump-is-purposely-freezing-out-the-mainstream-media-that-should-scare-you/?utm_term=.e5f3b9bb54b4

CNN
President Trump skirts tough questions again
http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/15/media/netanyahu-trump-press-conference-questions/index.html
President Donald Trump has a strategy for skirting tough questions at press briefings: Don't call on reporters from the mainstream media.

Remius said:
But, I have no doubt that it is amateur hour at the White House. 

"Are you allowed to impeach a president for gross incompetence?"
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/474134260149157888?lang=en

 
Congress is asking the FBI why Flynn's phone calls were bugged ? No outcry from the privacy groups now. Those responsible need to be prosecuted.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/02/14/fbi-needs-to-explain-why-michael-flynn-was-recorded-gop-intelligence-chairman-says/?utm_term=.f9c2343e17ff

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said Tuesday that the most significant question posed by the resignation of national security adviser Michael Flynn is why intelligence officials eavesdropped on his calls with the Russian ambassador and later leaked information on those calls to the press.

“I expect for the FBI to tell me what is going on, and they better have a good answer,” said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which is conducting a review of Russian activities to influence the election. “The big problem I see here is that you have an American citizen who had his phone calls recorded.”
 
Apparently, Remius, more than one White House, or for that matter more than one neophyte government anywhere, anytime,  has gone through the exercise of trying to figure out how to get things done.  And while I agree that it is always possible to hire the last guy's staff that strategy didn't work so well for the Merovingians - who let their Chief of Staff, a chap name of Pepin, run affairs until he ran them right off the throne.  You may know his son Charlemagne better.

Again, I am not bothered about beliefs.  I am bothered about the imposition of beliefs.  For example imposition of rule by elites, even Burkean elites, even though many believe in that system, bothers me.

As for noisy voices, of left and right, it may be necessary to differentiate between those that believe their slogans and those that believe the only way to counter slogans in the street is with contrary slogans in the street.  Slogans don't allow for nuance but it is reasonable to believe that, until the other side quits, slogans are necessary.
 
Chris Pook said:
Apparently, Remius, more than one White House, or for that matter more than one neophyte government anywhere, anytime,  has gone through the exercise of trying to figure out how to get things done.  And while I agree that it is always possible to hire the last guy's staff that strategy didn't work so well for the Merovingians - who let their Chief of Staff, a chap name of Pepin, run affairs until he ran them right off the throne.  You may know his son Charlemagne better.

Great reference Chris. A bit like in House of Cards.

The problem is that this neophyte administration isn't actually trying to figure out how to get things done.  They are attempting to do whatever they want and acting any which way they want which is leading to backtracking, corrections and contradictions and more importantly court actions.  They think they know how to get things done.  A bit like putting Ikea furniture together without reading the instructions.  You end up with a few extra screws and something just doesn't seem right.  Looks good for the base but makes for bad governing. 

And it's only been three weeks.

I suspect that the inner circle is comprised of yes men and no one wants to present the Boss with facts he might not like. 

 
 
With respect Remius, I suspect that you have no greater insight into what they believe, what their motives are, than do any of the rest of us.

And for many people the unknown is a fearful prospect.  For others it offers hope.
 
tomahawk6 said:
Congress is asking the FBI why Flynn's phone calls were bugged ? No outcry from the privacy groups now. Those responsible need to be prosecuted.

Just a wild guess, but because they had reason to suspect he was talking to a foreign intelligence agency?
 
tomahawk6 said:
Congress is asking the FBI why Flynn's phone calls were bugged ? No outcry from the privacy groups now. Those responsible need to be prosecuted.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/02/14/fbi-needs-to-explain-why-michael-flynn-was-recorded-gop-intelligence-chairman-says/?utm_term=.f9c2343e17ff ...
Questions about leaks?  Fair ball. 

I have no proof, but if I had to bet a loonie, though, I'd bet it's the Ambassador's line, not Flynn's, that's tapped by intelligence/SIGINT folks.  Or is THAT out of bounds now, too?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top