Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Trump and his cabinet/buffoonery- Get your bunkers ready!


brandymac27

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

"Knowing" in the public sphere and "knowing" in the intelligence community are two very different things.  The CIA said nothing firm prior to the election because they didn't have enough.

 

Don't get me wrong, there was a ton of circumstantial evidence that Russia favored Trump, an unbelievable amount of it.  But there's a difference between circumstantial evidence and direct evidence.  It appears the CIA recently gained the latter while previously only having the former.

 

It's like the difference between placing an alleged murderer at the scene of the crime, with a motive, and with no one else around (circumstantial) and finding the gun they used with the alleged murderers fingerprints and maybe some of the victim's blood on it (direct).  The former might be enough to convict, but the latter is, well, a smoking gun.

 

From what has been said by those briefed it comes down to the CIA inferring it from the evidence ,while the FBI sees no clear evidence Russia was behind it.

They use different disciplines and the FBI prefers not to guess (as you saw in the Hillary server mess)

From what I read the RNC was not hacked, but rather some affiliated.

 

Russia has been playing games here for a long time and even hacked the White House about 4 yrs ago 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

McFarland’s theatrical performance might have been lighthearted, but its breezy and simplistic tone underscores why national security experts in both parties worry she is unqualified for what national security veterans say is among the hardest — and most important — jobs at the White House. McFarland, whose initials stand for Kathleen Troia, has not worked in government since the mid-1980s. Her main occupation for the past decade was as a national security analyst for Fox News, where her contract ended this fall.

 

Her appointment, announced in late November, has fueled concerns that Trump is not taking seriously enough the need for a top-flight foreign policy team at a moment of high global instability.

 

Though less visible than the national security adviser, a job for which Trump has picked retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the National Security Council’s principal deputy carries an even more crushing workload, NSC veterans say. Coordinating the government’s foreign policy, intelligence and national security arms is a herculean task requiring endless hours of meetings among deputy officials who develop policy options for cabinet and agency chiefs, and the president himself, to consider.

 

“The schedule is relentless. It’s incredibly exhausting. You are under constant pressure to respond to events and breaking news in real time,” says Juleanne Smith, a former national security adviser to Vice President Joe Biden.

 

Quote

McFarland, 65, last worked in government three decades ago, as a public affairs official in Ronald Reagan’s Pentagon. In 2006, she mounted an improbable bid for Hillary Clinton’s New York Senate seat that ended in a GOP primary drubbing. She then became a paid commentator for Fox News, which people who know McFarland said was her springboard onto Trump’s team.

 

McFarland’s stock may also have been boosted by her friendship with her onetime boss, former national security adviser and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who has spoken to Trump several times.

 

“I have very high regard for her. Her knowledge of international affairs has developed in all the years I’ve known her,” Kissinger said in a brief phone interview. “She has a strong personality, but with great tact and personal skill, which is needed to handle the inherently complex relationships of a White House.” Kissinger said he recently met with Flynn and McFarland for two hours.

 

But many of those who are skeptical of the McFarland appointment — a group that includes NSC officials of both parties, speaking to POLITICO under condition of anonymity — dismiss the fabled Kissinger’s praise as loyalty to an old friend and a nod to the reality of her new influence.

And you thought Samantha Power was under-qualified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, twa said:

 

From what has been said by those briefed it comes down to the CIA inferring it from the evidence ,while the FBI sees no clear evidence Russia was behind it.

They use different disciplines and the FBI prefers not to guess (as you saw in the Hillary server mess)

From what I read the RNC was not hacked, but rather some affiliated.

 

Russia has been playing games here for a long time and even hacked the White House about 4 yrs ago 

I want to point out that even if Russia did hack the DNC with the intent on influencing the election and succeeded in that effort  there is no action that can be taken against the results of the election. The US can take action against Russia (even if there is no proof - not saying there isn't any  - but a nation state always can act against other nation states if feel it is in their interests  - ie what Russia may have done to us - what the Japanese did do to us 75 years ago etc. - if they are willing to deal with the consequences of said actions) .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Walsh so super pro-Trump before the election. It was like he was applying for a gig with him. "Trump loves this Country, Obama and Clinton hate it...". 

 

Now that Trump won and the market for people like him to be anti-gov from the right wing is going to drop because people don't tune into hear folks defend their guy. They want to be angry at somebody else. He's switching sides Sorry Joe. This isn't the WWE.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...