President Trump Revokes John Brennan's Security Clearance
Historically, former heads of intelligence and law enforcement agencies have been allowed to retain their security clearances so they can be called upon to consult with their successors in times of crisis - John Brennan has been accused of using his access to personally profit as a spokesperson on one of the media networks.
Currently Brennen is being investigated for possible perjury charges in conneection with the debunked pee-pee dossier.
Thoughts? Should former agency heads be permitted to keep their clearances?
PERFECT: An orange, paranoid 72 year old traitor who just betrayed the USA in Helsinki by siding with our arch enemy Vladimir Putin, just revoked the security clearance of a great American patriot named John Brennon who risked his life daily acting as Intelligence Leader for years to keep the USA SAFE:
How insane is that?Where has President Trump committed treason? Oh wait, you don't have anything, you are just making things up, as always.
Russia is not our 'arch enemy.' You realize Marvel and DC comics are not documentaries, right? We don't have an 'arch enemy.'
Have you ever heard of Franklin Roosevelt? He was a US President who was very close to a Soviet dictator. He did not consider Russia our comic 'arch enemy.' Ever heard of any Russian leader besides Vladimir Putin? Well, let me tell you, if you bothered to learn about the recent history of the US and Russia, you'd learn that we've not considered them our 'arch enemy' in a long while now.
In fact, only a person referring to comic books would use 'arch enemy' in a sentence, but they'd only be referring to fiction. Carry on in comic book fantasy land, if you must.
If you want to be taken seriously as an adult, you should learn to speak the way adults speak.I have given up on trying to reason with Jake - he claims to have a journalism background but refuses to identify where he went to college. He has no body of work, either published digitally or in print. In fact, he really doesn't have anything to bring to the debate forum other than over-the-top partisan ramblings that are easily disproven by an elementary school student.
Wesman, RJ: Keep pretending there is no evidence and the prosecutors will continue to indict Trump cronies and Trump himself and his family:
If Traitor Trump is NOT indicted for treason that would give the green light to ALL Americans to betray this country at will:Once again Jake provide evidence. And let me remind you no one in the Trump family has been charged with a crime of any form. FACT
So what, Jake is right, it is coming. Jake can say the same thing you said about Trump family about the Clinton family and I doubt you haven’t convicted them of multiple crimes - no difference.
There was lots of evidence in regards to Clinton crime. So far there has been zero produced to implicate our president in a crime.
In another life, I worked with the National Security Agency on "black box stuff" that was used in the Minuteman missile fail safe system. I held a secret clearance with crypto access. A security clearance could get revoked for many reasons, but none of them included being punished for criticizing your superior.
Trump has revoked one clearance already, but is threatening to revoke more for the purpose of punishing those who criticize him
This brings to mind the classic tale of the Emperor has new clothes. For those of you who don't know it, it is about an emperor who loved to change clothes all the time and have the townspeople praise him for his beautiful clothes.
One day he heard there were two new milliners in town who could make exquisite clothes. Little did he know these milliners were con men and they knew the emperor would pay big bucks for new clothes.
He went to see them and they said they would make invisible clothes for him and the only people that could see the clothes were those who were smart and loyal to him.
Everybody heard about the invisible clothes and when the emperor paraded naked down the street in his new invisible clothes, they praised him for fear of being punished for not being loyal to him or ignorant. There was one little girl who shouted out that the emperor was naked and her father silenced her for fear she would be punished.
The story is about a situation where "no one believes, but everyone believes that everyone else believes. Or alternatively, everyone is ignorant to whether the emperor has clothes on or not, but believes that everyone else is not ignorant
That my friends is what Trump is doing. If you criticize him, you will be punished in one form or another that he calls "counter-punching."
I also believe, there are many who are afraid to tell him he is "naked" for fear of retribution. That's why he has his staff and aides sign non-disclosure agreements that include "thou shall not demean King Trump."
Everybody: Trump, by his own admission is a counter-puncher. If you criticize him, he says he will counter-punch you 10 times harder than your criticism. He does it tweet storms, rallies, interviews, and any other venue that can be seen and/or heard by the public. He doesn't care if you are male, female, or were a former POW who is dying of cancer. He relishes a good fight.
He revoked Brennan's clearance because Brennan criticized him. In his mind, he is punishing Brennan, because Brennan is part of a high ranking, highly experienced cadre of people who have served our country well for years.
By taking away his clearance, he has essentially "drummed" him out of the corps. It's not about taking away his freedom of speech. It's about threatening to shut down Brennan's criticism of Trump and others who are in that group and are on Trump's hit list.
However those people are the ones a president needs to advice him in times of crisis and national security. But what is more important to him is to be prepared to revoke their clearances if they criticize him.
William H. McRaven, a retired Navy admiral, was commander of the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command from 2011 to 2014. He oversaw the 2011 Navy SEAL raid in Pakistan that killed al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Here is the letter he wrote to Trump.
"Dear Mr. President:
Former CIA director John Brennan, whose security clearance you revoked on Wednesday, is one of the finest public servants I have ever known. Few Americans have done more to protect this country than John. He is a man of unparalleled integrity, whose honesty and character have never been in question, except by those who don’t know him.
Therefore, I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency.
Like most Americans, I had hoped that when you became president, you would rise to the occasion and become the leader this great nation needs.
A good leader tries to embody the best qualities of his or her organization. A good leader sets the example for others to follow. A good leader always puts the welfare of others before himself or herself.
Your leadership, however, has shown little of these qualities. Through your actions, you have embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation.
If you think for a moment that your McCarthy-era tactics will suppress the voices of criticism, you are sadly mistaken. The criticism will continue until you become the leader we prayed you would be."
People have said, you can't beat Trump at his game. He relishes a good fight and he will always find a way to announce it as his win, even if it is only in his mind.
Sometimes to do nothing is to do everything. Mueller understands that and that is why he continues his work without confronting Trump. He is cutting off his oxygen by not giving Trump the chance to fight him.
It's important to understand what I'm going to say is strictly my opinion.
I believe Trump is like a Mafia leader and Mueller is going after his lieutenants first in order to take away Trump's protection while gaining more information about Trump. Once he is ready, he will be coming after the Capo de Capo...strictly my opinion.
Remember when former President Obama ordered a government wide reassessment of the 5 million Americans who held Security Clearances after Snowden leaks - why was it National Security then, but Free Speech now?
Duh - There is a huge difference to reassessing security clearances because of a breach in security and taking away someone's clearance because they bad-mouthed you.
But, I am guessing you don't see the difference.
BTW, what is your credible source for the 5 million number?
What evidence? She faced numerous congressional investigations run by Republicans. If they couldn't find any evidence, then none exists.
Furthermore, Trump proudly encouraged crowds to chant "Put her in jail" at many campaign rallies.
Did he? No, because he can't. It's all propaganda.
I'm no fan of Clinton, as I have said before, but in this country a person is innocent until proven guilty -- even Hillary Clinton.No evidence, yet you won’t find one conservative who says she isn’t guilty. Likewise, then who needs evidence to say Trump is guilty?see now that is what you call a double standard. Jake can say whatever he wants, the other side does too
Of course I won't find one conservative who "says" she isn't guilty but the sad fact is, they could not find any evidence to back it up. So ALL they can do is just keep lying about it.
Conservatives don't need evidence, just innuendo.
Sh clearly broke many laws. She was not charged, so I would think it is for now water under a bridge. I will be satisfied after hearing IG Horowitz report. Hopefully, it will be soon... I assume you have listened to Comey's report. He clearly gives his opinion on Hilary's handling of Classified information and having several servers that were unprotected, and his opinion was they were hacked by unsavory players. Just having the illegal servers were enough for me. Some mistake a server for an email account. She had illegal servers. And yes some in Government have been caught using their personal emails for government business, no one had a server set up in their homes. One must ask why she felt he needed a private server? We will have to agree to disagree on Hillary Clinton breaking the law. I think she has been breaking laws for many years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghph_361wa0&t=156sMy major point still stands:
If she broke any serious laws, why haven't the Republican-controlled White House and Congress prosecuted the woman they hate so much?
I can tell you why. They use work email on private servers and accounts all of the time.
For example:
"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, a likely Republican presidential candidate, primarily used a personal email account on his own computer server when he was in office from 1999 to 2007. In December, he posted online hundreds of thousands of emails from both the private and government accounts."
- From the conservative Wall Street Journal newspaper
BusinessWeek reported that 88 White House staffers in the George Bush administration used private servers and accounts. They include Colin Powell.
Etcetera.I remember when Trump won there were several hubbers giddy with glee that Hillary would finally go to jail. I've asked several times why she isn't being prosecuted, much less in jail yet, given the Republicans control the House, Senate, and presidency. I've never received a straight answer.
Weird, huh?Much ado about nothing. This country has much bigger problems being ignored by "conservatives", like the skyrocketing debt.
And you never will receive a straight answer. Why? Because one does not exist in the real world.
You forgot the conservatives control the Supreme Court to.
What law did Hillary break?? Granted, she broke policy, but policy is not law.
We ALL know why she wanted a private server and she finally agreed it was a stupid reason. But, it was never illegal.
What the investigation found that she did not knowingly put classified info on the server - and therefore not a crime either; just dumb, but dumb is not a crime either."She clearly broke many laws..."? Exactly what "laws" did she break? The FBI couldn't find any.
There is no question she acted stupidly in setting up that server, but the FBI found no laws broken, which is why they didn't recommend prosecution. (oh yeah, in your mind, the FBI is in the pocket of liberals - even though most of them are conservatives - and wanted Hillary to win. That explains why Comey helped defeat her (not on purpose, I admit) and kept the investigation of Trump under wraps)
OH! I though he was talking about Bill. Yep, for Hillary there was no evidence at all, just hyperbole.
Key word is "produced". Well today Cohen implicated Trump in a federal crime. When Mueller finally issues his report, you will drown in all of the evidence he has accumulated.
LOTs of evidence?? What LOTs of evidence? And for which crime? The only one I know of is lying to a grand jury, for which he was impeached (but not convicted) and for which a judge punished him for after he left office.
Which of course proves nothing. Yesterday his lawyer and fixer Cohen and his campaign manager Manafort were not guilty of anything. Today they are.
Further, Cohen effectively told the judge that Trump was an unindicted co-conspirator in a federal crime.
Will Trump Jr. end up being charged? Of course he will.
Will Jarad end up being charged"? Of course he will.
How can they not?Exactly what does that mean "Once again Jake provide evidence. And let me remind you no one in the Trump family has been charged with a crime of any form. FACT"? It means nothing.
At one point Al Capone was not charged with a crime ... until he was
At one point Paul Manafort was not charged with a crime ... until he was
Are you saying that Al Capone and Paul Manafort had not been committing crimes until AFTER they were charged? Don't you see how absolutely ridiculous that logic is?
I bet you believe Capone didn't commit murder since he wasn't charged with it, lol.
I bet you think Hitler is innocent of mass murder because he wasn't charged with it.
The circumstantial evidence is now overwhelming that the Trump son's and Trump have committed crimes and it is just a matter of time before they are charged.Or Not.
Why , because unlike Obama or Clinton , Trump came into being politically already under the democratic big
guns .
Be kind of like sending a nuke to North Korea BECAUSE we think that they will send one
............eventually .
That's the Democratic sense of justice .You forget that in addition to the Democrat's legitimate worry, most Republicans, even many conservative ones, opposed Trump for the same reasons the Ds had.
But since he won, illegitimately or otherwise, those Rs who opposed him have lost their backbone and won't stand up to his traitorous and atrocious behavior that only like-minded lemmings find acceptable.
I'm pretty sure he got out of 4th grade. I wrote and thought about at his level when I was in 4th grade, and so this is how I pass that judgement.
Jake, you're still hitting that raw nerve of theirs. Lol
Well PP, the truth and facts crush Trump fans more than anything else, and we have plenty of that here on the good, righteous progressive side: I guess they've never discussed a true, genuine legal defense of Trump that might stand up in a court of law primarily because there is no valid defense to conjure: All they got is 'batty' Rudy Giuliani with his eerie eyes:
I've noticed they are once again resorting to personal attacks which is expected at this point:
Here's the tragedy, recklessness and criminality of Trump: While he's in a twitter stupor rant rage all day, unilaterally revoking security clearances from the best and brightest of our national security intelligence team with the blessing of many Russian republican congress-persons, Donald's Russian pals are using cutting edge satellite technology to gain the upper hand over us: UNREAL and Unacceptable:Jake, PP, have you read my, or other work on RWA (right-wing authoritarianism) followers?
You will find that what you describe about Trump followers fit perfectly with high scoring RWAs. There is years of study on this phenomenon.
Yeah. In a community of writers, persons who can't substantiate things they say are often frowned upon. We expect better.
I notice you pretty much only "expect better" when it's someone you don't agree with.
Don't worry, no Russian ties and Bozo Trump did not unilaterally revoke John Brennon's security clearance per orders from Vladimir Putin:
The only conceivable way a Trump fan could possibly try to defend the indefensible inside their minds, and try to mitigate the overwhelming anxiety is to pretend the mountain of evidence against him, which clearly spells is his doom, doesn't exist:
"John Brennan has been accused of using his access to personally profit as a spokesperson on one of the media networks."
Perfect case of pot calling kettle black. Trump has profited by several bankruptcies. This petty punitive punishment of people who publicly disagree with him must be stopped. This amounts to taking away Mr. Brennan's 1st. amendment rights. I believe a court will find it unconstitutional.
So there are at least 12 more on his list who are being considered with the same treatment. Cut out the security clearances of everyone who has spoken out against Trump policies, and only Trump will have a security clearance. I would spell that with a "d" (dictatorship). Khrushchev said he would bury us from within. He didn't, but a Russian protege is having a fine time doing it.Please - tell me where in the Constitution it states that former employees need to retain security clearances - or tell me how this keeps Brennan form exercising his 1st amendment rights?
You are parroting Democrat talking points.
Would you let former employees keep their key to the office?
I didn't think so...Please tell me, RJ, where in the Constitution it states that former employee MUST have their security clearances taken away.
As to taking AWAY his rights, you are clearly missing the point. He is being punished for EXERCISING his 1st Amendment rights, which is probably illegal. In addition, there are others down the food chain who now feel intimidated and won't exercise their rights as a result.
It is just like Trump's obstruction of justice. To be guilty, all he has to do is attempt it (such as his latest twitter tantrum about Sessions and the DOJ), he doesn't have to succeed.
As to keys for my private business, no I wouldn't. But to clearances for pubic servants who hold special knowledge and experience, it makes all the sense in the world, which is why they do it.
I use to have a Top Secret clearance, but not since I retired. Why, because the gov't doesn't have need of my talents, experience, and knowledge to protect the national security. But for people like former CIA directors, they do.
"This amounts to taking away Mr. Brennan's 1st. amendment rights. I believe a court will find it unconstitutional."
Come on MizBejabbers, I understand your perspective, relative to pettiness, but you must know there is no 1st Amendment issue. Mr. Brennan is not being censored or his Right to speak stifled, by this action.
Right?
GADo you think that the revocation of Brennan's security clearance, done personally by the president and outside of the normal review procedures for such an action, followed by the reading of a list of names the president is also considering for security clearance revocation, could be construed as an intimidation tactic by the president to silence his perceived enemies?
Now that's a different matter isn't it?
I will dip in just one toe, and say that I don't know if it was "... outside of the normal review procedures ..." or not. But that's all you are getting. I didn't bring the right clothes to dive into the rest of your question.
GASecurity clearance revocations are done by the agencies that grant them. It is rare (I'm not sure it has ever happened), though it is within his power, for a president to revoke a security clearance. It would normally be referred to the appropriate agency.
It's just another bullying tactic by Trump to try to silence his critics, with the added bonus that it gives his base a vicarious thrill watching their leader exercise his power. They dig that $h!t.Hi there PrettyPanther, I understand your explanation of the typical process, it makes sense to me. I think I recall hearing a commentator say Pres. Kennedy did it - in one case, but your described process seems to be the normal way it is done.
Regarding your final two points, I doubt Pres. Trump thought it would silence Brennan, but I don't think I can deny the possibility of your second reason being true. ;-)
GATrump may or may not have thought it would silence Brennan (observing Trump tells me he doesn't give much thought to anything) or not, but it was clearly Trump punishing Brennan for saying bad things about him.
Since Trump did it as a vendetta (his punching back), he probably broke a law in exercising his power.Well My Esoteric, there you have it ... "probably."
All you have is your opinion. It may be shared by others, but it is still just opinion.
He "probably" revoked Brennan's clearances out of pique, and he "probably" did it as punishment for what Brennan said. But, there is also "probably" legitimate validation for removing those clearances, (I think there is), and those same technically legitimate validations "probably" mean he, (Pres. Trump), didn't break any laws.
I don't mean that as cute as it sounds. Consider those thoughts in the context of the consequential reality of 'plausible deniability'. Sure he knew, or did it, (probably knew or probably did it), but can you prove it?
GAI also say the sun will "probably" come up tomorrow. Since I don't know for sure, don't put it that way.
But you would agree, don't you, that I have two choices, 1) probably and 2) probably not. I use "probably" when I think there is good logic couple with good evidence that something his true. Likewise, I use "probably not" when logic and evidence go that direction. When I don't know for certain, I say I don't know for certain.
Also, when somebody convicts someone else in a criminal case, the jurors are rarely 100% their verdict of guilty is correct. But, they "probably" think they did where "probably" in this case, means beyond a reasonable doubt. Yet jurors have been proved wrong many times over.
When someone is convicted in a civil trial, the standard is more "probable" than not given the preponderance of the evidence. That is the standard I use here.
Do you use something different?
Now let's take the instant case. Yes, he "probably" revoked Brennan's clearances out of pique, and he "probably" did it as punishment for what Brennan said. It is a fair statement because we have a Trump lifetime of evidence that that is how he operates.
As to "But, there is also "probably" legitimate validation for removing those clearances, " there is no logic nor evidence to support that plus there is expert testimony by those who know the system that say there WAS no legitimate reason to remove Brennan's clearance.
They are former employees of the Fed. - how does stripping anyone's clearance keep them from being able to criticize the President ? How does it silence anyone ? Your argument has no backbone - after all, you don't have a clearance and you can criticize the President all day long.
Because he is being punished by a federal employee, the President, for saying things that employee didn't like.
Of course Bozo Trump unilaterally revoking a former intelligence leader's security clearance for nefarious purposes raises 1st amendment issues just like his blatant constitutional crime of calling the press the enemy of the people for which he must be prosecuted if we still have laws:
GA, what's even more shocking is that you are apparently fine with the fact that a mentally unstable, incompetent 72 year old man who can't even explain the nuclear triad and slurs his speech, just made the USA less safe by committing this blatant act of abuse of power when he revoked the clearance of a brilliant national defense mind in John Brennon: UNREAL:Sticking with the point being discussed Jake, How is losing his security clearance restricting his Right to say what he wants, or censoring what he does say?
I think his, (Brennan's), next-day op-ed proves his 1st Amendment Right are intact.
What am I missing? What are the 1st Amendment issues are you referring to?
GAWhat you are missing, GA, is that Trump is punishing a person for things he has said. That is what makes it a 1st amendment issue. It makes no difference if Brennan is actually hurt or not, it is the punishment that is the issue.
Hi My Esoteric. You have me in an awkward position. I certainly agree that appearances are that Brennan lost his clearances because he pissed-off the president with his comments.
Which can be viewed as that he was punished for speaking out against the president.
But ... the loss of security clearances is not a punishment that in any way restricts a Right to free speech.
So, I have to think about the question; is an act of punishment itself enough to be a restriction, or must that punishment be an actual restriction, or cost-bearing penalty ie. removal of access to a public forum, or a value fine?
Combined with that thought is the reality that the revocation of Brennan's clearances can be legitimately attributed to, and justified by, documented protocols and actions.
As cut and dried as it appears; someone is punished for what they say, I can only end up with an opinion that this "punishment" in no way restricts Brennan's free speech Right, or harms him. So I don't believe it is a 1st Amendment issue.
That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
GA" I can only end up with an opinion that this "punishment" in no way restricts Brennan's free speech Right, or harms him."
Apologies to both of you, I just had to get in on this briefly .
GA, If they took your driver's license for stating you didn't like Obama, that wouldn't be a violation of your first amendment rights? Would it harm you? It restricts your, and others, willingness to speak out in the future...does it not? Isn't this THE primary way societies' restrict rights to free speech? It's almost like "the truth isn't the truth" here. Rudy stuck to that too.
I don't see the comparison hard sun. Taking my driver's license would be a restrictive penalty in both a value cost and a restriction of movement cost.
For that thought to be wrong, it would have to be shown that Brennan needed his clearances, in the same way that I needed my driver's license.
Then there is the technically legitimate justifications. What would those be for the taking of my driver's license? As blatantly clear as it appears that Brennan's clearances were revoked as punishment, there are legitimate justifications that can counter appearances.
What would be those legitimizations in your driver's license example?
GAFirst, I just disagree that it should have to be shown that Brennan needed his clearances in the same way you needed your drivers license. I could argue you don't need a driver's license if you're near a bus route but it's still punishment, which is my point.
If Brennan wants his clearance, it's still punishment...and maybe he does need it IDK.
Second, "there are legitimate justifications that can counter appearances."
The problem here is Trump stated he removed the clearances for what Brennan has said " his conduct is "characterized by increasingly frenzied commentary," Commentary is speech. Also "“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said: ‘you know, this Russia thing . . . is a made-up story.’” So, the reasoning also included a "story" being told by Brennan.
I see this similar to how Trump's first immigration bill was knocked down because he stated, at one time, he would ban Muslim immigration. Once you say it, it's um it.
While I see what you're trying to get at, I think it's just going to have to be a disagree here. If only I were on the Supreme Court, more would care about my dissent.I will take one last stab at this Hard sun, reluctantly, because I do believe Pres. Trump revoked Brennan's clearances because of what he, (Brennan), said publicly. I also think that revocation was very poorly handled.
But, (unfortunately for me, this will probably be seen as a defense of Pres. Trump's action), I agree that Brennan should not have retained his clearances after leaving his position. And, from what I have seen of the supposed "13" Criteria for removing a clearance, Brennan did appear to meet at least a couple of them.
Pulling from MizBejabber's post
I think that even your quoted Trump comments could fit some of those 13 reasons. Or at least a reasonable case could be made:
1. Allegiance to the United States
5. Personal conduct
6. Financial considerations
9. Psychological conditions
12. Outside activities
Those are the reasons I said that I think a technically legitimate case could made that would counter the reality of appearances.
Moving back to the "punishment" thing, we may have to just disagree. It seems you feel any punishment is validation, whereas I feel that a punishment must have a bearing on the Free Speech Rights.
It's just life that actions have consequences. I think the force of those consequences is the determining factor relative to this issue.
GA"I think that even your quoted Trump comments could fit some of those 13 reasons. Or at least a reasonable case could be made:"
I agree that a reasonable case could be made here. However, I'm not sure this disqualifies it as being a First Amendment issue as Trump specifically states the revocation is due to commentary.While this doesn't exclude the other potential reasons listed, does having another reason exclude it from also being a free speech violation? On this point, you've lessened my confidence on my position.
Of course actions have consequences but, on a first amendment issue, I still say the specific consequences don't matter. What matters is the reason for the punishment and the fear of speaking out that it creates.The bottom line seems to be that we disagree on the validity of any "punishment" as an infringement of a Right Hard Sun. Ideologically, I think we are stuck, and must leave it there.
I am not defending Pres. Trump's actions, but I am saying I think they could be validly defended.
GA
While you are correct that "in all likelihood" Brennan will keep right on talking, as I said earlier, the mere fact that he was punished for exercising his free speech. If Brennan takes it to court, I presume the charge would be abuse of power.
Secondarily, and many in the intel field have already said this, punishing Brennan in such a way will inhibit others from speaking their mind, especially if they are still employed.
Thirdly, until Trump, the intel community said they often brought former top level officials in to provide context and insight to a particular problem. They can't do that with Brennan or anyone else on his enemies list.
It is the 'punishment' that is the issue?
No what is at issue here, is the lack of comprehension on your part, and anyone else's part, that believes having a TSC is a right, or that anyone can have access to it just because they want it.
Brennan violated more than one Guideline for being able to maintain his TSC. As he no longer serves the interests of the nation, or a government position that requires he have TSC, he has no legitimate reason to have it.
The last thing that should be allowed, is even a hint that someone like Brennan speaks with any authority on behalf of the government.
Brennan losing his TSC is a clear message to others that he has no authority, no power, and now no access to government information.
When news agencies give Brennan a platform from which to speak, so he can show his disdain for this country, the President, and the American people who support him. They are giving voice to disgruntled old man who has been disgraced, not a person of influence or insight into the current activities of our government. That difference needs to be clear, and this move has made it so. His opinions now have no more weight than any other raving extremist.Finally a voice of reason from someone who obviously thinks for himself instead of parroting left wing talking points - thank you Ken.
Let's stop and correct you on your first point Ken, "No what is at issue here, is the lack of comprehension on your part, and anyone else's part, that believes having a TSC is a right,"
- Tell me, who is saying have a TSC is a "right". Nobody is as best I can tell. Please point he or she out.
It is common practice, and I thought you would have known this, that all top level gov't officials keep their clearance because it is of value to the government for them to do so. Brennan was no exception.
And exactly what guidelines has he violated that you can substantiate with any evidence?
It can't be the first one because he is acting IN America's interest by pointing out what is probably treasonous behavior. Your FORGET that Brennan's allegiance ISN'T to Trump, instead it is to America. Unfortunately, your side of the aisle simply doesn't understand that principle.
You have listed others elsewhere, but only SAID it was true, you offered not one iota of logic or proof.
You say, Ken, that "Brennan losing his TSC is a clear message to others that he has no authority, no power, and now no access to government information." That is laughable because even Brennan knows that he has no official authority or power. I am surprised you thought so.
What losing his TSC means is the removal of a valuable resource to the intel community should they need it (which is why he, and others like him, are allowed to keep their clearances. So all Trump did was hurt America. Of course that seems to be his MO, doesn't it.
No wrong, I wish it were that simple. Brennan criticized Trump in tweets, Trump retaliated by revoking his security clearance. Does Trump have the right to tweet his mind and Brennan not?
I didn't realize this but high level former government employees retain their security clearances so they can serve as advisors to the administration...because of their experience. It is clear that our current president doesn't want any advice.
https://www.npr.org/2018/04/27/60658012 … emely-rare
Brennan may know something damaging to Trump.
https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politi … -know.htmlI followed your links MizBejabbers , and I didn't see either one as relevant to the point of Mr. Brennan's 1st Amendment Rights being abridged.
Contrary to your claim I am wrong, and that it "is not that simple," I think it is just that simple. I can see nothing about the loss of a security clearance that affects, or has affected, his Right to say what he wants, and how he wants to say it.
As mentioned to Jake, I think Brennan's next-day op-ed on one of the newspaper's website proves his access to a platform, and the content of what he says, proves his Right has not been restricted.
Other, than proving that Brennan may be right in what he says, can you prove that I am wrong, and his Right to say it has been restricted?
GAGA you are an intelligent person. I was just pointing out some of the things that Brennan said that attributed to his getting the security clearance revoked.
Because there are a set of 13 guidelines by which national security clearances are typically evaluated and revoked. Those factors:
1. Allegiance to the United States
2. Foreign influence
3. Foreign preference
4. Sexual behavior
5. Personal conduct
6. Financial considerations
7. Alcohol consumption
8. Drug involvement and substance misuse
9. Psychological conditions
10. Criminal conduct
11. Handling protected information
12. Outside activities
13. Use of information technology
I also note that free speech is not on there UNLESS it involves giving away national secrets.
Brennan held the security clearance, like the 12 others being considered for
revocation, so he could be called in to advise the president and the Pentagon on security matters. He has years of experience in "the barrel" as do most of the others. Revoke all these clearances, and one general put it, all you have left as an advisor on national security is Jared. Is that in the best interests of this country?
Now Gen. McRaven says he wants his security clearance revoked in sympathy.
http://theweek.com/speedreads/790802/re … ider-honor
Looks like it may be just Trump, Jared and Ivanka running this country if someone doesn't put a stop to this madness.Well now, that's progress MizBejabbers. With so many other reasons to support your perspective, you didn't need the natural, but incorrect, gut-reaction to jump to the 1st Amendment thing.
I hope you won't be disappointed that I can't contribute to the defense of this presidential action, and argue with your comment here, Even if there are valid and logical reasons, I just can't make the leap.
GA
Why would President Trump want any advice from a proven liar?
Well you see, that makes no sense to liberals because they are all liars, their world view is based on lies, To be appominted to positions of leadership you have to be a liar, not a good liar though because when they are caught in lies then they are promoted higher into the liberal’s ranks.
Trump himself is a proven pathological liar. What happened to common sense as so many supposed conservatives say.
So your defense of lying liberalism is Trump is a liar? That’s profound, where did you learn to debate, the school of liberal tactics?
Trump isn’t a conservative per say but his policies are and they work. Every problem in this country is found in cities and states that have been run by liberals based on liberal policies for decades and wherever prosperity reigns it has been the result of conservative policies, both in cities, states and federal government and that has nothing to do with your opinion of Trump’s veracity. I don’t care how much of what he says you think is true or not because obviously you are brainwashed by the media who for example claims Trump says the media is the enemy of the people when he never said that but he said the fake news media is the enemy of the people and I can’t find a lie anywhere in that statement. Where were you when the Liar In Chief Obama lied about almost everything relating to his administration and policies? You can keep your doctor? The IRS not a smidgen of corruption? ...quite an impressive list of lies while Trump has never lied about what his administration has done or is doing, all he’s done is keep campaign promises.
https://247sports.com/high-school/georg … -70603076/
Talk about pathological liars, i can’t imagine anyone worse than Obama, the Clintons and their operatives or anyone in leadership of the Democrat party so to make Trump out to be one to justify them living lies is really hilarious"So your defense of lying liberalism is Trump is a liar?"
I simply pointed out Trump is a pathological liar. That obviously struck a nerve as the truth often does. I don't care what you say about Clinton or Carter or Bugs Bunny. Take a deep breath, we're all Americans, even the Muricans. It's all good. You are arguing something I have no desire to argue.Excuse me, I said “Well you see, that makes no sense to liberals because they are all liars, their world view is based on lies, To be appominted to positions of leadership you have to be a liar, not a good liar though because when they are caught in lies then they are promoted higher into the liberal’s ranks.”
To which you reply: “Trump himself is a proven pathological liar.”
That’s exactly what I said justifying liars by pointing to other liars, a typical liber ploy.
Then you said, “What happened to common sense as so many supposed conservatives say.”
To which the rest of my comment was directed...face it you are no match for me.That's not defending liberalism, it's pointing out hypocrisy. I have no desire to defend liberalism. Face it, you have no clue what you are even arguing about. It just upset you that someone called Trump a liar. Give it a rest and maybe come back with at least a real name.
The removal of a security clearance does not take away Bennen's 1st amendment rights? He can express his verbal opinion on anything he pleases? Although he did work for our government and is under investigation. I would think it prudent to remove his access to any further classified information. And in regards to Trump's bankruptcies, he was a private citizen and broke no laws. Not sure how you equate the two?
The others on the list are also being investigated for possible involvement in the Rusian dossier scandal. You know the one where the DNC paid Fusion GPS to obtain information from Russian's on Trump. The investigations that now have evidence in the way of actual documentation that well proves collusion with Russia by the Clinton campaign. The investigation that some networks have not covered... The exact same crime they accused the president of. Russian collusion paid for by Hillary Clinton... Yes, perhaps it's time someone stood up and removed security clearances... And we now have a president that will take steps to stop collusion with foreign entities.Do you believe the dozens of intelligence professioknals speaking out against Trump's actions are all part of a conspiracy against Trump?
ONLY believe Trump and Trump approved news sources. This is true no matter how outrageous the dots they try to connect are. This is the first rule of Trump Worshiping Syndrome (TWS).
OMG --- I have to address you... When did The New York Times become Trump's approved news sources? Not sure if you realize it' t the very top of his Fake News outlets... LOL Please read your posts before hitting submit.
OMG...Seriously? You feel compelled to address me when I didn't address you. I can't even read your NYT's link.
Do you pay to read fake news? So, is it fake, or is it only fake when it states what you don't want it to state? You can't say it's fake and then use it as a source when you think it supports your side. Or, yeah, you can, lol.I used the NYT to provide a resource that a liberal respects as a good news outlet? I suggest you check out NYT the publication provides the reader more than political articles and op-eds. They have a well-respected Business and finance section, science, entertainment, fashion, and lots more. Yes. I find they use bias when it comes to covering the president. However, if one wants an all-around newspaper, they are well worth paying for.
It's apparent Trump dislikes the NYT. Am I not Trump? Not sure about your thought process? I don't buy into groupthink. I think for myself, I like the NYT... I also like the job Trump is doing, and dislike some of what he says. You see one can like one thing about a newspaper, a person, and dislike somethings about a newspaper or a person. Hopefully, I cleared up why I pay for fake news... Because it's not all fake Todd, it's not all fake. No sides Todd, I don't boycott because I disagree with a page of a new outlet. You really must be open to diversity.I'll tell Todd you said something or other. It's all good.
I was addressing you in regards to your question as to why I pay for the NYT., Sorry for the mistake with your name.
I do understand your reasoning. No worries about the name. It's not as though I'm exactly recognized nationally, despite my clear prowess as a wordsmith and forward thinker. I joke.
Actually, you are a very good wordsmith. You certainly give me lots to think about. Hey, you are one up on me, good shot... you caught me paying for Fake news... I like the NYT what can I say. LOL
Oh no, now I'm going to have to bring my A game for sure.You have made me think a time or two. I do try to separate Trump's policy-- where I can find it anyway-- from the man and appreciate that not everyone who voted for Trump condones all of his behavior.
"TWS": Nice: Just remember hard sun, conservatives no longer adhere to the U.S. Constitution, the law of the land, especially the phrases which guarantee our freedom of speech and freedom of the press:
If the press reports on a fact of impeaching or incriminating evidence that drives Bozo Trump more mad than he already is, and that's quite often as he probably makes plans to flee the country to evade prison or worse, just call it fake news: Why not if his tiny core of fans accept it?
No, I do not believe there is any form of "conspiracy" on the part of those that came together and protested president Trump for action in removing Brennan's security clearance. It is clear that after reading only excerpts from the letter they were protesting Brennan's right to free speech. I have not been able to find the transcript of the letter online to evaluate its message in full. I believe in free speech. As I stated I do not feel his freedom of speech has been taken away. His clearance to classified information has been taken away. Which I think prudent due to the fact he is under investigation for colluding with Russia to interfere with Trump being elected.
What I concerning to me. It seems the Dems did what thy accused Trump of doing. Once again we await an investigation, but this time the evidence is documented, and very clear from start to finish.I have no idea. Shatlee has stated more than once that his security clearance should be revoked because he is under investigation. Odd that I can't find any info on that. I'm sure Sharlee can provide that info, since she is so certain he is under investigayion.
House Judiciary Committee. He has been implicating in the ongoing FISA warrant investigation. John Brennan as others on the list waiting to have their security revoked signed the documents that were used to obtain the FISA warrant on Page. Coincidence? Yet another investigation that will be very embarrassing to our country. This will be one as I said that will be added to our history books.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video … ittee.html
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video … ittee.html
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4579950/ … ies-senateA single Trump-supporting Republican congressman who says he has questions for Brennan does not equal not an investigation.
I have considered anyone that the House Judiciary Committee has requested to come before them and be questioned is under investigation or at best under scrutiny for their part in the FISA investigations? I would think he will be called on the carpet very soon? Just my opinion, but I think this is one of the reasons his clearance was taken. Once again we wait and see...
Brennan is a traitor to the nation, always has been, always will be, he is scum, that is my personal opinion of him. But don't just take my word for it.
"I applaud President Trump for his revoking of John Brennan’s security clearance," Senator Rand Paul tweeted Wednesday. "I urged the President to do this."
Last month, Brennan fiercely critiqued the president for meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and said it "exceeds the threshold of 'high crimes and misdemeanors.'"
Shortly after, Paul tweeted that he had a meeting at the White House with Trump where he said that "John Brennan and other partisans should have their security clearances revoked."
Paul also attacked Brennan in a Fox News interview as “completely unhinged” and a “Trump hater." In a series of tweets, he also claimed he was monetizing his security clearance.
Paul, however, has been a fierce opponent of Brennan for the majority of his political career. [And there is damned good reason for it]
In 2013, when the Senate was set to vote on Brennan's appointment as CIA director, Paul filibustered the vote citing former President Barack Obama's use of military drones for his delay.
"I filibustered Brennan’s nomination to head the CIA in 2013, and his behavior in government and out of it demonstrate why he should not be allowed near classified information," Paul said in a statement Wednesday. "He participated in a shredding of constitutional rights," Paul said, "... and has been monetizing and making partisan political use of his clearance since his departure."Brennan has a very dishonest past this is clear. He has definitely monetized at MSNBC with his bias opinions of the president.
I have a strong feeling Trump is starting at the top of the food chain that participated in the FISA hoax, and will work his way down. At that bottom of the chain, there will be cry babies that will spill all. The real Russian collusion was just another of Clinton's crooked scams that backfired. Is it me or does it seem like Dems never learn to stay away from Cheap Grifts the Clinton's come up with?Seriously? Donald Trump as we speak, is likely according to the law, committing federal crimes by violating our constitution: He's raking in money from any and all individuals and foreign governments via properties that advertise his name and he's actually doing this as he schleps around our white house !! : INSANE:
Money he receives can include but is not limited to possible terrorists, N Koreans connected to Kim Jung Un and Russians who may be affiliated with Vladimir Putin and that's just one reason this is the most corrupt impostor administration in history and he must be REMOVED ASAP:
You won't believe this: INSANITY: read this, the exact reason why our founders drafted the "Emoluments Clause" in the constitution to obstruct this kind of blatant greed driven corruption:
"Trump hotel reportedly got a huge revenue boost from Saudi crown prince’s entourage"
"President Donald Trump’s hotel in New York City earlier this year reversed a two-year trend of declining rental revenue after members of the entourage of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman booked rooms there, The Washington Post reported."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/03/saudi-g … -drop.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXl8vRmLeJk
Your link says he is being called as a witness, not that he is being investigated.
A security clearance may be revoked at any time. There are 13 guidelines that are common to all agencies of the federal government that are used to determine eligibility for a clearance and to determine if an existing clearance ought to be revoked.
IMO Brennan has violated the following guidelines:
Guideline E: Personal conduct
Refusing to cooperate with the clearance investigation, refusing to complete requested paperwork, refusing testing. Associating with known criminals, adverse reports from past employers, neighbors or friends. Providing false information or concealing information from investigators.
Guideline I: Emotional, mental, and personality disorders
“A condition or treatment that may indicate a defect in judgment, reliability, or stability.” Failure to follow prescribed treatments, including taking prescription medications. “A pattern of high-risk, irresponsible, aggressive, anti-social or emotionally unstable behavior.”
Guideline K: Security violations
“Unauthorized disclosure of classified information.” Deliberate security violations. Multiple violations. Negligence.
Brennan's obvious connection to the fabricated dossier and fisa warrant efforts that occurred during Trump's campaign, there may also be evidence of leaking information to reporters.
Calling the sitting President a Traitor and calling his actions treasonous qualify, if the former CIA Director had said this about Obama, the reaction by the media would be quite different.
Brennan's ongoing crusade against Trump in the public arena may qualify as well, as irresponsible, aggressive and unacceptable behavior.
Brennan's actions easily qualify under one or more of the listed options above.
The careless attitudes shown in regards to Top Secret information, and particularly protecting the information of the lives of those who serve this country, had been criminal during the Obama Administration.
Never had so many FBI and CIA agents suffered persecution, some even lost their lives because of the careless and criminal activities and leaks that occurred because of the likes of Clinton and Brennan.
Anyone who stands in defense of either Brennan or Clinton is just as guilty and just as traitorous to this Nation, take note of who they are, and lets hope they are all removed from the scope and ability to do our Nation more harm.Oh gawwwddd Ken! I just knew this was going to be a martini night.
You are completely right in your justifications for Pres. Trump's revocation of Brennan's security clearance. Brennan met several of those bars. No one has any solid basis for refuting that.
Speaking for myself - if I were Pres. Trump, I would have revoked his clearances as soon as he left government - knowing I would have no more use of his expertise.
But ... do you honestly think they are the reasons for Pres. Trump's actions?
I know, I have no idea what the president's real motives were, but given the timing, I feel comfortable with my assumption.
Using your listed potential reasons, why wasn't Brennan's clearances revoked earlier? Why now, if not due to his recent public statements? By my thinking, if the justification was any of your examples, it should have happened well before his public statements.
I have the impression that Pres. Trump has been unhappy with Brennan for a long time. Why didn't he take action as soon as Brennan left his position?
To reuse a phrase, do you think a veneer of justification can negate a seemingly apparent contrary motivation? And even if your "veneer" is accepted as legitimate, do you not see your rationalizations as being contrary to almost all apparent publicly displayed characteristics that indicate this was a punitive action?
As a note, I am not defending Brennan, (or even addressing Clinton), so you can leave the "traitorous" adjective in the bag.
I know, I have no idea what the president's real motives were, but given the timing, I feel comfortable with my assumption.
"I call it the rigged witch hunt, (it) is a sham. And these people led it! So I think it's something that had to be done." - Trump about his decision to revoke former CIA Director John Brennan's security clearance
It's kind of amazing that there is a debate about his motivations huh? And then we have the defenders who fall into the paranoia that America itself is the enemy, and our finest security experts all part of the Illuminati..er um Deep State. Our nation has problems but turning it over to Trump's inner circle is the answer? I'm not even sure he can maintain an inner circle.
Let's just hope we still have free elections come November and that Trump's "it's all rigged" doesn't come to fruition as he likely hopes.Reading KB's post this morning reveals the depths to which many Trump supporters have gone, abandoning reason, decency and truth.
"Anyone that defends him [John Brennan] I immediately consider suspect and complicit in the illegal activities and actions our government has taken against its own people, as well as foreign nations, in the past 2+ decades."
So, this guy belies Donald Trump over dozens, perhaps hundreds, of intelligence professionals, some of whom have repeatedly risked their lives to keep us safe. Trump supporters believe s lying coward like Trump over those who have served this country with courage and honor.
When I read $h!t like this, and that's exactly what it is, $h!t, I fear we are doomed. If people are that easily conned....wow.Yeah. I don't even have the words anymore. Yet, we are all being duped because we don't take the word of one proven repeated liar over that of so many fellow Americans and patriots. They are choosing Trump over their country and cloaking it in patriotism by making up whatever fits Trump's view and ignoring the facts.
Do tell, how many years did you hold a TSSC or above?
How often did you handle direct communications from the highest ranked individuals at the Pentagon, CIA, 18thABC... or any position where you would have the experience to draw on to know of that which you speak?
The only thing more surprising than the overall ignorance of most Americans (regardless of political leanings) is their adamant and concrete certainty that they know of all the facts which they speak, because hey, CNN told them so, and that makes them experts.You set the tone with your post, dude. Brennan an idiot? Hardly. I can think of others who qualify for that descriptor but not John Brennan.
Deflection, I asked you a specific question, what is your experience, how long have you, or did you hold a TSSC?
How do you know with any certainty about any of this?Oh, please. How ridiculous. Nothing I stated required any special knowledge or experience to convey. I suppose you're an expert on idiots? lol
Get over yourself.Ah, so you are ignorant about the topic.
Thanks for your valuable input into the discussion, your in depth analysis is most appreciated.It's as in-depth as yours and far more accurate. Again, get over yourself. On second thought, keep it up so we can all see the mighty intellect of one who would call Brennan a traitor and Trump a patriot. Geez Louize. Lol
A little about John Brennan that anyone could dig up about him on the internet:
Brennan voted for Gus Hall, a four-time presidential candidate for the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) in 1976. Brennan admitted he supported a Kremlin-funded political party at the height of the Cold War.
Brennan is one of the key reasons the Obama administration did so little to combat jihadists domestically. In 2011 Brennan purged all mentions of Islam and jihad from law enforcement counter-terror training materials and ensured the “Countering Violent Extremism” program had been ‘ideologically purified’.
Many of the FBI’s best and brightest agents lost their Security Clearance and their jobs, because they tried to do their jobs. The three ‘jihadist’ mass murders that occurred between 2014-2016 could have been stopped if not for Brennan’s direct intervention to purge the investigations into those who committed those horrific acts.
Brennan was once the CIA’s station chief in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He stated “I saw how our Saudi partners fulfilled their duty as custodians of the two holy mosques of Mecca and Medina,” he said. “I marveled at the majesty of the Hajj and the devotion of those who fulfilled their duty as Muslims by making that privilege, that pilgrimage.”
Former Marine John Guandolo, who worked in the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, identified Brennan as an enemy operative who converted to Islam. Brennan made sure Guandolo, and anyone else that tried to speak out against him, ended up disgraced or disposed of.
Under Brennan our human assets in China were wiped out and members of the Muslim Brotherhood were given high-ranking positions in the intelligence community.
He spied on the U.S. Senate, lied repeatedly about spying on the U.S. Senate, lied about drone kills, and tried to alter the outcome of a Presidential election while stating it was the Russians who supposedly interfered with our elections.
Some of Brennan’s recent quotes:
“What Mr. Trump did yesterday was to betray the women and men of the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and others, and to betray the American public.”
“And that’s why I use the term that this was 'nothing short of treasonous.' Because it is a betrayal of the nation. He’s giving aid and comfort to the enemy. It needs to stop, and Mr. Trump needs to understand there will be consequences for him too.”
“[The President] has shown highly abnormal behavior by lying routinely to the American people without compunction, intentionally fueling divisions in our country and actively working to degrade the imperfect but critical institutions that serve us.”
“Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of “high crimes & misdemeanors.” It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???”
Do your own research on the man, stop listening to talking heads on the boobtube and find some real answers.Are you serious. You "dig up" something on the internet. I like a lot of the quotes about Trump you have there. Much of what you state is just opinion. The Muslim Brotherhood thing is flimsier than flimsy. You're sources are worse than mine.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cia-d … an-muslim/
"Different versions of the “Brennan is a Muslim” claim have a single thing in common: ex-FBI agent John Guandolo. Guandolo resigned from his position with the Bureau in December 2008 after he was caught engaging in a sexual relationship with a key confidential source in the midst of a corruption investigation of a Louisiana politician. Since then, he has created a burgeoning second career training law enforcement groups to identify potential covert Islamic threats to the United States.
However, Guandolo’s credibility in this area has been questioned, one example being an NPR segment that primarily focused on Jordanian-American Omar al-Omari. Guandolo was central to the segment due his insinuation during a law enforcement training course that Omari was connected to a vague cabal of “terrorists”:" etc. etc.
So, this is your in-depth analysis? This is the FBI agent you do choose to believe? Yet, so many others are all just Deep state liars? I'm sorry, but this argument is ridiculous. I really wanted to find that you had at least some merit to your accusations.
Stop listening to random, often astroturfing, fly-by-night websites, Glenn Beck and Alex Jones. You have no real sources here and you act as though you have a mainline to the truth.
Oh yeah, I don't even have ANY cable television channels and haven't for over 15 years.
"John Brennan is an idiot if he tries, all it will do is expose his treasonous and traitorous acts which he had hand in during his reign in the Obama Administration."
KB...Do you have personal knowledge of these traitorous acts? If so, you should probably be telling the proper authorities as opposed to stating it on HubPages. If not, then you're basing your opinion on a news source like most of the rest of us. Where's the in-depth analysis?
Hi GA,
Well I think it came on Trump's front burner when:
A) It recently came to light that it was Brennan that had spearheaded the efforts against the Trump campaign, and helped set up some 'time bombs' to go off against him once he took office (IE - Flynn).
B) Brennan's remarks not too long ago where he called Trump a traitor and treasonous.
Lets keep in mind, Trump is a civilian with NO experience in regards to Top Secret Clearance, who has it or why, when it runs out and what it allows a person access to, etc. I am sure he had some vague idea, but no more than you probably do.
And as President I am sure he has had a few things on his plate to keep him occupied, and from learning more about the intricacies of TSSC until now, when he was prompted so aggressively by Brennan to go out of his way to do so.Hi Ken, I think you are right about the "front burner" thought.
Although I am unfamiliar with your point that Brennan was involved in something against Pres. Trump's campaign, I agree that it was probably Brennan's recent public remarks that lead to the president's actions.
But I am worried. This common ground was too easily reached.
GAGA, it would seem reasonable that two intelligent people might find that common ground be easily reached when they apply some common sense and logic, wouldn't you agree?
There is another possibility, when the prestigious Senator from New York Chuck Schumer stated Donald Trump was being "really dumb" for picking a fight with the intelligence community soon after becoming President:
"Let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community — they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you," the Senate Minority Leader stated on MSNBC. "So, even for a practical supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he's being really dumb to do this," he added.
It could be it takes a long time for things to develop, for the facts to slowly come out, and for one conspiratorial traitor after another to be exposed.
Of course a security clearance can be revoked at any time, unless it's executed for unlawful purposes as most of Bozo Trump's actions are:
In my opinion, I think anyone under investigation by DOJ should have their security clearance put on some form of hold until pending investigations are completed. It makes good sense in the case they have shared classified information or perhaps will share classified information. If exonerated the clearance can be reinstated.
That would include President Trump, because he is under investigation by the DOJ.
I assume you would make an exception in his case.Yes, it would seem so, but our very own laws prevent that. I guess we never imagined we as a country would be up against this situation. I hope by years end we can be done with all of these investigations, and return to just sweeping any corruption under the rug, as we have been doing for a very long time. Transparency is hard to stomach... We are just not accustomed to it.
Will veiled threating tweets satisfy us? This morning president Trump tweeted a derogatory threat aimed at John Brennan former head of the CIA. The president has the authority to release government documents to the public if he sees the need to do so. Trump's tweet threatening Brennan makes me think he may be very well aware that Brennan has committed crimes and the president is willing to hold the threat of over Brennan's head. Perhaps trading the transparency he promised on the campaign trail to keep Brennan from suing him? This makes me very uncomfortable.
If Brennan broke any laws, and there is proof of these crimes it's time the president release any and all documents that shed light on why he feels Brennan was involved with the FISA warrants mess. It has been widely reported Brennan signed off on the documents. The swamp is getting worse daily. But now it's being played out for all to see. This kind of threat is not right. Trump threating tweet is like an open blackmail letter...
@realDonaldTrump
Following Following @realDonaldTrump
More
I hope John Brennan, the worst CIA Director in our country’s history, brings a lawsuit. It will then be very easy to get all of his records, texts, emails, and documents to show not only the poor job he did but how he was involved with the Mueller Rigged Witch Hunt. He won’t sue!"Actually, Donald Trump has no right to release government documents if he does so with nefarious purpose:
It would not be nefarious if a crime or crimes are discovered. In fact, It's more my fear that if Trump uses knowledge of a crime or crimes as a tool to stop free speech of people that he feels threaten him or could bring a lawsuit against him. It well appears the president has the right to classify or declassify documents. The Congress has the authority to try to change this privilege. It is my hope he will release the documents needed to clear up the FISA mess. I don't feel it fair to the people to pay for another special investigation, and this is most likely where this is headed. We were promised transparency, not investigation after investigation. Time for Trump to stand by the promise of no more crooks in Washington or once again will the truth be hidden for political gain?
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete … ything-an/Once again, Bozo Trump does not have the authorization to release government documents for nefarious purpose, nor does his zombie republican accomplices in congress:
If Bozo Trump plans on cleaning out the republican crooks in Washington before he's indicted and or impeached, which must happen soon if we still have valid laws, he'd better start by swiftly removing himself:
It turns out our founders were prepared for this day and they injected the first anti-corruption law into the pages of our constitution to prevent a sitting president from doing the incredibly unthinkable act of betrayal, receiving money from foreign governments: It's called the 'emoluments clause'
"The emoluments case is the nightmare Trump has long feared"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ri … b8232fd6c6Interesting article. It will be interesting to see the outcome. I do know Trump has donated monies made from some of his properties to the government and has kept to the pledge so far. No other president has done this? Although I think we can be assured his every financial move is being scrutinized. At this point, I am more interested in what he knows about any FISA irregularities? I don't appreciate a cat and mouse game he is playing with documents. He needs to put up or shut up. I hold him responsible for keeping to his agenda and campaign promises.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald … ov-n855331"emoluments clause'". I understand the meaning of the emoluments clause'. However, ones again Trump stepped away from his businesses. HIs Son is at the head of all business ventures at this time. Plus it appears he is being generous by donating to our government any funds that would appear to have any problem with the emoluments clause. Jake, it is obvious that Mueller would have charged Trump if he felt he was violating any form of emoluments clause? You keep grabbing at straws, maybe it's time to just wait until Mueller gives his report? So, far no evidence to show the president is guilty of any crime.
I'm not trying to speak for Jake here but couldn't help myself.
Trump never truly backed away from his business endeavors as he never placed them in a blind trust. There is plenty of evidence that suggest he is violating the emoluments clause. https://www.boston.com/news/politics/20 … appens-now
Also, I don't think it's obvious that Mueller could indict Trump even if he has him dead to rights on any charge. No sitting President has ever been indicted, thus any attempt to do so would almost assuredly wind up in the Supreme Court. I do agree that there is too much theorizing going on before the report. However, there is evidence that shows he is guilty of crimes. If Mueller thinks he can indict a President, there is likely to be more than a report. But we will just have to wait on that.Very interesting article. It would seem we will have to wait to see how the lawsuit plays out. There is every possibility that Trump's businesses have benefited due to his presidency, but it might be hard to prove he had control over those that bought his properties or belong to his different Country clubs would not have spent their cash there one way or the other? Not sure the emoluments clause would stand up? He may be profiting due to his popularity? One can't tell people what to spend their money on. Very trick situation. Now if he was making government decisions based on pay for play, it would be a bit easier to prove.
I hope that the Mueller investigation is thorough, and his report answers everyone questions. It's time to bring out the truth. We all have a right to know if crimes were perpetrated as a means to win the election.
RJ said - "Currently Brennan is being investigated for possible perjury charges in connection with the debunked pee-pee dossier."
REALLY?? Who is investigating him? What is your source? I found nothing on the Internet, even from your far-right propaganda outlets like Fox Opinion, Brietbart, Dailywire, etc.He isn't being investigated by anyone. This is a right-wing fantasy also repeated by Sharlee, who produced no evidence when asked.
Oh?
He and many others are under the spotlight, there are more like Strzok that are going to 'lose their heads'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFFMTjckDmMI watched the video, and it confirms that no one is investigating him. Nothing will save Trump from his crimes...the earth is round and America still prosecutes criminals. This isn't a liberal vs conservative thing. It's an "I love Trump" no matter what thing.
Yes, and the link Sharlee provided to "prove" Brennan is being investigated only mentioned that he and others were asked to testify before s House committee.
I remember that. I think Sharlee at least admitted afterward that he wasn't really under investigation. I'm not sure on that, but I'm sure she'll correct me if I'm wrong.
That's the thing about some Trump supporters that's just so damn eerie. They go to any length to defend a man that treats others like garbage. It's kinda like a domestic violence kind of situation.
I am a girl who loves writing and I want to be a famous writer, I love writing since childhood I hope everyone follow me and I will be good when you think of me
It's great news. Also, anyone else who's not currently working in government, and is dedicated against the Trump Presidency, should have theirs removed. Furthermore, if criminal charges can be filed against said persons, them I'm all for filing them, and prosecuting them.
I think that everyone who USED to work for the government should lose their clearances immediately upon separation. Too many leaks in this world.
Actually, stripping security clearances from brilliant national security experts such as John Brennon and leaving our safety in the tiny little impotent hands of a cowardly idiot named Traitor Trump who dodged the draft several times, a mental midget who is clueless about the 'nuclear triad' and its critical functions is exactly what our enemies like Vladimir Putin would like to have happen, and this unimaginable unlawful breach of oaths and execution of constitutional crimes is ACTUALLY happening in the USA as we speak:
Vladimir Putin is in a state of perverted ecstasy right now:
Undermining our once great economy, destroying our unity with global allies while kissing the boots of our enemies is destroying this once great nation, weaker and weaker until a third rate dictatorship is permanently established:
Do you understand why certain people retain their security clearances?
Do you believe it is acceptable for a president to revoke a security clearance because a retired government employee doesn't like him and says so?
What criminal charges would be filed? Is Brennan accused or committing a crime? If so, what crime?I absolutely do understand, being someone who used to actually have a security clearance, I know how they work - how about you? Have you held a clearance? I believe that a sitting President has every right to strip FORMER employee's clearances whether he likes them or not.
Yes, he has a right. Are you supportive of a president revoking security clearances to punish his enemies and attempt to silence his critics?
No, I've never had a security clearance but my husband had a Top Secret security clearance for over 20 years, so I have an in-house resource for basic information.Then you fully understand that clearances are given when needed and revoked when not needed. A former employee doesn't need one and if they were called into service it could easily be reinstated. I think you're too hung up on the narrative that it's a way to silence Brennan - BUT, in the spirit of fairness, please provide an example of how revoking a clearance silences anyone ?
Yes, it has been well documented by the media why some keep their clearance. However, when a person or persons are being investigated it prudent to remove their security clearances. I would very much dought that any on the list would be asked to consult with the president government while under investigation for possible interference in the 2016 presidential election? It is clear some on the list have had a part in pushing the unsubstantiated Rusian Dossier on the FISA court as well as pursuing information and paying for it on a presidential candidate from a foreign foe. This is against the law plain and simple. It's the exact same thing they accused the Trump campaign of doing. But one difference there is no evidence of Trump's campaign colluded with Russia. There is documentation that the Clinton campaign did pay for information from Russia... Very cut and dry one might say. This past week more evidence of deception on the part of the DOF and FBI has been uncovered in the form of Bruce Ohr's emails, meetings with Steele, and personal notes all connecting this crew to Russian collusion.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/us/p … ssier.html
- PrettyPantherposted 5 years ago
0Retired Admiral William McRaven asks Trump to revoke his security clearance
William McRaven, a retired Navy admiral who served as commander of the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command from 2011 to 2014, wrote an opinion piece for The Washington Post Thursday asking President Trump to revoke his security clearance in solidarity with former CIA director James Brennan, who had his security clearance revoked Wednesday. McRaven oversaw the 2011 Navy SEAL raid in Pakistan that killed al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
McRaven called Brennan "one of the finest public servants I have ever known," saying "his honesty and character have never been in question, except by those who don't know him."
"Therefore, I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency," McRaven wrote. He also criticized the president, saying that he did not possess necessary qualities of a good leader.
"Through your actions, you have embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation," McRaven wrote. "If you think for a moment that your McCarthy-era tactics will suppress the voices of criticism, you are sadly mistaken."
Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders announced during Wednesday's press briefing that Brennan's security clearance had been revoked. The president is also reviewing the clearances of James Clapper, James Comey, Michael Hayden, Sally Yates, Susan Rice, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and Bruce Ohr.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bin-laden- … clearance/ - PrettyPantherposted 5 years ago0
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … 67bfbdac9b
"In a striking rebuke to President Trump, more than a dozen former senior U.S. intelligence officials have signed a letter sharply criticizing him for what they call his “ill-considered” decision to revoke the security clearance of former CIA director John Brennan.
The signers — who served in Democratic and Republican administrations — say in their joint letter that Trump’s decision this week was a blatant attempt to curb free speech and sent an “inappropriate and deeply regrettable” signal to other public servants.
“We all agree that the president’s action regarding John Brennan and the threats of similar action against other former officials has nothing to do with who should and should not hold security clearances — and everything to do with an attempt to stifle free speech,” said the letter, whose signers include former CIA directors who served under Presidents Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton."
"Trump has told advisers that he is eager to strip more security clearances as part of an escalating attack on people who have criticized him or played a role in the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign."
what country are we living in? I'm starting to wonder, with so many of our citizens seeming to be supportive of this behavior.Once again, this shows zero proof that anyone's rights are being limited - just because a bunch of retired people decide to write a letter doesn't make it factual or public policy. How about you cite some actual laws instead of letters or news stories.
I have not claimed the president violated any laws. Are you okay with a president using security clearance revocation as a way to punish and attempt to silence his enemies?
Prove to me how it silences anyone and we can discuss. Many people have gotten their clearances revoked in the past for many reasons including financial troubles - does that silence them? No it does not. You keep asking the same question expecting to get a different answer - there is no need for a former employee to keep a clearance unless the current administration expects to recall them.
https://news.clearancejobs.com/2014/08/ … clearance/
Hi there RJ Schwartz, I don't think there is any valid argument that he doesn't have the Right to strip a clearance. The question is more should he do it.
It seems reasonable to me to agree that Pres. Trump's motive was both punitive and personal. It appears he didn't like what Brennan said, so he yanked his clearance to show it.
Of course there is plenty of room to 'justify' Pres. Trump's action by pointing to the vitriol in Brennan's comments, and I am sure that flood of rationalizations will follow, but ... I don't think that denies the obviousness of his motives.
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should, an just because you can find a legitimate veneer of justification doesn't mean that the apparent motive isn't the correct motive.
Just imagine how much more 'cover' Pres. Trump could have given his action if he had just said something like; "I know John Brennan has given years of service to his government, and that has been appreciated, but ...."
Instead, his comments strip away any chance for plausible deniability, and hand his opponents one more club to beat him with. Geesh.
GAThat's what happens when a man who is not fit to take care of my dog much less my country is installed in the highest office in the land. It was predictable and it was predicted.
Couldn't resist using that club. ;-)Do you really think Brennan will change his behavior now that his clearance is gone? Do you think he won't continue trying to scold the President like so many of the other never-Trumpers do? Maybe you should be bashing Senator Paul, since he was the one driving it.
Maybe the President knows more than the average citizen and has his reasons. I really don't care what it "appears" like on the surface, but if the elected President of the nation chooses to exercise the powers granted to the office by the Constitution, then what difference does my opinion make?Well RJ, I certainly can't argue with any of that. At least we have moved beyond rationalizing it with anything other than he has the authority and prerogative.
GA
Brennan's comments are vitriol if they have no basis in fact.
If they do have basis in fact, then his comments are well justified.Hmmm, who is more credible, Trump or Brennan? Such a puzzle.... lol.
Oh no promisem, a definition lesson. I am wounded, (and I try so hard).
However, without tossing in a dictionary copy and paste, an accepted understanding of the use of vitriol is as cruel and bitter criticism. Factual accuracy has nothing to do with the word's application.
Of course you may argue both the "cruel" and the "bitter" parts of that, but others could equally argue defendinfg them. So I stand by my use of the word.
I think his comments could be viewed as vitriolic - without passing judgement on their factual accuracy.
GAI'm aware of the definition. I assume legitimate "criticism" in vitriol has a basis in fact, which was my larger point and I think the foundation of Brennan's comments.
I also don't think the cruel and bitter parts of the definition apply unless you think Brennan's use of words such as "hogwash" apply.
But I wasn't criticizing your use of the word. Just offering a gentle opinion that time will tell if he's just venting or making legitimate, fact-based criticisms.
I try so hard too ...Hi promisem, sorry for the delayed response, I missed this reply.
I know you try hard. I suppose I was a bit off-base too. My use of vitriol was relative to harshness, not the cruel and bitter I found when I looked it up to see if you were right about the "factual" part.
I do view Brennan's comments as blunt and harsh, But, I wouldn't say anything about them was cruel, unless forcing one to face a counter-perspective can be viewed as cruel, and bitter certainly doesn't enter the picture.
So, I will let you slide with the "factual" requirement part if you let me slide and keep my middle ground of "harsh," as a valid median between cruel and bitter. ;-)
As for your closing ... I don't think that, at this point, I can agree with the White House description of "outrageous" relating to Brennan's comments. But, neither can I completely discount Senator Rand Paul's comment that Brennan had: "... lied to Congress and has been monetizing and making partisan political use of his clearance since his departure,”
I do think Brennan has been using his credentials as a platform for his message, but I will leave it to others to pass judgement on that message. For now... *
*Dangerously, for me, I feel myself weakening, and may soon be unable to resist getting in the mud with a couple specific forum personalities - just to have a reason to visit the forums, because there sure as hell aren't many rational conversation opportunities lately.
GA
Hi GA,
Just have to throw in my 2 cents here, hope I am not taking the quote above out of context (misinterpreting your point).
Testifying in front of the House Intelligence Committee Brennan said that Russia “brazenly interfered” in the 2016 elections and had been in active contact with members of the Trump campaign "Frequently, people who go along a treasonous path do not know they are on a treasonous path until it is too late,” he said.
Brennan Tweeted: "Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of “high crimes & misdemeanors.” It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???"
Brennan stated on NBC’s “Meet the Press”: “I called his behavior treasonous, which is to betray one’s trust and to aid and abet the enemy,” Brennan responded. “And I stand very much by that claim.”
The ex-CIA chief said of Trump, "You will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history."
I am not sure what your definition of "outrageous" is, the quotes above spoken by an ex-official of the former administration, well, they speak for themselves.
Brennan's efforts/actions against Trump prior to the election, and post election, are what I consider criminal and treasonous. The words he speaks verify that there is something dangerously wrong with the man, a percolating incessant hostility, and therefore lends credibility to the accusations that he went 'above and beyond' in his efforts to derail the Trump campaign and then Presidency.
Sixty former CIA officials warned President Trump: "the country will be weakened if there is a political litmus test applied before seasoned experts are allowed to share their views."
Those sixty former CIA Officials understand this is exactly what Vladimir Putin wants, Bozo Trump in a little crazy tizzy tirade running amok revoking security clearances of the most experienced law enforcement officers in the USA for his own personal gratitude, weakening our national defenses: INSANE:
All this as Russian republican congress-persons enable him and are complicit with his treachery:
We'll soon find out if Mr. Trump will pay a price for his latest atrocious act of abuse of power, tonight on the Rachel Maddow Show, John Brennan said he will bring this to the courts:
John Brennan is an idiot if he tries, all it will do is expose his treasonous and traitorous acts which he had hand in during his reign in the Obama Administration.
There was plenty ofcriminal activity that went on during the last 24 years from Clinton to Bush to Obama, but this fool was one of the most unbalanced and ignorant of the bunch.
Anyone that defends him I immediately consider suspect and complicit in the illegal activities and actions our government has taken against its own people, as well as foreign nations, in the past 2+ decades.
More and more of the rats on this ship are being exposed to daylight, what started out as an effort to undermine Trump and remove him from office before he could do any damage or expose any of their illegal actions is being undone in large part because of this conspiracy against him.
If they had not gone to such lengths to undermine him, he and those who support him would have been far less likely to investigate any of their actions... the fools did themselves in with their own arrogance and efforts to take down Trump on falsified evidence.In reality, it's mighty difficult but I guess not impossible for some individuals to confuse a great American patriotic law enforcement official like John Bennon who spent decades risking his life to protect us, to keep America safe from our enemies like Vladimir Putin while the real betrayer Bozo Trump probably ran and hid under his bed when he was asked to serve our country in the military:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDfQA-ygTU8
It is insane Jake. They turned America into the enemy and a draft dodging failed real estate broker/reality TV star into a hero. They even turned John McCain into the enemy. Putin is winning for now.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
In all of this "Trump Derangement " era Americans like many here fed by an obstructive news media have lost the ability to discern truth from fiction in politics . Intelligence people are often hired and fired , as we have seen with Comey , for entirely political reasons .
So What ?
Brennan has become more and more politically outspoken against Trump for ideological reasons , Why shouldn't Trump or any president be allowed to oust those in whatever means necessary to" shut them up "?
OH.............Guess what , Trump or anyone can freely do this ! He is after all , the boss .No, Brennan and the hundreds of other intel types speak out because they are deathly afraid of Trump destroying our democracy. Something any clear thinking American is also afraid of.
Oh yes, Trump can fire almost anyone he wants (he can't personally fire Mueller) in the executive branch that is a political appointee, that is true. But which firings are with proper cause and which are obstruction of justice?Hah, I would say having a special prosecution going after the President on the pretenses of a falsified 'dossier' and DNC leaks they attribute to Russians is what is the biggest threat to "our Democracy".
This is to be expected when you run a campaign to 'Drain the Swamp' and are a true outsider with no friends or networking built up over years on the inside.
They want him out, and they will fabricate some charges to get him out, whether he is guilty of anything or not is irrelevant. Imagine impeaching and removing a President based on some oversight they find on his taxes from two decades ago...
Of course, the Dems will need to win over a lot of seats in the 2018 elections, or its all for moot. Trump will be un-impeachable if it is a Republican landslide.If it's a Republican landslide it's because like Trump said, it's all rigged. At any rate, I think he may be impeached even if Republicans keep the house. You know there are more feet to fall with Trump's crimes. He's draining the swamp and replacing it with a sewer.
Ken: Cohen implicated Trump in his testimony. He said Trump had him pay hush money to two of Trump's "ladies" during the 2016 election campaign. Trump is denying it, but Cohen is speaking under oath. Here is the article.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/21/politics … index.htmlCohen is a hostile compromised witness, and anything he has to present or say can easily be countered or removed from any legitimate court.
His speaking under oath is worthless, he has already destroyed his reputation and viability with his actions (such as leaking a tape that violated attorney client privilege) and being caught in lies.
Throwing up a CNN link is like me throwing up a Trump Campaign link, CNN and MSNBC is total biased garbage that no-one considers legitimate unless they are already pre-disposed against Trump. CNN was 'fake news' before Trump ever came along or anyone ever came up with that quip.
You want to listen to how pathetic any case they have against Trump is, listen here to Lionel, a former prosecutor, a lawyer, who has more wits about him than probably the entire cast to be found in Congress:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acccROC-8nY
Of course, all that is irrelevant as I have said, if the Democrats regain control of the House and Senate in the 2018 elections, they will railroad Trump on whatever trumped up charges that Mueller comes up with...
That was the gameplan since before Trump took office, clear to anyone who has an objective perspective... they were calling for his impeachment before he ever took office.Ken, I hope you realize here in the real universe, CNN and MSNBC are indeed legitimate news sources: Just because they report the devastating truth about your hero Bozo Trump and the mega corruption of this cesspool of a white house, truth which probably makes you mad and angry, doesn't mean it's fake, unlike fox channel which is essentially a propaganda outlet for crazy right wing republican conspiracy nuts:
I have read enough of your posts 'Earthshine', trust me, we are not existing in the same universe, which of us are existing in the 'real one', I will leave for others to determine for themselves.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Those of you who cannot accept that Trump can and will fire ANY partisan obstructionists no matter how high a level of government institutional participation in that obstruction , are just political knowledge challenged . The fact that Brennen is a "has been " is of little importance.
I think you are missing the point ahorseback, the question isn't whether the president has the authority -- I have noted I that too would have revoked Brennan's clearances -- but whether it was the right thing to do - as done, and whether it was an infringement of Brennan's 1st Amendment Rights.
I agree that the president has the authority, and that Brennan's clearances should have been revoked. But I disagree with the method and apparent reasoning.
Do you have a thought on the topic beyond the declaration that the president has the authority?
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
It's more and more obvious to most that liberals truly are uninterested in "draining the swamp" BECAUSE having a DC swamp is important to acquiring any kind of a socialism conversion for the US .
It was once one of the democratic party's agendas to end big government apathy , move America towards progressiveness in government NOW simply towards more government . More government means more entitlement . No matter the cost ,no matter the inherent inefficiency OF bigger governments .
"Give me socialism or give me death " - ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
What used to be the KGB disinformation has become CNN , Msnbc etc.......I almost wish dems would succeed in impeaching so the media would lose it's TDS .
The winning is there for all TDS sufferers to conveniently ignore , Have you resubscribed to your Pravda paper yet ?
Are you done crying yet? No, you continue to worship Trump, you and your fellow TWS sufferers will cry to the end just like you did when Obama was President and the winning really began. Maybe John Kasich will be President soon. Oh wait, he may have a brain, you wouldn't support him. You wanna do this all day? This is your debate style,as taught by Trump, so I knew I could get you going. it's like a carnival and a circus wrapped into one. So much fun and even Trump supporters can do it as it takes zero knowledge.
Kasich ?....................Kasich ? Really . You should begin to catch up on your reading . You can't just "look at the pictures "in the papers . There is no crying on the Trump train we are winning without the help of either party platform . Republicans have gone into hiding , demobrats has gone insane . Are you ready for 2020 ? Because as your buddy James Carville said it the best during Bills term ,Quote --"It's the economy stupid ".
No carnival over here , just the juggling circus act of your party.Here is what you are fighting Hard Sun:
Day 1: Trump says "the sky is blue" (it was night time, btw). Trump Supporters say "the sky is blue"
Day 2: Trump says "the sky was purple yesterday". Trump Supporters says "yesterday, the sky was purple"
Day 3: Trump says "I told you, on Day 1 the sky was pink". Trump Supporters say "The sky was pink on Day 1 and you (who said "no, it was night" have this made up condition we call TDS"
Does this sound about right? I don't have to make their condition up, it is called High-Scoring Right Wing Authoritarian Follower syndrome. Look it up, it has been well studied and documented. Here are their traits (from my hub on the subject):
1. Fear:
2. Self-Righteous:
3. Dogmatism
4. Authoritarian Submission:
5. Hostility:
6. "Biggest Problem" Syndrome:
7. Compartmentalized Thinking:
8. Double Standards:
9. Feeling Empowered
10. Prejudice:
11. Ethnocentrism:
12. A Lack of Critical Thinking:
Now all people exhibit these traits to one degree or another; even a high degree for a few of them. But high-scoring RWA followers (those that are most susceptible to following demagogues like Trump) have most of these traits in spades.You can't easily accuse Trump followers of your own symptoms of party sickness , Personally I've never seen such a brainwashed ideological affliction since the days of the LSD experiments in the fifties and sixties , those are so indicative of your party today.
I used" progressive" because Trump has hijacked all progressiveness previously claimed by your party's past. How does it feel to no longer own that particular political phrase Esoteric ?When you speak of "party" in terms of "past", as you just did, please give me a time frame, otherwise anything you say after that is simply nonsense
Instead, use "conservative" and "liberal" as they are time insensitive. So let me put that into context for you.
1. Those that score high in most of those 12 traits are most often hard-core conservatives and, to a much lesser degree, hard-core, far-left liberals. Study after study has shown that, including my own.
2. Those that score low in most of those traits are almost always moderates and liberals. This is just an irrefutable fact.
Also, I don't have a party that I adhere to. My vote goes to the person who will help America the most. In today's world, those are Democrats. In tomorrow's world, it may be the Centrist Party. From 1960 - 1984, it was either party because each had a large wing that was moderate, which is what I am.
It is clear you don't have a clue as to what "progressivism" means. First, all parties (until today) had "progressive" elements to it. But to give you a history lesson, progressivism was mostly identified with:
Federalist Party
Whig Party
Republican Party from 1860 to 1908
Democratic Party from 1929 to present.
Conservatism was the key element of the:
Democratic-Republican Party
Republican Party from Eisenhower through H. W. Bush
Ultra-conservative was concentrated in:
Democratic Party from Andrew Jackson to Herbert Hoover
Republican Party from Gingrich to present
BTW - high-scoring RWAs = Brainwashed and 90% if high-scoring RWAs are conservatives plain and simple.
Sounds right on target. I looked it up...it is a thing. Ran across your piece on it as well. Very interesting...0% on the survey with honest answers.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Even your terminology is copied from Trump supporters , What's with that ,TWS ? .............TDS ? Come on ! Where's your party originality Hardsun , got any left at all ?
I sure hope you guys don't have any security clearances .Have fun horsey. I don't even know, or care, what you're talking about. It will be ok though, even if Democrats take the House or they don't...I promise. Deep breaths. you can get through this.
No worries here , I'm actually even loving your party's divisiveness both outside and especially within your party . You will have to have an entire DNC engine gasket replacement after this whole charade however . I'll say one thing Trump followers ,no matter what happens tomorrow , will enjoy THAT for years to come.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
One thing about liberal owned "studies " is that no one believes them at all anymore , even your own entitled young , want to see proof ? Look at your college aged youth , the collective lack of even average intelligence is astounding .
Your kids are failing ? Just lower the testing standards , that doesn't work , lower the teaching standards , when all else fails claim it's monetary issues , With liberal ownership of the education system , the reporting media and the "studies ............?
You just can't lose .
Now though You want us to believe any of your" studies "?
Keep trying .You almost always speak in generalities and abstractions that cannot be proven or disproved.
" Look at your college aged youth , the collective lack of even average intelligence is astounding ."
Seriously, you really think the best thinkers in college today are less intelligent than they were say 50 years ago? I see motivated, hard working, intelligent youngsters every day that have more knowledge about physics, chemistry, engineering, etc. than say the baby boomers could have even imagined in their time. Not all youngsters are lazy dope fiends or coddled kids who got a trophy for trying in school. Go out in your community and meet some of them. It's mind blowing to those who think otherwise. I have a kid who is a prime example of this. And, this should have NOTHING to do with politics.
I'm sure this will mean nothing to you because your notions of who and what everyone is, and will be, are firmly established. So, I'm not arguing with those notions any longer.You keep saying you're not responding to my posts even as you keep responding to my posts...............interesting , To bad that the facts show that your precious college grads have dumbed down in recent decades . Intellectualism is useless without my level of common sense and I'm not sorry for presenting that fact .
ahorseback: Here are some facts about Trump.
He lies, then he lies about what he lies about.
He lacks empathy for others.
He is driven to win, no matter if he loses. In his mind he is always the winner.
He exaggerates the truth to the point of lying.
He lacks social emotions, such as shame, guilt, and embarrassment.
He blames other for his failures.
He has superficial charm and lacks sincerity.
He has a grandiose sense of his own self-worth.
He is impulsive and does not care about the long term consequences of his actions and how they affect others.
He is verbally abusive and can be mean and cruel
You know I can give you examples of everyone of those traits. However you know it as well as everybody else does.
I don't want him impeached. all he has to do is rectify all of those terrible and dangerous traits and I will support him as president.
However, you and his supporters could care less about those behaviors in a president, because you see him as someone different who is going to save the world.
You are willing to look the other way, because those deficiencies and lack of character in a president don't matter to you or his supporters. You can say other presidents have the same behavior patterns and traits, but not to the degree and repetition of this guy.
In my book he is damaged goods and very dangerous to this country. I hope I'm wrong, but from what I have seen of him, since in office, I kind of doubt it.Peoplepower , So wow , You don't personally like Trump because he offends your apparent sensibilities , Question ; Is that an impeachable offense too ?
You're right , I am willing to ignore that and the fact that I don't like him either , That however gives you nor I any right to impeach him , say nothing about demanding he somehow change his personality for our benefit !
Quite frankly there is nothing illegal , immoral or impeachable about being or having an a$$hat personality . NOW however , let's talk about true leadership and what Trump has accomplished with the exception of pi$$ing off the natives ?ahorseback: No, offending my sensibilities is not an impeachable offense and the way things look, he is right on the cusp of that now. What you don't get is those traits in a president can cause him to do something that is impeachable,like treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors".
The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct peculiar to officials, such as perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, unbecoming conduct, and refusal to obey a lawful order.
I didn't say I demand he change his personality. I said I would support him if he did. There is a difference.
You mentioned true leadership and accomplishments. Why don't you tell me why you think he is such a great true leader and what he has accomplished.The accomplishments have been listed here and elsewhere extensively and all for you to ignore , Works in progress ,The economy , tariffs in trade , the illegal immigration disaster , military confidence and moral , corporate confidence and moral , the deregulation of the EPA , the coal and oil producers , Texas for instance just became a record exporter of crude oil , Law enforcement moral , positive Nato negotiations , China is begging for fair trade negotiations , The EU is caving to the same , space and NASA progress , Trumps business and corporate experiences far ,far ,far outweigh anything Obama or Clinton ever dreamed of in fact , Any presidential candidates of the future should be required to have the same corporate , entrepreneurial, business experiences or not be allowed to even run .
These are just starters !
Not to mention and you have to admit ; Trump is working his magic totally outside of ANY party cooperation from DC , from the news media , from the GOP , DNC or even the house senate and congress .
That Trump is working under incredibly selfish and obstructive political lacking of any cooperation from established D.C.politics AND succeeding too , Is an incredible accomplishment , IGNORED totally my your "neutral "news media ?The accomplishments have been listed here and elsewhere extensively and all for you to ignore , Works in progress.
The economy - He is taking credit on the stock market based on the trend started by Obama. Taking credit for other's work is one of his bad traits.
The economy was already good under Obama. Trump lied about Obama's 42% unemployment while campaigning. Once he was elected and without doing anything, it dropped to 4.2%. - another one of his bad traits
tariffs in trade - We will have to wait and see how it affects business that are going to be paying more for imported goods and services.
the illegal immigration disaster - you are right it is a disaster. He has missed the judges deadline three times for bringing parents and over 2,300 children back together again
military confidence and moral - I don't know about that one. He probably made it up.
corporate confidence and moral - He lowered taxes for corporations and big moneyed interest which is going to increase the national debt by 1.7 Trillion over the next 10 years...another one of his bad traits, not looking at the long term effects of his policies only trying to get re-elected.
the deregulation of the EPA , the coal and oil producers - Yep that's really great if you want it to affect your health with smog and black lung disease. Again he did it to get re-elected, doesn't care about people's health, especially in California.
Texas for instance just became a record exporter of crude oil- whoopee, what are the tariffs on that?
Law enforcement moral - You mean ICE?
positive Nato negotiations - You mean pi**ing of the EU?
China is begging for fair trade negotiations- You mean the trade wars he started?
The EU is caving to the same - again p**ing off the EU
space and NASA progress - You mean his Space Force while we already have NASA and the Air Force- where is the money going to come from? He announces it without even going to congress. - another bad trait.
Trumps business and corporate experiences far ,far ,far outweigh anything Obama or Clinton ever dreamed of in fact , Any presidential candidates of the future should be required to have the same corporate , entrepreneurial, business experiences or not be allowed to even run .
You mean all his failed businesses, law suites, bankruptcies, and scams. and his dealings with Russian oligarchs?
True leadership comes from not placing yourself first and above others. Everything he is doing right now is to get re-elected to satisfy his big ego. Leaders care about all their people, not contriving to divide them by calling part of them the enemy of the people or like what he did in Charlottesville blaming both sides for the riots, when one side was white supremacist.What PP said. I'll just double down on the Trade War thing. NEVER, in the history of America has a Trade War NOT ended up in a big recession. Trump's Trade War will be no exception.
Many industrial sectors are reporting bad news and when the next round of quarterly reports come in October, many of them will be grim - especially now that the next $16 Billion of taxes have been imposed.
If Trump does stupidly carry through with his $200 Billion tax increase (some call them tariffs) threat then all hell WILL break loose.
Read much. I said I'm not arguing with those notions any longer. Reading comprehension skills are apparently not big with you. It's ok though, I promise.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Peoplepower , Esoteric , Hard sun , ;
Never before , at least since the days of the western " Dime Novel" , has any party completely re-written the rules of political reality like todays liberal media writers . If Trump or anyone other than a hard core democrat says for instance , the sky is blue - you will immediately set out to prove an opposite color or alt-reality . Fact !
As to Your "fact "infused news media , the fake news media , your liberal academia professors line up a few of these paragraphs that favor your party's alt-reality and calls them "studies ", BOOM , they become your political bible .
I am just so happy that the average American voter is able to see through your ideological B.S. , that same average voter is fully capable of discerning liberal alt-reality from true reality , for instance -- "It's the economy stupid " from James Carville's reign in the Clinton years telegraphed FROM voters directly to the ballot box .
---"It's the economy stupid "---- will also destroy your baseless and false facts , your liberal academia's bogus studies and the alt-reality" fake news" media in the Nov. mid terms AND in the 2020 presidential elections JUST LIKE IT DID in the Clinton / Trump 2016 election as long as Trump's economy stays as strong as it is right now. So, keep promoting your fake media , phony studies and blinded leftist rhetoric , it fits .
In the mean time and in your alt-reality your party is gasping for oxygen in it's death throws , you're passing up awesome opportunities to join a yes , "progressive " Trump driven dismantling of the DC gridlock , the draining of the two party quagmire and the awakening of main-street America !
Now THAT is a fact .Peoplepower, Hard sun - a blind person locked in a dark house sees better than horse does.
Look at my 12-traits above and then compare them to this horse's screed and see how many he max's out on. This guy would probably score 200 on my 100 point RWA survey he is so TraitorTrump obsessed.
It does make a good, humorous read, anywayYea right , play the "come all ye' " herding " game , this is where you go on to call me low IQ , racist , bigoted , blah blah ..........Yet as with the above post ,your party message is lacking the possession of a certain level of common sense to go with your borrowed intellectualism .
Advice , because you can generalize , quote others , note the newest "studies " and mass media vomit , doesn't mean any of it's believable except in again , your ideological " herding " and that is all that you prove . Here , Let me see if I can go find you a bigger paint brush for your next post .You accuse Esoteric of herding yet you brag to us about the average American voter as though it's a badge of recognition, whether the statement is true or not, and whether the "average" is beyond brainwashed. You justify your rantings by stating you are just like the average voter. Kind of ironic to then accuse others of group thought.
I am always amazed how previous Trump supporters keep supporting Trump no matter how dangerous and obscene he gets. CNN periodically tracks down Trump voters and ask them if they have changed their mind yet. None of these people are hard core Trump lemmings like Horse is. Instead, they look at former Obama voters who voted for Trump.
So far, 18 months in, with scandals ad nauseum and Trump's criminality becoming more and more certain, for most of them, it simply doesn't matter - they just don't give a damn how bad Trump is.
I kept listening and it dawned on me ... Horse was right "it is the economy, stupid". So long as they don't perceive Trump's actions hurting them economically, he can murder someone and it will make no difference "to most of them".
It is that "to most of them" that becomes important. The other thing I noted in those CNN reports is that while they will show several Trump voters who won't change their votes - yet. There is always at least one who did.
Normally, that would be a problem, but for Trump it is. And here is why. What the numbers and polls and everything else is showing is that Trump is only losing voters, he is not gaining any. And since he squeaked by with such a small margin (<90,000 votes), it won't be long where even if he ran against Clinton again, he would lose. I suspect we are already past that point.So, Trump riding the economic rise is worthy of support no matter the harm he causes our nation in other areas. Of course, die-hards will never admit Trump is doing any harm. I've never seen such religious-type fervor for a president. I agree that he's very unlikely to win another election if he makes it to one.
The level of hostility toward a fictional enemy is almost surreal. I don't think horse has any idea the difference between fact and opinion. Maybe at one time, but no longer. Off the charts. I do like to get his top spinning now and then though for entertainment purposes.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Hard sun ,They and you insinuate something towards my PERSONAL level of intelligence because of my opinions and then question me accusing of ideological GROUP herding ? .........Interesting ,.... I can guarantee you one thing however your twisted sense forum attack is nowhere near important enough to "spin my top ".
Like you don't insult people on every level. Still spinning "like a record, baby Right round round round"
Was it the fact vs opinion line? I can tell you importance has no bearing on who can pull my chain. People are People no matter their titles or position in life. Deep breaths...Again , you seem to have trouble differentiating ideological criticisms from personal attacks , If as I have stated before ,....... " Intellectualism is nothing without common sense " ........that is not an individual personal attack , that is a ideological opinion , true as it may be . Your " spinning my top " is but a dream on your part. I am fully aware that my opinion is just as equal to yours in public forums and that is true no matter how snidely you deliver your opinions of me personally . I also feel that yes , " real voters" will also know the difference between how your party and media obstructionists define Trump and his progress from how your party delivers said "facts " .
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
So ,".......all the damage to America ......" that Trump is doing ? , you guys are all sounding like your "bestie" Jake here , Not one real clue about any political reality . Not a clue about legalities , nothing about diplomacy , internal policies ............Nothing . Just an absolute and all consuming Trump hate , ideological resistors all living in an alt-world political reality .
The impeachment that never was ;
Actually, I don't "hate" Trump. Instead, I feel sorry for him because he is dangerously mentally ill. He has no control over his destructive behavior.
Now, I understand acting like a world-class bully makes his supporters feel good, but it isn't the behavior of a world-class world leader.
I also think acting like a petulant child when he gets stressed is just fine with his supporters, but not the vast majority of Americans
I also think isolating America from the rest of the world is a good idea to his supporters, but that always has led to a much more hostile world to America and to American decline
I also think that Trump's approval and fascination of murderous dictators is what pleases his supporters, but it scares the hell out of most Americans
I also think that Trump's attempt to become a dictator himself (hopefully not a murderous one) is what his supporters think he should be, but it wi destroy our democracy
And the list goes on and on.
I also know that his supporters, because all those failings are normal to them, think that pointing them out is delusional on the part of people who can actually see.".........The list goes on and on ......." You really think that if Trump was mentally ill as you no doubt expertly stated , that he would or could possibly have made it to the presidency .
Can't see what I mean about your chronic TDS ?So, It walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but if you call it a duck then you have a mental illness. Refusing to see the deep-grained personality flaws and how they can negatively impact a nation is the illness. Can't you see this? No you can't. And, you rant about others not having common sense. As far as making it to the presidency, well, if it wasn't rigged as he said it was, people that STILL support him prove how he became president in our nation. Jim Jones' supporters probably thought all the others were crazy too. Snake oil salesmen have duped people forever, it doesn't make them sane, or good people.
Of course he could, given that he did because of people like you who overlook that defect.
And yes, it is "expertly" stated, just not by me but a score of Psychiatrists and other mental health experts who are leaders in their field.
If you dare, read "The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump" by Bandy Lee, M.d., M.Div. and 27 other mental health experts who evaluate Trump.
(And NO, you don't need to personally interview the subject when there is such a huge volume of audio, video, and written evidence that spans decades available for review to reach reliable conclustions.)The worst part of all this is he believes all he stated. What the hell happened ? Hey, there are plenty of us to keep the sanity, and keep them in check...
I see Esoteric has deflected to president Trumps mental status? Must be a slow week at CNN? They may have had to dig into old feed to dish out.A must watch for Sharlee01: If she still accepts facts and professional analysis, maybe this will finally change her mind about the extreme unprecedented danger and monumental national crisis Donald Trump presents not only to the USA, but the world:
The short film is unsettling to say the least so proceed with caution:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ytx25IMsBwcThat video clearly puts things in perspective
No, the worst part of all this is that people like you have abandoned minimum standards of decency and competency for the person occupying the highest office in the land.
Apparently, Sharlee, your ONLY source of information is the Trump propaganda team called Fox Opinion.
For those of us who actually read, even CNN, we can see it has been a very busy week, obviously you missed it, Sad.
I find it interesting you believe the state of the most powerful man in the world's mental health a mere "deflection". Most thinking people would consider it the core issue.
Apparently you find a dangerously mentally ill person being your president is OK, and from the way you write, even desirable.
With people like you voting, the answer is self-evident.
And with those like you resisting , the world can see through Trump derangement first hand......I love that . Eventually and thankfully even TDS sufferers will go silent .......maybe you'll be a the mall spending your tax cuts on your low interest credit cards .
I hate to break it to you, horse,but most of the world hasn't been taken in by a lying com man and are counting on sane Americans to oust the lying POS.
TDS, lol, a great example of "when you are losing, create Fake News"
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
OMG you guys have been predicting "doom ,gloom and soon" for three to four years now ! In the mean time at the Clinton Blue Dress Broom Closet what's the DNC doing for a new found strategy , propping Hillary up in braces for "one more time ' around the campaign merry go round .
Me , I'll take my tax cuts and $ retirement package .
Bozo Trump is executing Vladimir Putin's agenda to perfection by revoking security clearances from great American patriots who have actually kept this country safe while Bozo probably hid in closet to avoid serving this country in the military and by the way, this charlatan has been implicated in at least one federal crime so far:
ALL Americans should be happy and relieved dangerous his charade is collapsing:Last month you guys would have called Brennen a Putin Puppet , Now all of a sudden in the alt-reality of the left he is a "Great American Patriot " ??????
Let me tell you this most people realize at this point that Brennen , Comey , Strzok , Paige are in the same boat as Lenin at this point . To tell you the truth Putin should be the one to take Brennen's place at the CIA . At least he has a slight affection for the USA .ahorseback: This is what you wrote:
"Me , I'll take my tax cuts and $ retirement package."
There it is in a nutshell. You and all the other Trump supporters are only concerned about getting your money. You and they could care less about the leader of the most powerful country in the world being mentally unstable. It's all about the economy.
You say we are suffering from TDS. Well my friend, I have news for you. Trump is suffering from sociopathic tendencies that are clearly exhibited by his behavior. Here is a check list from the Mayo Clinic of classic symptoms that he has and is currently exhibiting:
Disregard for right and wrong - Yes
Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others- Yes
Being callous, cynical and disrespectful of others- Yes
Using charm or wit to manipulate others for personal gain or personal pleasure- Yes
Arrogance, a sense of superiority and being extremely opinionated- Yes
Recurring problems with the law, including criminal behavior- Yes
Repeatedly violating the rights of others through intimidation and dishonesty- Yes
Impulsiveness or failure to plan ahead- Yes
Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, aggression or violence- Yes
Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others- Yes
Unnecessary risk-taking or dangerous behavior with no regard for the safety of self or others- Yes
Poor or abusive relationships- Yes
Failure to consider the negative consequences of behavior or learn from them- Yes
You and his supporters can overlook all of those symptoms held by the highest leader in the land, because you want him to show you the money.
If you watched Jake's video, you would know that if he were an airman that was trying to qualify to work on nuclear weapons, he would be disqualified with only half of those symptoms being displayed. However, he has his fingers on the buttons that can launch every single one of those nuclear weapons...Ask yourself...how could that happen?
Here is Jake's video. It bears watching.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ytx25IMsBwcs
Disregard for right and wrong - No
Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others- No
Being callous, cynical and disrespectful of others- No
Using charm or wit to manipulate others for personal gain or personal pleasure- No
Arrogance, a sense of superiority and being extremely opinionated- Yes
Recurring problems with the law, including criminal behavior- No
Repeatedly violating the rights of others through intimidation and dishonesty- No
Impulsiveness or failure to plan ahead- No
Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, aggression or violence- No
Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others- No
Unnecessary risk-taking or dangerous behavior with no regard for the safety of self or others- No
Poor or abusive relationships- No
Failure to consider the negative consequences of behavior or learn from them- No
I guess its just a matter of perspective and opinion on how those questions are answered.Ken: You wrote:
"I guess its just a matter of perspective and opinion on how those questions are answered."
No it's a matter of truth and getting passed the denial. I can give examples of any of those symptoms exhibited by Trump. By you saying "No" proves nothing because how do you give examples of Trump not exhibiting those symptoms, other that just saying no?
Even Trump supporters are willing to admit they look the other way when it comes to his behavior, because they are only concerned about what they think he can do for them when it comes to the economy.
Even Evangelical Christians are willing to give up their values and beliefs when it comes to getting more money from the Trump agenda.
No, that's just it, for the most part you CAN'T.
In your opinion, you can give examples that you believe, fit those criteria.
But in my opinion, the examples you give, will not meet the criteria.
Therefore it is only your opinion. Now, that opinion will be shared by some others, but it will also be rejected by an equal amount of people, just like I reject it.
Trying to speak for any group, especially if you are not directly part of said group, be they Evangelical Christians, or Conservative Republicans, is a attempted portrayal that is reminiscent of the arrogant, entitled, corrupt, and dishonest efforts we see in the liberal media.
Your opinion of Trump, of his mental status, or his fitness to be President does not speak for the majority of Americans. If it did, he would not have a 50%+ approval rating and 70%+ that do not support any effort to remove him from office. Those percentages can be found in various recent polls.What, lol, 50+%??? TraitorTrump is having a hard time keeping his head above 42%. Now as to the 70+%, you are probably correct as even I am one of them, or at least was. Helsinki changed my mind.
He is flat out dangerous and I would rather have Pence. The world would be a much better place without Trump as president.
You are clearly brainwashed, Ken. The answer to each of those questions is factually YES. There are multiple, verifiable, via decades of audio, visual, and written material (the same material 28 leaders in the mental health field whose combined EXPERT opinion is that Trump is dangerously mentally ill), examples that PROVE Trump exhibits every one of those traits.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Peoplepower , The main problem with you and almost all democrats is that you rely totally on written interpretation by all others for the making up OF your own minds for one , add that to the fact that you're reading material written by only the liberal academia and media ! The problem with that ; You're actually all chasing your own party's literary tails [tales ].
I have believed that for years liberals suffer greatly in that one respect , You are all herding around your own rhetorical " one size fits all "party mentality . What conservatives do is real ALL written material and make up their minds from a standpoint of neutrality and NOT from singular source media .
It IS however never too late to learn Peoplepower , never too late to open avenues of the mind that , in the end , will even surprise yourself as to how informed you COULD become , the possibilities are endless ! Suggestion , open you media sources to include more than , for instance ,Rachel Maddow . There is more than one ideological possibility out there .
BY the way , How strange it is to have one from your party talk about Trump's supposed mental illness' , given you past party choices ; Bernie Sanders , a fist slamming socialist retard , Hillary , a sociopathic ideological hallucinator , Elizabeth Warren, an "out of body experiencing " native American wannabe ,.........better check those ghosts in the democratic party closet my friend , they have escaped .....................again ! - ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Did Obama lie ? Yes
Hillary Lie ? Oh yes
Bill Clinton lie ? Yes
But somehow NOW liberals are butt hurt about Trump lies ?
Figures .Trump lies at a clip that only this guy down the street from me named Lyin Luke does. That's his name Lyin Luke. Everyone knows that because he lies all the time.
Who is president anyway? Why would we be talking about Bill Clinton right now? Religious fervor got ya. Drink a beer, smoke a joint,...whatever it takes to chill. Trump's a big boy is he not?Yea Trumps sure big boy enough to handle all of your democratic meaningless party babble , No ?
You really have to wonder though , Who REALLY has the mental issues Trump or the TDS minions ?
Welcome to the party .Then why do you feel like you have to come to his defense anytime someone says anything remotely bad about the man. Do you have a crush on Trump?
No, But you and so many here have some ideological psych-paranoia of Trump ! Go Easy........go easy .......he has no intentions of hurting anyone , give it another six years or so and you can offer up one more empty suit to a democratic loss .
Calm !
I bet you wish I had been on your "lobbying " team , you might have won something big .
Hi Ken, I am always glad to see you throw in your " 2 cents."
I should have been more specific relative to the outrageous description.
Regarding your House Intelligence Committee quote: "Frequently, people who go along a treasonous path do not know they are on a treasonous path until it is too late,” he said. "...
When viewed in the full context of his statement ...
BRENNAN: I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals and it raised questions in my mind, again, whether or not the Russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.
Those “efforts to suborn,” he elaborated, begin with Russians targeting and then cultivating people of influence or who are “rising stars,” to “try to get them to do things on their behalf.”
It was his knowledge of how those Russian efforts work that made his radar go up, said Brennan,
"...even though frequently the American involved might be an unwitting target. There are “contacts that may have been totally, totally innocent and benign as well as those that may have succumbed somehow to those Russian efforts,” Brennan said. Often, he added in an ominous moment, “individuals who go along a treasonous path do not even realize they’re along that path until it gets to be a bit too late.”
... I think the context is obvious that the latter bold emphasized phrase, (your quote), clearly applies to the first bold emphasized phrase - which I think is the context of his statement.
I do not see that as an outrageous statement, but I can it see as susceptible to a spun presentation.
Regarding his tweets, I can certainly see parts of his statement, the parts that are really just opinion, as outrageous - particularly given the setting;
But, again in the context of his twitter comments, which is that anti-Trump folks would see them as truthful, and pro-Trump folks would see them as outrageous, I chose the middle ground and called them vitriolic - as in "harsh."
One question would be which comments the White House was labeling as "outrageous," his testimony, or his tweets? Given their perspective, I will leave them to their outrageous, and I will stick with my harsh.
As to your closing thought, I also think he went too far, but I wouldn't see his action of making those comments, as "criminal and treasonous." Just vitriolic. Similar to statements we hear from less sophisticated, but equally zealous Trump supporters.
However, even though I can't agree with your thoughts here, I still believe it was right for Brennan to lose his clearances. He used them as credentials in a political arena, and since I can only see the purpose of helping an administration as a reason for an ex-official to keep them, that is plenty of justification for me.
GA
As Kimberley Strassel wrote in the Wall Street Journal, Brennan in particular has revealed himself to be a total anti-Trump partisan to an extent that's shocking for a public official. His animus is raw and deep, as his actions suggest.
"The record shows (Brennan) went on to use his position — as head of the most powerful spy agency in the world — to assist Hillary Clinton's campaign (and keep his job),"
While Brennan's hate for the GOP nominee may be public now, it wasn't in the summer of 2016. His evidence for collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia was so weak neither the FBI nor Clapper would commit to it.
Knowing his role as CIA head forbade him from intervening in domestic spying and trying to take the investigation from a low simmer to a high boil, Brennan got the ball rolling in August of 2016 by telling thenformer Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid a tale of Russians interfering in our election on Trump's behalf.
It worked. Pushed on by Brennan, Reid, then the most powerful person in Congress, wrote a letter to FBI Director James Comey citing "evidence of a direct connection" between the Trump campaign and seeking an investigation.
Not only did Brennan share intelligence with the FBI, but soon after, the Democrat-linked opposition research firm Fusion GPS began leaking the "Trump Dossier" to the media. The fix was in.
https://www.investors.com/politics/edit … stigation/
Excellent retort GA, you effectively neutralized my opening quote by Brennan from the hearing, thereby making the rest seem less than the sum was meant to appear.
Brennan's critical role regarding the 'Russian Collusion' charge and current efforts to remove Trump via the Mueller Investigation are what I refer to as his "treasonous and criminal" acts.
A little research on him will show what a sweet guy he is.Hi again Ken,
I haven't delved into Brennan, other than the necessary points to address your comments. But ... although admittedly from Right-leaning sources, I have seen intimations of what you are saying.
I haven't decided if I have the interest to track down those inferences, but I will say, from the tangential comments I have seen, I wouldn't dismiss your points out-of-hand.
I do feel a bit guilty that I am cheating your effort by not applying a similar one, but, I don't have a problem with Brennan losing his clearances, so I am lazily satisfied with the conversation.
I have the feeling that if I did dig deeper, I would only end-up with a Right-perspective vs. a Left-perspective, and no facts to declare either the correct perspective.
I promise to be more reciprocal in future discussions. On this one, I think we aren't that far apart.When you claim "revealed himself to be a total anti-Trump partisan to an extent that's shocking for a public official." has it occurred to you that TraitorTrump deserves such censure because of his own actions (passing on secrets to the Russian ambassador or by supplicating to a foreign leader whose goal it is to destroy America and siding with him over his own PATRIOTIC intelligence service? Both of those acts fall under the definition of treason.
Wouldn't you think Republican Brennan who has served his country to the best of his ability and is privy to the real truth about what is going on in the world would want to support his Republican president - IF HE COULD. But Brennan is an honorable man that fears for America being run by an unintentional traitor (I am not sure Trump has the acumen to be a real traitor, he is just that stupid) and calls it like he sees it.
Why is it that virtually the WHOLE intel community of proven patriotic civil servants side with Brennan? Granted none have had the guts to tell to the whole truth as Brennan has, but side with him nevertheless.
No, Brennan IS NOT being an anti-Trump partisan, he is being a truthful American who cares about his country and sees TraitorTrump for the danger he is to our democracy.
(BTW, to be partisan, doesn't that mean you have to be of a different Party? Well, he isn't.)Ken writes - "The record shows (Brennan) went on to use his position — as head of the most powerful spy agency in the world — to assist Hillary Clinton's campaign (and keep his job),"
Exactly how did he do this while he was CIA director under Obama while Hillary was running for president. I think those so called "records" are made up.I believe Dick Morris covers my response to your posts best:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jaax3upA8K0Well Ken, I’m sure that link will be answered by crickets .... a little truth and the liberals disappear or if they don’t they will attack Morris as not a credible source just watch and listen
Ken: You wrote this a few posts back about my post on Trump exhibiting sociopathic tendencies when I said I can give examples of any of those symptoms exhibited by Trump. This is what you said:
"No, that's just it, for the most part you CAN'T.
In your opinion, you can give examples that you believe, fit those criteria.
But in my opinion, the examples you give, will not meet the criteria.
Therefore it is only your opinion. Now, that opinion will be shared by some others, but it will also be rejected by an equal amount of people, just like I reject it."
Ken, your logic is faulty. Just because my examples don't meet your criteria and you and others reject them, does not make my examples, just my opinion.
It turns out Trump's behavior is available for the world to see and hear, in his tweets, his rallies, his press conferences, and his meetings with foreigners.
He constantly exhibits his sociopathic tendencies. In addition, people even have recordings of his lying. Those are facts, not my opinions.
Disregard for right and wrong - Look how he is treating McCain's death with raising and lowering of the flag.
Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others- Obama Birther movement. Truthful Hyperbole (his words)
https://www.politifact.com/personalitie … st=speaker
Being callous, cynical and disrespectful of others- McCain is not a hero. Megan Kelly has blood coming out of her private parts. Counter-punching with 10 times the force of his adversary. (his words).
Using charm or wit to manipulate others for personal gain or personal pleasure- Seducing the women he has had affairs with while still being married.
Arrogance, a sense of superiority and being extremely opinionated- He says only he can fix America. You are going to be so tired of winning
Recurring problems with the law, including criminal behavior- Paying hush money to his ladies of the evening to influence the outcome of the election
Repeatedly violating the rights of others through intimidation and dishonesty- Zero Tolerance and separating children and parents. Intimidating Jeff Sessions and others by constantly talking about firing them.
Impulsiveness or failure to plan ahead- Helsinki Trip
Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, aggression or violence- "Beat the crap out of them. I'll pay for it." Mocking reporter with a nervous condition. Enemy of the people, fake news.
Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others- Separating children from parents.
Poor relationships- All his wives
Failure to consider the negative consequences of behavior or learn from them- Not willing to learn from his mistakes and blames others for his mistakes.
Ken: You see not a single one of the examples I have given are my opinion and they are all based on verifiable facts. You and others may deny them, but in the digital age, they are there for posterity. These are just a sampling of his behavior patterns. I could go on and on.And that is the Short List of TraitorTrump's shortcomings.
From the earlier post which I responded.
The latest in this line.
Yes, what you consider mentally unstable, what you consider sociopathic, I do not. Not to the extent that I would classify him as dangerous or incapable of doing the job.
You can say he disrespects McCain and that qualifies, well his opinion of McCain is mild in my opinion, so that tells you something about what I think of McCain. Just as an example, I'm not interested in getting into a debate about McCain.
These examples you throw out, you think qualify for those labels, I don't, and the majority of the country does not. That sums up my debate on the issue.Ken: In other words, you are in denial. Now you are speaking for the majority of the country? How can you deny something that the rest of the world knows? Those aren't labels. They are Trump's behavioral symptoms of a serious personality disorder.
He even punishes McCain in his death. McCain was a statesman and was concerned about doing what was right for the entire country. Trump doesn't care about what is right for the country. He only cares about winning for himself and his supporters.
There is a huge ideological difference between winning and doing what is right for the country.. One is is about uniting the country. The other is about dividing it. Which one do you think describes Trump?Actually, I would say you are the one in denial.
The latest polls show that Trump's job approval went up from 42% to 44.5% since the whole Cohen & Manafort garbage came out.
And the last poll taken where the question was posed about should Trump be removed from office or impeached, more than 70% said no.
So you, and others, can push the same tired tirades that CNN, MSNBC, etc. are providing, and I would say, again, it is a matter of perspective and opinion.
And until the version that you cling to becomes the view accepted by the majority of the people (a 70%+ type of majority) it is irrelevant if you think he is mentally unstable or unfit... it is irrelevant if it seems every MSM outlet supports and backs your opinion, the majority of Americans don't support that view, and there aren't enough people in Congress who do, so therefore Trump is not going anywhere anytime soon.
You might as well get used to him being your President, because he has a couple more years at the minimum to go. It may be frustrating, but that is the reality, so long as the economy, jobs, stock market continues to thrive, Trump will have the support of a large majority of Americans.Ken: I never said I wanted him impeached. I want people to understand who he is and what we are dealing with as him as president. It is your opinion if you think his behavior is irrelevant. So you are saying that I am in denial, because his 44.5 % like him? How about the 55.5% who don't approve of him, are they in denial as well?
Everyday, he exhibits more and more of his sociopathic behavior. With McCain, he is not capable of empathy or remorse. When you and Trump supporters realize, it is not about party, but it is about country. Only then will this country and Trump be on the right track.As of today (and of course with many states voting who knows how slanted these polls are) it seems roughly 40% support impeachment.
"Four in ten Americans now support the impeachment of President Donald Trump — a ten point jump in the last six months — according to a new poll from the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI).
The survey found that 40 percent of Americans — including nearly three-quarters of Democrats but just seven percent of Republicans — back impeaching the president and removing him from office." -end quote
So it went from 70% didn't want it, down to 60% now.
The opposite of 40% wanting it, is 60% do not want it.
Take it with a grain of salt, if the Dems have enough votes they will Impeach him, if not it won't happen, this has always been what the mid-term elections were going to be about, almost to the day that Trump won the Presidency.
As for the country being back "on the right track" as you say.... lol … yeah, if he is impeached the Dems will pay the price in 2020, and Pence will be the President which I'd be fine with. Unlike some delusional Dems out there that think Hillary would somehow be swept in to become President after an Impeachment, I actually know how the process works.
Sa la vieKen: Pence is just the other side of the same coin. He is ultra self-righteous, which is another ball of wax.
Its kind of a great situation, if they impeach Trump, they will enrage the 'Right' voters (not the corrupt political class in D.C.) as well as alarm the entire 'Moderate' voter block.
But they don't 'win' anything, because as you state, Pence becomes President, and likely because of the Impeachment the political momentum shifts strongly back to the 'Right' side for the 2020 elections.
If the Democrats don't recapture Congress in 2018, they will be powerless to stop Trump's momentum (especially where the economy is concerned) and with Rinos like McCain now out of the way, Trump will wield more influence than before in getting Republicans to do his will.
Really, its almost a no-win situation for the Democrats for the next 4 years... they have focused on things like Impeaching Trump, Open Borders, shutting down ICE... basically all issues that 60-to-70% of Americans are not in favor of... especially if you discount CA nd NY voters.Ken: Yep, it definitely is the "Trump Effect." The economy is in good standing. I'm not sure it was because of Trump or it is just the trend. The stock market is at an all time high.
However, what goes up also comes down. It's just the natural order of things. Part of the Trump Effect is deregulation of the financial markets. That is never a good thing, because it brings out the worst in people including greed and corruption.
The Trump Effect has not even been in play for two years. We shall see how it all plays out, including tariffs and higher prices for goods and services. Of course, it it all goes down the tubes, Trump will blame the democrats because, he is not capable of owning his mistakes.
As far as the democrats and obstruction of Trump, the GOP did it for 8 years with Obama. That is how they were able to take over congress and the presidency.
Trump can blame who-ever he wants, the voters will blame him if the economy tanks.
The Glass Steagal Repeal, NAFTA, Community Reinvestment Act, etc. had to do with the last nosedive we had in 2008, Trump is renegotiating NAFTA, taking on China, and the ability to get a mortgage is still as hard as ever for people who have limited means, so I don't see a repeat of 2008 magnitude on the horizon.
They were able to take over because the ACA was a terrible new act/law that was costing hard working Americans thousands of dollars extra hardship every year. Tens of millions were getting screwed by that act.
The ACA led to the first rise up against our idiotic and corrupt government in the form of the 'Tea Party' types, the media lashed out at them calling them Nazis, the IRS lashed out at them trying to investigate them, and that only helped make even more people see how out of control our government was getting.
Long tenured Rinos were getting voted out of office and replaced almost as quickly as the Democrats were, and hopefully that trend will continue in 2018.
These politicians that have been in office for 20 years or more need to be swept out, we won't see that in CA or NY where the likes of Waters and Pelosi and Schumer will be able to hang onto their seats even after they are dead and buried. But for most of the rest, there is good chance that many incumbents get ousted."The ACA led to the first rise up against our idiotic and corrupt government in the form of the 'Tea Party' types, the media lashed out at them calling them Nazis, the IRS lashed out at them trying to investigate them, and that only helped make even more people see how out of control our government was getting."
The Anti ACA" uprising", even all the common repeated phrases, were started by corporate interests that didn't like the bill. No, the bill isn't perfect but it could be improved upon if there was a desire to do so from those who represent us. That's not going to happen when people are led to believe falsehoods by those who benefit monetarily do so.
I was an expert at lobbying for anti-Obamacare campaigns. These were not grassroot uprisings by any means and were based on half and twisted truths.
I cannot believe you wrote such a ridiculous thing as "Not only did Brennan share intelligence with the FBI,"
Is it your belief that one intelligence branch sharing information with another intelligence branch illegal or at east unethical as your statement implies?
Why do you think 9/11 happened (unless you are one of those that think Bush did it)? As every investigation into that tragedy pointed out, it was intel agencies working in their own stovepipes that stopped the dots from being connected. And her you say they still shouldn't do it - flat out amazing!!!
You also amaze me by writing "a tale of Russians interfering in our election on Trump's behalf." as if that 1) wasn't true and 2) he didn't have the patriotic obligation to tell Reid that. I am starting to wonder what world of make believe you live in Ken.
Oh, yes, about that dossier. You do know don't you that various parts of it have now been authenticated by various intel agencies and NOT ONE CLAIM has been proven untrue.
So even if the FBI had used the dossier (which they didn't) to kick off investigating TraitorTrump, it would have been the right thing to do.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
The very moment that people you all call out of "higher "standards of integrity in such a institution as DOJ , FBI , CIA ......in the past the IRA, NSA begin to spew their ideological opposition verbally , grandstanding like Comey , Brennen and the likes. They give up any chance of retaining security clearances . Thank God.
Partisan maneuvering in office or when they get out is wrong .
Brennen got exactly what a dozen more SHOULD get ! - ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Dick Morris , A name straight from the Clinton Mafia Machine .....turned against them ---fortunately , I find it interesting that Morris is almost totally ignored by all but the conservative media . He nails it though.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
As with CNN Fake Cohen Russia Source blow out this week , Democrats have cried "The wolf is coming, the wolf is coming " So many times in three or four years that even their own base is chasing its tail backtracking on "impeachment " , it would almost be headshaking hilarious if it weren't so party stupid .
It gave me great pleasure to watch the DNC meltdown last year , Now it's the fake news media's turn ? OH the great pleasures of life on the glory bound Trump Train . Even now the Dembratic party is abandoning it's wayward children like a welfare queen on Oxycodone . If the Midterms go as predicted ; if it really is "The economy stupid " , watch as we see one more red wave move across the country .
Sad part is , America really needs two party's , it really needs a unified two party front to function properly . Who knows maybe we'll see the legalizing of a third and even a fourth party . That I believe is the beginning of our own downward spiral . Two party's works ,but three or four ...............?ahorseback: Trump doesn't want two parties. Look at what he said today, if the GOP loses the mid-terms. He is already priming the pump with fear mongering and predicting violence. The irony is Trump always need somebody to attack and blame. Therefore, he needs a two party system.
Fear is a great motivator and he really knows how to use it.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat … s-electionIt used to be both parties wanted the same goals but just differed on how to achieve them. This is no longer the case, the Democrat party has forsaken those goals while the Republican Party continues to embrace them. Neither party ever wanted socialism, open borders, to do away with the constitution but these are the goals of today’s Democrat party while the Republicans goals have never changed, freedom and liberty, national security, rule of law and adhearance to the constitution.
Frankly this type of two party system, where the goals are opposite there can be no compromise, there can be no bipartisanship, plain and simple, logic dictates only one party can prevail or else the country as we know it and as it has been known for some 240 years will no longer exist. There will always be two parties but this Democrat party can never be allowed to prevail, it will always be the minority it has become ever since Obama was elected. They have him to thank for that.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Demobrats doom and gloom for the next six years is what's feeding their obstruction today, pretty obvious to most , Just look at all the polls . Isn't it probable that the voting pendulum's swings from Obama's eight is moving hard right at the moment to continue for a few years ?
ahorseback: You are just like Trump and his supporters. You place party above country. In your replies that is all you talk about is how our party is winning and your party is losing and is to blame for all the ills of the country. But is that really good for the entire country?
The obstruction of Obama for 8 years is what has allowed the GOP to take over congress, the presidency, and the SCOTUS. Let's see how all your happy talk plays out. I have coined a new term. It's called the Trump Effect (TE). Let's see what long term effect TE has on the world.
He is already doing his fear mongering with the mid-terms. Oh I know how you hate CNN, the Fake News, but this is a video, you can't deny as being fake. So put on your big boy pants and see how the other side presents the "fake news". You don't even have to watch the whole seven minutes, just the first part where Trump is talking.
https://youtu.be/_nyQwP4lUeg via @YouTube
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Peoplepower , So I suffered through Wolf and "soccer mom crew " knowing first Exactly where they would go with the discussion , Second , I lost all respect for Blitzkrieg long , long before the fake flowing tears of election night .
But truthfully You , the news media , especially CNN and the likes totally ignore where all the politically conceived violence in America has always and will forever come from in our streets .
Democrats , liberals , idealist activist inspired and directed academia , and youth .
Don't get me wrong ,I can well imagine a day when a combined ideology takes to the streets in revolution but from Trump supporters ? Not likely . Let me ask you this ; While Obama was figuratively and literally ripping at the threads of our constitution , polluting the supreme court roles , Corrupting the government institutions like the IRS , DOJ , FBI , weaponizing OUR government offices against the American public ---Did you see violence from OUR side then ?
Fear not the Trump voters in the dark of night , If when the Trump reign is over and we haven't moved the pendulum that your entitled party hangs onto with a death grip in the scaffolds , we can all give in to Socialism together .ahorseback: The issue is not about Democrats , liberals , idealist activist inspired and directed academia , and youth and what you think Obama did.
All of that you mentioned is a distraction about the real issue. The real issue is about Trump using fear mongering to motivate his base and influence the election. Do you think that is right or wrong? A yes or no answer would suffice. Thank you.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Peoplepower , Unlike the Obama years Trump is a direct result and a movement OF a motivated base not a directing dictator of one like democratic leaders ." Fear mongering" is one more lowly and accusatory falsehood.
That is the difference democrats will never get .
Of course you can decide now to make "Trump Fear Mongering " Impeachment reason # 192 or so ?ahroseback: In the video you saw, was Trump fear mongering or not? Yes or no. What do you call it when without any proof, he says if the GOP loses, the dems will become violent and take away everything he has started?
I call it fear mongering...so you better vote for the GOP or the dems will kill you and destroy him. That is what he is saying. And the real problem is, they believe him.ANTIFA nor any other liberal organization doesn't need any Trump endorsements , they have been here in America for decades . The anarchists are your new Political Activist Army Peoplepower , Embrace them , for they are your patriots . Antifa and the new democrats are comrades in arms from another era , Remember the black panthers ? The symbionese Liberation Army ?
Fear mongering , Since when do democrats" hang on every word " of Trumps except for the newest party addiction of "phony outrage ".ahorseback: You won't answer my question will you?
ANTIFA stands for Anti Fascist. it's origins are from NAZI Germany. They are against Fascist, Neo NAZI's, and white supremacist groups. They are not even a cohesive group. They are a loose collection of people with a common interest. They will resort to violence when they deem it necessary to stop those groups from plying their wares.
Again, Trump is using scare tactics to call them out. Unless Trump brings the groups I mentioned to the party, he is just making it up, Like he does everything else.
It's just like if he doesn't win some competition, then it must be rigged or it is a fraud. I would like to see how he would react to losing a sporting event. "If I loose this tennis match, it must be rigged or I lost because, it must be a fraud. I call for an investigation."
That's O.K. You people are willing to overlook all that B.S., because it's the economy stupid. There is a reason we are taught not to lie. It's because sooner or later it will catch up with you. An old Italian saying says, "Lying is like spitting straight up in the air, it will come back to hit you in your face." It's just a matter of time his immorality will catch up with him.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Peoplepower , You're simply still blinded by your Trump Outrage , It is time to move on , don't continue being stuck in the five stages of Hillary grief . It doesn't even fit your higher level of intellect . Trump is a blabber , he always has been one for the inciting the outrage . Dial down his personality volume in your ears and turn up the reception of how well our economy is , our trade agreements , YOUR military service and it's Trump rewards , you're focusing too much on personality and not enough on , for one , the substance of his economic accomplishments . You sir ,are way too intelligent to be on that trip , If it helps don't look at him when he speaks , that's what I did , now , Even his orange hair doesn't bother me .............:-]
ahorseback: Sorry, I can't do that, not at this stage. Almost 3,000 Puerto Rican's were killed as a result of hurricane Maria. So what does Trump say today? He praises what a great job FEMA did when they did practically nothing. Again it shows he has no capacity for empathy or remorse. That is very cold in my book. All he did when he went there was toss paper towels to the poor people and boast about how big a crowd he drew.
To me character of a President is much more important than the economy of the country. You and I both know economies and jobs go in cycles. Some where along the line, they will both crash. But this guy is damaged goods and I have a fear his lack of character is going to play into the decline and fall of this country.Actually Trump so far , has ended "the fall of this country " . Your president charged it all to debt , ripped the guts out of the constitution and started an AHCA that can't be afforded now or ever . mine is inciting an economic boom that should eventually change the Obama course ? When in twenty years , you google up the Obama Legacy ......at the end of the paragraph it will say .....See...Trump !
For those of you who've gotten bogged down in the Trump personality mental block against recognizing real progress and can't move past it ; I say - We all got over Obama . I hope not but I suspect that you have a long way to go my friend !ahorseback: I don't think you have gotten over Obama. You and others still blame him for everything. So you want me to look the other way just because he is "inciting an economic boom."
I'm concerned about the children who Trump and Stephen Miller have separated from their parents and Trump has no intention of bring them back together again.
I'm concerned about the long term effects of his tariffs and what they are going to do to the economy. I'm concerned about the 1.7 trillion dollar debt added to the national debt over the next ten years. I'm concerned about ISIS being re-constituted after Trump boasted that he has taken them out. I'm concerned about all the people he has fired just because they criticize him, don't agree with him, or presented a threat to him.
As I said before, there is a difference between winning for yourself and your supporters, then there is for real leadership. He violates everything I have learned about effective management. I don't think he was paying attention when he took the classes at the Wharton School of Business.I suspect Trump bought his degree, he simply doesn't have the ability to pass a hard school like Wharton. If he did, where did it go??
What REAL progress other than the rich getting much richer. His trade war is killing businesses right and left, even those who USE to think tariffs were a good idea.
The rest of any progress he has made was built on the momentum Obama left him.
Mostly, he has taken America backward and down into the moral gutter he lives in.Take off the rose colored Obama glasses Esoteric , it is a new day as the machine of American mfg. roars back into action ,you stand there in those glasses wringing your hands over your party's collective personality conflict ?
A Twenty One Trillion Dollar Obama Debt IS NOT momentum in the proper direction ?
What hasn't economically exploded ?
-GDP
-Wall street
-Mfg. companies
-Foreign Tariff negotiations
-Job Growth
-Natural resource
-EPA restrictions
-The wall
-I.C.E.
-on and on
-.....................
America is coming back from the brink of entitlement socialism , we would have tipped easily into the abyss where other nations have fallen . Say say thank you Mr.President !Manufacturing is not exploding from my vantage point here in the rust belt. Opiate and meth sales are still on the rise though. Destroying natural resources is on the rise..my 401k had its best year in 2016, tariff negotiations...we really haven't seen much of this or any results; I don't think the wall is being built at all, maybe some repairs on existing structure.. on and on... Just saying something over and over doesn't really make it true, despite what Goebbels said.
Hard sun , The deal is those areas and jobs worst hit by decades of ignoring economic problems will take longer to restore , Although YOU know that because you were a political strategist , lobbyist of some kind right .
Why it is that there are those who think 'instant oatmeal' economics comes from the oval office ? All Trump has allowed to happen is the returning of corporate confidence and actual growth to realign itself in a growing economy unstifled by high taxation and overregulation ?
But you already know this or should , Goebbels , a fascist like Obama ? In fact the WWII era economic boom of Germany is a prime example of what the wrong leader [Obama ] can do to a thriving economy , overspend , over colonize , overreach taxation and regulation , the OWO mentality .
Thanks for the example."The deal is those areas and jobs worst hit by decades of ignoring economic problems will take longer to restore , Although YOU know that because you were a political strategist , lobbyist of some kind right . "
Then why do you state they "roar back into action." You make no sense. Now you admit it's too early to tell on these things. You are just throwing things out there to see if they stick...and they don't. Propaganda for your savior.
Germany's economy after WWI is a horrible comparison to our economy. Your statement on that makes no sense either. Germany's economy was horrid after WWI, before WWII, and the conditions which brought that economic climate are not comparable to our issues.
It is clear as a bell you do zero independent research, horse, and only rely on far-right Goebbels-type propaganda machines like Brietbart and Fox Opinion. If you had done ANY research at all you would not have created that ridiculous, disconnected list.
- GDP has NOT exploded - GDP was increasing under Obama and is still in increasing at about the same rate - PROVE ME WRONG
- Wall street: I assume you mean the stock market. "Exploded"? No It is doing just slightly better than the long-term trend set by Obama. I suspect that will be wiped out by years end.
- Mfg. companies: Not sure what has EXPLODED here either - SHOW ME. Jobs certainly haven't and plants are closing or cutting back because of Trump Trade War
-Foreign Tariff negotiations: Yes the did EXPLODE. Trump took a steady, well working world economy and put it on a 2-legged stool. If you think that is good, I feel sorry for you.
-Job Growth: "Exploded"? No. Trump's jobs growth is worse than Obama's in terms of jobs created.
-Natural resource: No idea what your metric is here
-EPA restrictions: Yes, which have led to increasing carbon emissions in the U.S.
-The wall: "Exploded"?????? What the hell are you talking about? What wall.
-I.C.E. : Yes Traitor Trump has turned them into America's version of Storm Troopers (probably right up your alley)
Trump is an abysmal failure who is doing REAL HARM to America and the world. And because you support him, so are you.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Were you concerned as much or more when Obama separated families because I don't seem to recall your outrage then ?
Tariffs ?
Are you as concerned about the 250 +% of Obama allowed Tariffs against US dairy products NOT going to Canada while our dairy farms fail and who's fields are forever divided up by realtors ?
I believe Trump who give up his firstborn before he 'd spend more than all combined presidents as Obama did on our national debt ?
ISIS ? Better trump beat them to a pulp over there ,anywhere , than to allow them citizenry over here like ........you guessed it Obama .
Forgive me , But when you learned about business and effective management , didn't you learn from and while employed by the US government ? Enough said there ."Were you concerned as much or more when Obama separated families because I don't seem to recall your outrage then ?
Tariffs ? " ???? Exactly when did he do that? Under what circumstances? If it even did happen, which I doubt, it certainly be design like Trump. Trump knew those kids were going to be separated and he planned on using it as leverage - don't you think that is sick? Deranged?
You will need to provide your evidence for this statement "Are you as concerned about the 250 +% of Obama allowed Tariffs against US dairy products NOT going to Canada while our dairy farms fail and who's fields are forever divided up by realtors ?" It doesn't ring true either.
ISIS - Well since Obama never gave even one ISIS citizenship (that is as stupid as Trump challenging his citizenship - btw, are you really an American, can you post your birth certificate on this thread?) then your claim is a lie, isn't it.
Your "forgive me" makes no sense but I learned my management skills from government service and I learned my business skills partly from working with major military contractors as well as starting my own successful businesses. What have you done?ahorseback: The one cardinal rule I learned in management is. If you don't support your people, they are not going to support you. Trump's people as president include all the people in the United States of America, not just those that support him, not just Fox News, but all the media, including what he calls the fake news and the enemy of the people.
More important than the economy is having a complete unified country. He is not capable of doing that because he only wins by dividing the country, not unifying it.
A real leader doesn't choose sides. He only holds rallies with his supporters and they all cheer when they and he attack the other side. That is not leadership in my book.
He may be a super marketeer and salesman, but I learned the most important thing in any business is repeat business. The only way to get repeat business is by having satisfied customers. If you don't have satisfied customers, they are not coming back. Trump only has less than half of the country as satisfied customers.
One of the most important thing they teach you in the military is discipline and how to work as a team. That's what boot camp is all about. Trump's states in his book, the Art of the Deal, he went to military school and he learned how to rise through the ranks by dividing and conquering. In the real man's military that is not how it is done.
"The U.S. national debt is once again raising alarm bells. Federal borrowing from outside investors expanded rapidly over the past decade, totaling more than $15 trillion in 2018, and it is projected to grow even faster over the next ten years under current law. Major budget legislation signed by President Donald J. Trump, along with continued growth in entitlements and higher interest rates, will see the debt nearly double by 2028 [PDF], coming close to the size of the entire U.S. economy."
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/national-debt-dilemma
Once again, say it over and over, doesn't REALLY make it true. And it doesn't even take a lobbyist to understand that.- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Hard sun ,Go re-read what I DID say , Germany and it's economy DURING WWII , Hitler screwed the economic pooch for his political ideology like Obama was doing ,
The economy IS roaring back to life AND observe how very little it took AND it's not too early to see that at all. All led by someone with merely a business background . You are an expert at "throwing stuff at the wall hoping for a stick " That's the only real Demobratic party platform that has continually shown itself successful for two decades or longer . - ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Peoplepower , the exact opposite of all you just stated was the same under Obama , Difference ?
-Booming economy
-Booming trade
-Low crude $
-Low unemployment
-Military raises
-Lower immigration
-Lower crime
-Lower social discontent
Half of America disliked Obama too but were silent and not incessantly whining about his perceived failures . And failures there were .Horse, you are undoubtedly one of the best world class story tellers that I have ever run across. Now, to repeat myself and give the readers the truth.
- Booming economy: FALSE. The TRUTH is the economy hasn't "boomed" since Clinton
- Booming Trade: FALSE. The TRUTH is, there was nothing booming about it and with Trump's Trade War, trade must get worse because it is the nature of ALL trade wars.
- Low Crude $: FALSE. The TRUTH is oil, after the world economy recovered after the conservative inspired 2008 recessions averaged about $49/bbl the last 2+ years of the Obama administration. On the other hand, the first 18 months of the Trump administration, oil averaged about $61/bbl. TELL me again your so-called Low Crude $.
- Low unemployment: VERY MISLEADING. When Obama left office, unemployment was DROPPING rapidly and was around 4.7%. It is now, what, 3.9%? Exactly what was your point??
- Military raises: And what does that mean?? The military get raises almost every year, so why is Trump's raise special??
- Lower immigration: Yes, when compared to Bush, but when compared to Obama. Trump has improved on Obama's record only a little bit.
- Lower crime: FALSE: The TRUTH is it is on the rise and has been since Trump started running for President in 2015.
- Lower social discontent: FALSE. Since I can remember from about 10 years old, I haven't as much social unrest since the Vietnam war protests as Trump has incited.
PROVE your last statement since it is FALSE also.I notice Horse doesn't respond to these refutations.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Esoteric , Your socialist Amerika and my America are at reality odds , face it . Anyone that cannot sense the corporate economic turn around since actually before Trump took office and has watched it's booming take effect since then , is economically blind !
Most of what's happening today is the powering up of a politically motivated media war against Trump , against the reality of his success' , against the flailing , the entire Obama legacy. I don't know about you but in MY world there was ten percent unemployment , there was five dollar a gallon gasoline and record high costs heating fuel ,
The lies your new political party news media is spewing now has done nothing to dissuade the path of Trumps success' and America's economic ride since Obama walked into the shadows of his economic failures , Actually DOUBLING the American debt, actually doubling the debt that your great great grandchildren will be so proud of paying off .
Did Obama have success' ? Yes . Were they mostly contrived , Yes . With such an Obama star struck news media , why not lie about ten percent unemployment , why not forget the high costs of energy and his "nuclear" attack against the coal industry , War against the oil drilling industry . Why not lie about his abject failures in foreign diplomacy ? Why not lie about the ideological and almost absolute corruption of government institutions of the IRS , DOJ , FBI , ICE , DHS .and lower federal courts ?
We can sling numbers , charts and graphs around here for hours and still not touch on the absolute corruption of the lower federal courts that Obama front loaded with activist judgeships . What that did to obstruct the economy alone , the coal industry for just one example is exemplary to obstructing economic progress and job creation .
Good luck with that legacy of Obama's economic, corporate doom and gloom with the exception of wall street .Was Obama mostly for wall street or for main street ? Real america knows the answer.Horse, define "socialism". I bet you can't do it correctly based on how you use it.
ahorseback:
A: Esoteric , Your socialist Amerika and my America are at reality odds , face it . Anyone that cannot sense the corporate economic turn around since actually before Trump took office and has watched it's booming take effect since then , is economically blind !
M: Amerika? That's why Trump and company is being investigated for doing business with the Oligarch Comrades. You just said that the economic turn around started before Trump took office. That means you are giving credit to Obama.
A: Most of what's happening today is the powering up of a politically motivated media war against Trump , against the reality of his success' , against the flailing , the entire Obama legacy. I don't know about you but in MY world there was ten percent unemployment , there was five dollar a gallon gasoline and record high costs heating fuel.
M: Now Trump has fired up the coal mines, the oil companies and the steel mills. All have been replaced by high technology. Why? to keep a promise to his "forgotten ones." Coal is a pollutant, Steel workers have been replaced by automation. And the waters used in fracking are polluting drinking water. He is making America great again by sending the country backward. Coal and oil are finite commodities. He should be focused on technology, not the forgotten ones.
A:The lies your new political party news media is spewing now has done nothing to dissuade the path of Trumps success' and America's economic ride since Obama walked into the shadows of his economic failures , Actually DOUBLING the American debt, actually doubling the debt that your great great grandchildren will be so proud of paying off .
M: When are you going to learn that every president inherits the national debt of the previous president? Trump hasn't even started yet and his tax cuts are costing the country 1.7 trillion over 10 years.
A: Did Obama have success' ? Yes . Were they mostly contrived , Yes . With such an Obama star struck news media , why not lie about ten percent unemployment , why not forget the high costs of energy and his "nuclear" attack against the coal industry , War against the oil drilling industry . Why not lie about his abject failures in foreign diplomacy ? Why not lie about the ideological and almost absolute corruption of government institutions of the IRS , DOJ , FBI , ICE , DHS .and lower federal courts ?
M: We don't have to lie. Trump lies every time he opens his mouth or his tweeter.
A: We can sling numbers , charts and graphs around here for hours and still not touch on the absolute corruption of the lower federal courts that Obama front loaded with activist judgeships . What that did to obstruct the economy alone , the coal industry for just one example is exemplary to obstructing economic progress and job creation .
M: Yes, we look forward to all the pollution the coal and oil industries are creating. You will be able to tell your grand children the reason they are stricken with disease is because of Trump giving those forgotten people jobs.
A: Good luck with that legacy of Obama's economic, corporate doom and gloom with the exception of wall street .Was Obama mostly for wall street or for main street ? Real america knows the answer.
M: He was for both. He inherited a recession from W, and turned it around into a positive economy that Trump inherited and is taking credit for it from the momentum created by Obama.
You don't like to look at charts, but feast your eyes on these charts. And then look at the sources of these charts at the very end. They are all very credible.
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/obamas-final-numbers/What Horse doesn't mention is that 80% of the debt increase was due to his Party's Great 2008 Recession
BTW, I see he failed to define socialism, so I must assume he doesn't know what he talking about..
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Answer one- , No Obama doesn't get credit , Corporate confidence at Hillary's defeat gave them movement before Obama left office , They knew what was coming from a corporate confidence and Trump economic boom for eight years .
Two- So far , not an iota of evidence or indictment against Trump.
Three -American coal is of the cleanest coal operations in the world but Obama wanted to pay India , Russia , Turkey and other nations out tax dollars to assume the dirtiest of coal mining in the world . When you go out and plug in your electric hybrid , YOU TOO cause coal fired electricity , How is that for environmental cleanliness for you at 30 something percent coal elec.? Go build another tax subsidized wind tower never to pay for itself before its obsolete , Or a solar farm that raises "global warming "and works occasionally ?
Go blow on a wind mill in peak hours lately or pull the clouds away from the solar farm ?
Four -This is so easy , Tax Cuts don't "Cost " anyone anything !
Five -Obama economic policy ? Spend , spend more and spend more again , hence Debt $11 Trillion dollars !
Six -Lies ? "You can keep your health care package , save $2,500 a year" Truth ? Too bad so sad , cost you $3,000 more a year .
Seven - "A positive economy" is NOT 10.1 unemployment , $5.oo a gallon gas and heating oil , 21% black unemployment , %50 black youth unemployment . Less women in the work place market , "stimulus spending " unemployment funds extended and extended again , and then "less unemployment " because people dropped out of the job search market !
Eight -" Charts " , An Obama love affair of Fake news media , journalists and statisticians is not truth in reporting , I'll tell you what you can do with your liberal media !
Shall we go one ?"Go blow on a wind mill in peak hours lately or pull the clouds away from the solar farm ? "
Are you serious? I'm just addressing this one fallacy here. I thought this argument was ended a few years ago.
https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind … d-turbines
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Hard sun ,Next time you drive across the southwest of America , notice the blight of the green energy . Thousands of wind towers where no homes will ever sit , Thousands of solar farms replacing food producing farms , dirt roads between towers , chain link fences going on and on and on for miles ,
All for a high tax dollar subsidization industry that can't effectively store its energy efficiently for peak hours reclamation , AND even though experimental energy storage is in the works IT TOO IS EXPENSIVE , this is just research and development at the cost of high taxation .
Too date the cost of green energy subsidization is the negative HIDDEN element of green energy efficiency . In other words , pretty to look at [for dreamers ] hell on the environment . What sense does it make to produce green energy at $.29 cents a kilowatt hour when we pay $.011 cents for electricity now.
R&D taxation at the rate of three - to- one for " Corporate Green " , It's doing nothing but adding to national debt ,- pocket lining- "greening up " for corporate America . Socialism by taxation in government at it's finest hour .There's thousands of wind turbines across the rural areas outside where I live including the area I grew up. There are homes there also. Coal and oil were subsidized, in many ways, and they do much more to the environment than just speed up climate change. If you were worried about "socialism" is should have started with the coal and oil subsidies not the green energy boogeyman. I studied this for a decade when I obtained my degree in meteorology and climatology and studied sustainable technologies while earning an MS. Despite what so many Trump supporters think, education does mean something. Nations that do not understand this fall by the wayside as their betters pass them up.
Energy storage will not be too expensive when its said and done just like fracking is not due to the subsides. And there is storage that happens now. Besides, they pass energy around the grid so if a hundred turbines outside Chicago aren't turning, no one's losing power.
There are trade offs to every energy source. No one source is an economic or environmental panacea. So, we simply stop advancing due to imperfections? This is not natural,Oh But It's all "natural" as long as taxation pays for it and the corporate offices of these industries reap the profits and liberals claim the massive ideological advancements ?
The "costs" of green then becomes exorbitant .The point is we already subsidize the dirtiest forms of energy creation known to man. Energy is something a nation needs to thrive...some subsidies may be necessary. I would prefer taxation not pay for coal, oil, wind, or solar. At least the renewable industry is attempting to be non-subsidized. So they say anyway. I too am skeptical of how the energy sector may take advantage of tax payers. But, this is absolutely not exclusive to wind and solar.
The costs of coal, oil, and even natural gas are already exorbitant. Economical and environmentally.
"Wind and solar electricity will become cost competitive, without the help of federal subsidies, by 2025, according to a new report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory."--This is certainly feasible. Let's hope the the industry doesn't insist on otherwise.
"Federal coal subsidies are forms of financial assistance paid by federal taxpayers to the coal and power industry. Such subsidies include direct spending, tax breaks and exemptions, low-interest loans, loan guarantees, loan forgiveness, grants, lost government revenue such as discounted royalty fees to mine federal lands, and federally-subsidized external costs, such as health care expenses and environmental clean-up due to the negative effects of coal use. External costs of coal include the loss or degradation of valuable ecosystems and community health."https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Federal_coal_subsidies
State governments even build and repair roads that crack under the pressure of mining equipment.
It's not natural to avoid better alternatives because those alternatives may still have flaws. In the case of renewables, the flaws are due more to the powers that be than the technologies themselves. However, renewables have their environmental impacts as well. They just pale in comparison and can be minimized with proper management. Whether that proper management happens or not has little to do with the form of energy.Several forms of sustainable energy are already self-sustaining. Many countries (not Trump's America of course) have goals of totally eliminating reliance on fossil fuels. Now, I don't think that is possible, or even advisable, trying to reach that goal is well worth it.
By the way, Horse, the COST of paying for the impact of global warming (like moving coastal cities inland) will make what is spent on renewables seem like a pittance.Except no one really knows the" cost "of global warming , it's major cause or the possibilities of it's solutions
Yes, people DO KNOW this.
1. There are many ways to estimate the cost of different global warming scenarios. Why can I say that, because I use to be a professional cost and economic analyst for the Air Force. So long as we have a reasonable set of assumptions and constraints, then most things can be estimated along with the degree of uncertainty around the estimate. You probably don't believe that because you are not a mathematician and apparently complex things are beyond you (based on your writing), but it is nevertheless true.
Since only a politically or religiously biased few, say 1% or 2%, disagree with with human-caused global warming, and the other 98 to 99% based their opinions on empirical (data driven) analysis, only fools or those with an agendas will disagree with their conclusions.".............Complex things are beyond you ",..... I don't care what you did ,for work there , If for instance you were in the "air force " you contributed more than most people TO global warming,
Your media and media friendly science has a log way to go to prove more than the activist media and media scientists predictions. There are scientists who say
" .....We are incredibly egocentric as humans to think that we are responsible for AND can do anything about global warming if we are in a warming trend............"
This is where you push .......again ..........for carbon taxes ? For your scientific information , just like liberal trials are not conducted in the media , so too liberal global warming studies , litigation or solutions aren't done only in the media . Man made global warming Prove it,.......... as you love to say.
The environmental and health costs of coal and oil go WAY beyond global warming. We can see those effects, no arguing them at all. Slurry, asthma, mercury deposition, etc., etc.
Sure but can you see the visual blight of wind towers and solar farms , dead eagles and killing of wildlife ? I read this morning about a mile and a half circumference solar reflective generating electrical turbine system where all the mirrors point to the center superheating saltwater slurry to generate electricity .
When bird life fly over it they are instantly incinerated .
What's the difference ?
I'll try to get that link.I would MUCH rather see a farm of wind mills than a farm of oil wells. Under the wind mills is, well, ground. Under oil wells is polluted ground.
"When bird life fly over it they are instantly incinerated ." Really? How? The energy of the solar panels is, according to you, directed inward and downward, not up into the sky were birds actually fly.Not talking a solar cell farm but a generation plant based on solar reflected heat , a mirror based center core elect. generator run by superheated salt brine water .
I''ll find it in a bit .Those are solar heat towers..been around for quite some time...heat the water with reflectors...generate steam...turn a turbine which powers a generator. Same generation concept as coal fired, nuclear power, pretty much everything except photovoltaics. it doesn't have to be brine water by any means.
The only place you'll find those is in the middle of the desert, way out middle of farmland, where not too many people to live. They are certainly bad for lizards, various small rodents and such ...and yes birds can be incinerated. However, they quickly learn to change their flight patterns. The biggest killer of birds now is windows, skyscrapers and such. The second biggest is cats. Should we eliminate windows and cats? It's all relative...everything we do has environmental impacts. However towers aren't often much of a human blight concern because where they are placed.
One of the profs in dept I was in was involved in environmental impact research of solar heating towers. It's not rocket science, but there they go again, those damn bastions of liberalism educating people.
Besides, I don't think grain bins are too attractive but sure not doing away with those.
That's the one , much space lost though , it superheats a underground system of liquid salt which generates electricity . Tell me that's not a climate warmer though .
ahorseback: Here is what happens with fracking in the Texas Permian Basin
http://a.msn.com/00/en-us/BBMCs3r?ocid=stNo, this isn't "the one." This heats water in the tower..not an underground system of liquid salt. Like I said, solar towers have been around for decades and there are many of them. Climate, warmer? No..concrete is "climate warmer" it's called the urban heat island (UHI) effect. This isn't warming the ambient air..it is warming the water within the tower which makes steam and turns a turbine. It's a closed system for the most part. Warm air may emit from the top, just as with a coal plant..minus the emissions. It's not generating any extra heat in the form of long wave radiation that is captured by clouds. This is what urban heat islands do.
Read up a bit if you want to learn a bit of the truth about these.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?pa … wer_plants
There are many concerned scientists who work on these things...they strive to dampen the environmental impacts and there is absolutely no comparison between these types of systems and coal plants.
I do think the UHI is underestimated by climate models. But, I'm not as up on those as I was ten years ago.
Horse, you write well, but you remind me of the scarecrow in Wizard of Oz.
It sounds to me that your preference, Horse, is to have no word at all than have one that uses taxes to save it.
Do I have that right?
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
I believe we have to get lobbyism out of government offices , Get energy companies out of the national pocketbook , out of subsidization . If the profitability of an industry ,AND there is much profitability, cannot pay for it's own R&D then they shouldn't be enjoying corporate welfare .
Democrats are always crying towards the gods of entitlement , Why then don't we trim back these subsidies to allow for instance , healthcare , education , the blankets of securing social injustices ?
Instead of subsidizing some of the most profitable industries known to man -health care itself , the insurance industry , energy companies.........etc........Instead we continually grow the subsidization of too many industries . Are we that rich or are our policies that stupid?You do know, horse, that the corporate welfare you are talking about is a conservative creature. Liberals oppose it.
- ahorsebackposted 5 years ago0
Hardsun , How much proof do you need for my "The one " and not your "The one " ?
It's interesting how may forms of these there are out there , Not quite the ultimate expert you claim to be ? There probably isn't one system out there that's less polluting in one way, form or another . OIl , coal , nuclear , natural gas , We are apparently using everything known to man and polluting as well .I was using your description, you know. So, how are these systems polluting? You have only said it but not proven it.
You are not understanding. I'm not claiming to be an "ultimate expert" just more knowledgeable than the average b on this matter. My point of "the one" is that there is no way for you to know if it is "the one" as there are many of these. You now know this as I see you did a bit of research, which I do think is cool. I love to learn.
Storage underground is not the same as " superheats a underground system of liquid salt which generates electricity." As your diagram points out, and I stated, it's heated in the tower. I'm just attempting to be precise in wording as it does matter.
At any rate, the issue was environmental impacts of which you clearly have little understanding. You keep talking about birds and such. How many birds, fish, and humans are killed each year by atmospheric deposition from coal-fired plants?
I never claimed these solar towers are the most environmentally friendly option but they are pretty damn good. I did say they are MUCH better than coal-fired plants and that's the truth.
Hi My Esoteric,
Even if I were to agree with you - that he most probably did it because he was upset with Brennan's comments, and even if every publicly knowable circumstance indicated the same, that is still not concrete proof.
I am not an expert on the use of the publicly listed reasons for clearance revocation, but, in contrast to the experts you mentioned, I have seen "experts" that declare the opposite - Brennan did violate several of the conditions for revocation.
Wait, I am not pitting those experts against your experts, and declaring yours wrong. I am only pointing out that there are arguable positions.
And with those arguable positions noted, my layman's eye sees at least a few that could be legitimately used as validation for the revocation.
Don't misunderstand my points to be a denial of what appears apparent. It is just my perspective that what seems apparent can not be concretely proven, and, can, from my perspective, be legitimately countered.
Your rationalizations may seem valid to you, but I still believe Pres. Trump has the benefit of the 'plausible deniability-type' wiggle room.
So, I am back to my "probably" point. Your perspective is an opinion, and it matters not whether it is right or wrong. You cannot nail Pres. Trump with this one - in my opinion.
GA
Related Discussions
- 8
Did Putin Order Trump To Revoke John Brennan’s Security Clearance?
by JAKE Earthshine 5 years ago
Then WHY on this ailing Earth does Donald Trump appear to be unlawfully and unilaterally degrading our defensive capabilities by stripping a security clearance from one of our best, most experienced law enforcement officials thereby weakening our essential tools designed specifically to fend off...
- 43
Jared Kushner's Top Secret Clearance
by Mike Russo 5 years ago
During the 1960's I worked for a company that was doing business with the (NSA) National Security Agency. The job that I was on required that I have a secret clearance with crypto access. The job required working with the NSA on many "black box projects" for the Minuteman...
- 19
Why are Senior Military and Intelligence Officers Attacking Trump?
by Scott Belford 5 years ago
The last two days have been extraordinary. Former Republican CIA Director John Brennan, after the Helsinki debacle, said about Donald Trump "Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of “high crimes & misdemeanors.” It was nothing...
- 37
The GOP and Hunter Biden’s Two Tired Government Special Treatment
by Mike Russo 10 months ago
Trump’s appointed judge, Aileen Cannon, in her classified documents trial wants the trial to be over by September. However, she wants all the lawyers on the case to have been granted top secret clearances. In terms of time, those two demands are in conflict with each other. I know having been...
- 11
Should Trump or Clinton or both be stripped of National Security Clearance?
by ptosis 7 years ago
Should Trump or Clinton or both be stripped of National Security Clearance? Marco Rubio wants the State Department to suspend security clearance from Hilary Clinton. Harry Reid wants the State Department to suspend security clearance from Donald Trump. A security clearance is used to confirm...
- 4
Why are security clearances needed for Federal Government jobs?
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter 6 years ago
BREAKING: More than 130 political appointees working in white house didn't have permanent security clearances as of November 2017, including Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner and Don McGahn, according to internal documents obtained by NBC News 1. Should the president have a security...