'Willful Ignorance.' Inside President Trump's Troubled Intelligence Briefings

[MrPeanut]

Nope, upstate....I know that the flak is strongest when we are over the target, so, for you I must be hitting close to home....

Do yourself a favor and take a tour of a modern military base. I'm tired of people believing everything that bloated idiot says without checking it out for themselves. We had the greatest military in the world under Obama and still do.

 

[Nickyjo]

I always knew "draining the swamp" would be an epic battle...And one that we may not win...But, at least we have a fighter giving it a go...

Trump is a swampy as they come. Check out his cabinet.

 

[iguanaman]

IF I knew what crime Trump and his crime family has done, (I am assuming you are talking about Trump's immediate family), you'd have a point.
I don't excuse anyone who breaks the law, so save the deceitful theater for a more willing participant.

So you agree that Manafort, Flynn and Cohen all belong in jail then?

 

[What if...?]

What was Peter Strozyk talking about when he spoke of an "Insurance policy" in his texts to his girlfriend?



I agree, so why so much resistance?



No, I think that Trump represents an existential threat the establishment can't afford to expose.

Or maybe just that those who.love status and power are an existential threat to every society.

As history demonstrates.

We don't learn this, so we keep repeating it.

 

[JustHanging]

I'm tired of people believing everything that bloated idiot says without checking it out for themselves.

If they did that, they would have to admit that they were conned by Trump, just like everyone told them they would be.

It's not uncommon for scam victims to desperately cling to their fantasies even when all the evidence clearly indicates they have been duped.

So at this point the last thing many Trump supporters want to do, or will do, is think for themselves. It would be too painful. Imagine, they're touting spending billions on a wall, when many five year olds could tell them how stupid that idea is.

That's literally the current state of much of conservative America.

 

[Master Debator]

Well, isn't this a bit of snotty reporting from Mr. Walcott from Time....It isn't that these things are out there by yet more anonymous sourcing within the Obama politicized Intel services, but that the fact that some within those ranks are more than willing to talk to MSM media sources whom they know viscerally hate this President....

Here's how Sharyl Attkinsson lays it out in the Hill....



Ms. Attkinsson doesn't use the term, but I will...What we have seen for the past two years, and continuing is America's first Coup d'etat...And if not actually full blown, and complete with Troops marching into the White House to arrest, and remove President Trump, that is the dream...The next type would be a political coup....And that is what we are seeing...This is Obama's true legacy.

I will almost agree with you, even as I find most of your pejoratives regarding the MSM and President Obama laughable. It does seem from various reports, and by the intelligence communities own testimony, that they do not just fundamentally disagree with this President on policy (which would be bad enough) but also on facts. Normally disagreement on policy would be fine so long as at the end of the day it is the President's policies being implemented. If the disagreement was big enough it might even result in a resignation. Here though it seems we have a situation in which the President's policies are so insane or devoid of any foresight or intelligence that his own people are at times just ignoring his orders. While not a coup in the traditional sense this is a subversion of the President's power and the citizens who elected him. If the President is incapable of doing the job through either incompetence or willful ignorance then his intelligence chiefs should say so publicly and loudly and call for his removal from office through the legal process of the 25th Amendment. Subverting his orders amounts to tyranny not just against this President but our Republic.

 

[j-mac]

I will almost agree with you, even as I find most of your pejoratives regarding the MSM and President Obama laughable. It does seem from various reports, and by the intelligence communities own testimony, that they do not just fundamentally disagree with this President on policy (which would be bad enough) but also on facts. Normally disagreement on policy would be fine so long as at the end of the day it is the President's policies being implemented. If the disagreement was big enough it might even result in a resignation. Here though it seems we have a situation in which the President's policies are so insane or devoid of any foresight or intelligence that his own people are at times just ignoring his orders. While not a coup in the traditional sense this is a subversion of the President's power and the citizens who elected him. If the President is incapable of doing the job through either incompetence or willful ignorance then his intelligence chiefs should say so publicly and loudly and call for his removal from office through the legal process of the 25th Amendment. Subverting his orders amounts to tyranny not just against this President but our Republic.

Welcome MD....Well said, while I have my own thoughts as to where we getting to with this, and what was put into place to aid it, the end is certainly what you outline, and that is tyranny....

 

[Idiometer]

To quote a Brazilian expression: You're complaining with a full belly. Life for most in the US these days is quite prosperous. Things are so easy that people that like to complain need to look for reasons to be unhappy.

Who says I'm unhappy? Hyperbole much? I don't like Trump. I think he's a liar, a cheat, a childish egomaniac, and an all-around disgusting human being. I think he is unfit to be our president. That doesn't make me an unhappy person, just not pleased with Trump.

 

[Idiometer]

Actually, you will need to correct your list. I gave you the correct answers.

Bush Sr was the best President post WW2. Period.

I agree, Obie was useless. He just fit the criteria you set. Carter is another possibility for what you asked.

Obviously the bottom of the list is Trump, the orange deity of the troubled.

You're correcting me on my own opinion? How does that work, exactly? Your opinion of Bush Sr. differs greatly from mine, but I thought we were talking about my choices here. Whatever.

 

[ElChupacabra]

I always knew "draining the swamp" would be an epic battle...And one that we may not win...But, at least we have a fighter giving it a go...

Two points:

1. Draining the swamp: In this category I don't think Trump's done that in the sense most people would understand that term. If the definition is removing people who were part of the previous administration and shared those values, then perhaps. He's brought in all sorts of corporate insiders who are set on making it easy for businesses to fight off existing regulations which in some cases protected the public. For me government's role is to protect the public from corporate overreach. Handing the leadership of government agencies to pro business people is a dicey decision.

2. Trump as a "fighter": Trump talks tough and can be bullish about how he handles himself through negotiations, but at this level it's more nuanced because you need others to make things happen and if you're going to challenge everyone to a fight, it will be difficult to get things done. This is exactly what we're seeing now where there are impasses. How any future treaties are dealt with also comes into question if you make too many enemies. Trump may be a fighter, but he's a brawler; I'd prefer a boxer.

 

[sangha]

OMG you people sure twist things that are said....I truly hope that is not on purpose because if it is, it is so dishonest....

In any case, as I stated, the very nature of the PDB, and all aspects of it, including whom it was given to is classified...These people are breaking the law by the very nature of talking about it in any fashion...

If the bolded text was true, then you would be violating the very same laws because you are talking about it also

Maybe we can discuss this in more detail when we are sharing a cell :lol:

 

[Idiometer]

Well the one I was thinking of Jimmy Carter, certainly was and remains one. I am not sure who the other is that you considered. Never mind, I read the other posts.

Yes, Carter and Obama both worked hard, they were both very smart, and neither of them cheated on their wives. They are the type of people whose word is worth something. Unforyunately, Carter's presidency was marred by a couple of failures, and Obama moved into the White House at the height of one of our worst economic recessions.

 

[noonereal]

You're correcting me on my own opinion? How does that work, exactly?

LOL, it's what you did to me.

I simply responded in kind.

Don't like it much do you, neither did I.

 

[Master Debator]

Welcome MD....Well said, while I have my own thoughts as to where we getting to with this, and what was put into place to aid it, the end is certainly what you outline, and that is tyranny....

To be fair to myself and to real tyranny everywhere, this is tyranny with a small t. In this case the people subverting the President aren't doing so for personal gain (at least not primarily) but because they believe this President to be a moron akin to a child ruler from some Victorian era drama making edicts from his bedroom that could destabilize the world. However, instead of trying to manage him they should instead follow the law and remove him from office via the 25th. It's understandable that they would want to prevent the President from committing war crimes or withdrawing troops from war zones via tweet but there is a legal way to handle this instead of everyone pretending as if we have a sane individual leading our country.

 

[Atomic Kid]

To be fair to myself and to real tyranny everywhere, this is tyranny with a small t. In this case the people subverting the President aren't doing so for personal gain (at least not primarily) but because they believe this President to be a moron akin to a child ruler from some Victorian era drama making edicts from his bedroom that could destabilize the world. However, instead of trying to manage him they should instead follow the law and remove him from office via the 25th. It's understandable that they would want to prevent the President from committing war crimes or withdrawing troops from war zones via tweet but there is a legal way to handle this instead of everyone pretending as if we have a sane individual leading our country.

A couple points. These people swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Not to protect and defend the President and his policies. Also the removal of a sitting President is really a political process. Much more so than it is a legal process. And political processes often get messy and from what we have seen from the GOP legislators is very little in the way in terms of political will or statesmanship and integrity to want to confront or take a serious look at the conduct of the President. The complexity of the political process outlined in the 25th Amendment makes it so cumbersome that short of the President turning into a drooling and rambling maniac such an effort would be very unlikely to prevail.

 

[Master Debator]

A couple points. These people swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Not to protect and defend the President and his policies. Also the removal of a sitting President is really a political process. Much more so than it is a legal process. And political processes often get messy and from what we have seen from the GOP legislators is very little in the way in terms of political will or statesmanship and integrity to want to confront or take a serious look at the conduct of the President. The complexity of the political process outlined in the 25th Amendment makes it so cumbersome that short of the President turning into a drooling and rambling maniac such an effort would be very unlikely to prevail.

Fair points. I perhaps should have used lawful rather than legal. Removal through the 25th is a political process but it is the lawful way to take away the Presidents power. Simply ignoring his executive authority isn't and despite the difficulties associated with that process it's the one that needs to followed otherwise you undermine the authority of the Office itself. These individuals might of taken an oath to protect the country rather than the President but no one elected them and no one voted for them and they don't get to usurp the power of the President because they feel like it's the right thing to do. The constitution explains clearly what the right thing to do in this instance is.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Fair points. I perhaps should have used lawful rather than legal. Removal through the 25th is a political process but it is the lawful way to take away the Presidents power. Simply ignoring his executive authority isn't and despite the difficulties associated with that process it's the one that needs to followed otherwise you undermine the authority of the Office itself. These individuals might of taken an oath to protect the country rather than the President but no one elected them and no one voted for them and they don't get to usurp the power of the President because they feel like it's the right thing to do. The constitution explains clearly what the right thing to do in this instance is.

I don't see how it would be possible for these people to ultimately usurp the power of the President. If there is any person in recent history that came close to doing that or actually did 'usurp' some of the powers President it would have to be Dick Cheney. The best his cabinet or West Wing staff can do is to try to discourage or persuade President Trump from making what they consider to be bad decisions. But in the end if the President decides that is what he wants to do than there is really nothing they can do to stop him. And that what is what we have been seeing much more of lately.

 

[Amelia]

A couple points. These people swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Not to protect and defend the President and his policies. Also the removal of a sitting President is really a political process. Much more so than it is a legal process. And political processes often get messy and from what we have seen from the GOP legislators is very little in the way in terms of political will or statesmanship and integrity to want to confront or take a serious look at the conduct of the President. The complexity of the political process outlined in the 25th Amendment makes it so cumbersome that short of the President turning into a drooling and rambling maniac such an effort would be very unlikely to prevail.

well said

 

[Amelia]

I don't see how it would be possible for these people to ultimately usurp the power of the President. If there is any person in recent history that came close to doing that or actually did 'usurp' some of the powers President it would have to be Dick Cheney. The best his cabinet or West Wing staff can do is to try to discourage or persuade President Trump from making what they consider to be bad decisions. But in the end if the President decides that is what he wants to do than there is really nothing they can do to stop him. And that what is what we have been seeing much more of lately.

Exactly. If they're committing some crime or constitutional offense, then they can face consequences for that. If they're failing to carry out orders they are constitutionally obligated to follow, then they can face consequences for that.

They're doing the best job they know how to do in a difficult situation. Working around an inept official is not a coup. Reporting on the inept official to let the public know what is happening in the people's White House is not a coup. And I doubt that any posters who think it is a coup in any sense of the word objected to those who revealed malfeasance on the part of Obama. (I doubt that the posters even objected when anyone made up alleged malfeasance on the part of Obama without evidence.)

 

[Born Free]

Well I suppose Trump should pay attention to intelligence briefings and quit endangering America's security.

How is Trump endangering America's security????

 

[sangha]

Fair points. I perhaps should have used lawful rather than legal. Removal through the 25th is a political process but it is the lawful way to take away the Presidents power. Simply ignoring his executive authority isn't and despite the difficulties associated with that process it's the one that needs to followed otherwise you undermine the authority of the Office itself. These individuals might of taken an oath to protect the country rather than the President but no one elected them and no one voted for them and they don't get to usurp the power of the President because they feel like it's the right thing to do. The constitution explains clearly what the right thing to do in this instance is.

They are not usurping any presidential powers. They are just doing a poor job of executing his policies...intentionally. Trump can fire them if he is displeased with their job performance.

 

[jghiretire]

https://www.politicususa.com/2017/0...s-trump-read-one-page-security-briefings.html

Thread title:


Oh, irony...

 

[Vern]

Our "friend" Vern tried to pull that one on me yesterday as well.... Looks like he needs some new material. :roll:

Trix, I didnt “pull” anything. Can you please explain what you think I "pulled". Trix, this is a debate forum. I'm asking you to explain something you posted (the nerve of some people amirite?)

so in this thread I accused Jmac of believing official conservative lies. He got quite angry that I would dare accuse him of believing such ridiculous falsehoods. Which begs the point, if you get that angry about being accused of believing such ridiculous lies, why are you not angry at the liars for telling the lies? And then it begs the next question: If you know they are liars, why would you believe anything else they tell you? that’s actually thread related because Jmac is bemoaning the “deep state” conspiracy to overthrow trump.

Why do you think he continues to believe everything the same liars tell him? Anyhoo, I bet in a few years, he gets just as mad when someone accuses him of believing “deep state” conspiracies.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Pretty disappointing article by Attkinson. The allegation here is Trump is willfully ignorant, doesn't listen to the briefings, points have to be condensed to 2 or 3 sentences, he reacts angrily when the assessment differs from a public position he's taken and more.

Her defense of that is that the IC has been wrong many times in the past, and or that OBAMA!!! among others has either disregarded the IC's assessment, or that they agreed with assessments that turned out badly. Also, Clapper lied. Etc.

But that's nothing but moving the goal posts. Of course Presidents and the IC will sometimes make wrong decisions, and Presidents will act contrary to IC recommendations. But that assumes those decisions are made after listening to the IC's assessment, weighing it, and basing decisions based on other factors, also carefully considered. If the stories are true, Trump does none of that.

The article doesn't say that when POTUS decides to, say, meet with N. Korea that he's made a bad/wrong decision. What it alleges is that in general Trump barely even hears the IC's assessment of North Korea, much less considers it, because the briefings to keep his attention have to keep repeating his name and title, and points boiled down to 2 or 3 sentences, and when it contradicts what he's said publicly, he gets angry. That seems to me dangerous, especially getting angry at people offering what we have to assume is their best assessment. Worse is the allegation that some have been told not to even offer assessments that contradict Trump's public comments. Those are reckless ways to make decisions. Carefully considering and rejecting isn't necessarily even wrong, but ignoring, dismissing, not even wanting to HEAR contrary info is the worst possible way to run a country.

Anyone who doesn't bow and fawn at everything Trump says and does is a leech and part of the deep state? How can I get a cult of deaf, blind and dumb followers like this?

I'm still baffled that Trump fools anyone. The right wing media I sort of understand, and I see how Trump is useful to McConnell, et al, but I don't know how they expect non-cult people to take them seriously. I guess they don't care. Clean up and run away...

 

[j-mac]

Anyone who doesn't bow and fawn at everything Trump says and does is a leech and part of the deep state? How can I get a cult of deaf, blind and dumb followers like this?

I'm still baffled that Trump fools anyone. The right wing media I sort of understand, and I see how Trump is useful to McConnell, et al, but I don't know how they expect non-cult people to take them seriously. I guess they don't care. Clean up and run away...

Maybe instead of just insulting people you don't know, like a child, you could lay out honestly what you think trump's foreign policy is in error of? And while you're at it, how you'll respond when the next Democrat has damaging insights from briefers is leaked?

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk