You better watch out You better not gripe Don’t throw shade I’m telling you why POTUS can take your access away
He’s making a list Checking it twice If you want more secrets, you gotta be nice POTUS can take your access away
He knows when you are tweeting He knows when you’re on-air He knows when you have dissed him So for goodness sake don’t dare
<ends with first verse again>
Hey, Mr Brennan, I agree with you, "Helsinki" was a total disgrace, but I wouldn't have gone so far as to use the "T" word. I wouldn't have said "Treason." Catch ya' later, dude.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-16-2018).]
Well, I'm going to be serious (or semi-serious) for a moment.
No. I did not mean to say Media Created Kerfluffle. And--just in case there is any confusion--I did not say Trump Created Kerfluffle. I said (and say) Trump Related Kerfluffle.
When I think about the reasons that I voted for the Bottle Blonde Woman--the Biatch--this comes right to the top:
I want a POTUS that is media savvy. It is incumbent upon the POTUS--and incumbent upon a candidate for POTUS--to understand the media, and to understand, ahead of time, what the media is going to do with any significant public statement or utterance from the POTUS or his administration. How the media is going to react. What direction the media is going to take. What the media is going to focus on, and emphasize, and put forward as the lead story.
The Helsinki meeting with Vladimir Putin? Big screwup for Trump. His "base" may have liked it, but I don't think that he is getting enough mileage out of it with his base to outweigh the damage that was done to the Trump "brand" with everyone outside of his base. The additional damage to the Trump brand, over and above any and all damage that was already realized before Helsinki.
I don't want to turn this into another long, "rinselberg" style, book chapter masquerading as an Off Topic message. So I will be very summary. He was too chummy with Putin in Helsinki. I would not have wanted him to be unnecessarily provocative or "rough" with Putin. I wouldn't have wanted him to risk starting a nuclear war, or anything like that.
Trump should have aimed for a middle ground. "The U.S., under my watch, is not going to tolerate any foreign interference in our democracy, and in our elections. Period."
He didn't have to call out the Russians, or point his finger directly at Putin.
If Trump did say anything like that, it didn't come through to me. I think it's because--and this reflects my desire to keep this forum message short and summary--Trump was too deferential to Putin at Helsinki. Trump's body language. The ambiguous statements from Trump's own microphone. The way he expressed his distinctly lukewarm appreciation for the U.S. intelligence community and their assertions about Russian interference in the 2016 elections, at the same time that he said (in so many words) "President Putin, who is standing just across from me, made a very powerful denial of Russian interference in the 2016 elections."
So, former CIA director John Brennan--Obama's CIA director--throws shade at Trump in the aftermath of the Helsinki meeting. Understandable. But--and I said this in my original or very first message--Brennan went too far when he used "Treason" or "Treasonous". He didn't exactly say that he thought that Trump was literally a traitor, or a perpetuator of the crime of Treason. But just to use that word--the "T" word--in any connection with his criticisms of the President--that was going too far. With that, Brennan made it that much easier for the President to revoke Brennan's security clearance(s).
I will cut it off right here. At least, for the moment.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-16-2018).]
I would say that President Trump's is, by a huge margin, the most media savvy President this country has ever had. He lives in the head of every Liberal MSM pundit, rent-free, (actually the anguish he puts them through could be equated to THEM paying HIM) and totally controls the conversation via Twitter. He's a step (or six) ahead of them at every turn. The more they attack him, the better his approval ratings become, and the attackers market-share declines.
As to the Helsinki meeting, the tone was perfect. He was deferential only because that is how you start a conversation with an adversary.
I don't want to overload you with simple logic, but if Trump is a Putin 'puppet' (as the MSM extolls), then why has Trump placed sanctions on Russia that are absolutely crippling their economy?
Unlike the previous Administration, there has been no 'Reset' button, no failure to enforce 'red lines', no defunding of our military, no softening of NATO excercises....
I've mentioned this before...you really should expand your base of information to include sources that may make you 'queasy'.
That is what thinking people do.
[This message has been edited by olejoedad (edited 08-17-2018).]
Well John Brennan got his access And he knew all the spies He was a ‘company’ man, spouting CIA lies, It was Clear As A Bell, No Ifs Ands Or Buts After Helsinki, John hated Trump’s guts
And he had fun fun fun ’Til the POTUS took his clearance away
Needs some work. I won't even try for a second verse.
I still don't see how anyone (or country) interfered with the election.. we were just shown what was already there and needed to be seen. How does showing the truth interfere? Oh wait...it Must be the snowflake logic that escapes me.
Edit to add: I always forget "truth" is a snowflake curse word (so is job, responsibly, winner, white, etc)
[This message has been edited by sardonyx247 (edited 09-20-2018).]
The Russians were involved in the theft and then the selective public disclosures of emails from the DNC and Hillary's campaign manager, John Podesta.
But not any emails from the RNC, or from any of Trump's campaign managers.
Describing that as "showing the truth" is misleading. How about "revealing some particular parts of 'the truth' that the Russian government wanted to publicize."
Truth is never as wholesome to the body politic as the Whole Truth.
The record shows that - Podesta fell for a phishing scam and granted access to his computer, and then the DNC network by opening the phishing email. - Debbie Wasserman Schultz had Pakistani IT guys (who were crooks) servicing her and other Democratic politicians' computers. The IT guys are under investigation for a wide range of charges, including bank fraud. - The DNC refused the help of the FBI to harden their system, the RNC accepted the help of the FBI
Describing that as "showing the truth" is misleading. How about "revealing some particular parts of 'the truth' that the Russian government wanted to publicize."
Truth is never as wholesome to the body politic as the Whole Truth.
Seeing a documented, compulsive LIAR like you try to lecture anyone about truth is both hilarious and sad.
It's like Nazi SS Dr. Josef Mengele lecturing on medical ethics.
Originally posted by olejoedad: The record shows that - Podesta fell for a phishing scam and granted access to his computer, and then the DNC network by opening the phishing email. - Debbie Wasserman Schultz had Pakistani IT guys (who were crooks) servicing her and other Democratic politicians' computers. The IT guys are under investigation for a wide range of charges, including bank fraud. - The DNC refused the help of the FBI to harden their system, the RNC accepted the help of the FBI
Sorry rinse, but stupid can't be fixed.....
Good points, all. This is material that should be part of the Special Counsel's report. The report that is (putatively) forthcoming.
These are points that will likely come up in the lawsuit that the DNC has filed, over the 2016 election. Points that will (likely) be brought up by the other side in that lawsuit... the lawyers representing the Trump/Republican side.
This doesn't cancel or negate what I last said. It adds to what I said.
It''s not the first that I have "heard" about the phishing scam, or the IT group from Pakistan. FBI... hardening... that's something that I don't remember running into before.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 09-21-2018).]
I am interested in what the Special Counsel--Robert Mueller--has been saying, and whatever it is that he could say next.
What the Democrats are saying, and campaigning on... not so much, in so far as these Special Counsel investigation and investigation-related topics.
Aside from a series of indictments, and guilty pleas and cooperating witness agreements, the Special Counsel has hardly said anything for the public record. Hardly even a word, that I am aware of.
The indictments have been characterized as "speaking" indictments by the crowd that shows up regularly on MSNBC.
The one thing that Mueller has not done is to level any accusations against President Trump himself, or any members of his family. Not Donald Trump, Jr. Not Eric Trump. Not Ivanka Trump. Not son-in-law Jared Kushner. And (just for the record here) not Melania Trump or Barron Trump.
I am waiting for whatever comes next from Special Counsel Mueller, with an open mind. I have already speculated in this forum about what that could be, but I don't think that any kind of outcome would surprise me--including a finding, in the form of a report to Congress, that President Trump and all of his family members are in the clear. They "dindu nuffin."
In the meantime, I hope not to irritate or anger my fellow Pennock's members any more than is necessary for me to satisfy my Minimum Weekly Requirement to "post" on this forum.
I think I've actually cut back on my provocations, compared to the "heady" times that I enjoyed last year, immediately after the appointment of the Special Counsel, on May 15, 2017. Then I was "all over" Michael Flynn, as that story was developing.
It would be a dullsville kind of forum if everyone had the same perspectives and reactions about "what's goin' down" with respect to the current President.
Does anyone want a dullsville kind of forum?
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 09-21-2018).]
I still don't see how anyone (or country) interfered with the election.. we were just shown what was already there and needed to be seen. How does showing the truth interfere? Oh wait...it Must be the snowflake logic that escapes me.
I think the Russians, the Chinese and many other countries and groups are always trying to undermine us, slow us down and disrupt American society. The last election cycle and the current one are not substantially different than many which came before. Each of us has a responsibility to find the truth before making a decision.
