Everything Trump Has Done Since Birth
Trump has become the new substitute for G.W.
Liberals always need something/someone to dislike or that makes them unhappy, such as guns, coal, oil, the wealthy, religion, lack of fairness, whatever that means etc.. You name it.
They also need someone to disparage so now they attack Trump for being a
racist yet, they are the ones who always play the race card when they campaign. Race is
everything to them. their political strategy is based on racial components of support.
We have embraced the liberal and progressive socialist philosophy from the time Wilson became president and what do we have to show for it? We have enormous annual deficits and a huge national debt, we have have recessions which have racked the middle class, we have significantly lowered our education standards, government dependency has ruined the family structure and we have an anti-religion attitude in this nation that is impacting our society and defining in a crippling way our national character. We constantly weaken our military which we then have to rebuild.
The Republicans , when they have been in power, have done little by way of standing against this Socialist tide and are certainly not blameless.
Should Trump become the Republican nominee, it will be the nastiest campaign we have seen in decades because that is what politics always comes down to - destruction of the opponent's character. Hillary and the Democrats are not above rising to the occasion, they always have. They have proven time and again they are masters at the game of viciousness and certainly Trump will match them in kind. The hypocrisy of Reid, Schumer, Pelosi etc. is well known for those who care to see.
Though it has become fashionable to attack Trump, to find nothing redeeming about him and/or his accomplishments, which are truly many, the press and media have already begun to seize the opportunity to support Hillary while trashing Trump in the hope of increasing readership and listeners. In doing so, I believe they are missing an opportunity to be objective, a word no longer important to them, and they could fall into the trap of actually increasing his support as their attacks might create a sympathetic backlash and of course we have Soros and his crowd of goons ready to assist . Whether this will propel Donald into The White House remains to be seen and we also have the unknown factor of Hillary's status regarding The FBI investigation.
As I have said before, if Republicans destroy Trump in order to select what The Establishment want, so as to distance themselves from the stench surrounding Trump's candidacy, they will go down in flames because Trump supporters are loyal and already feel aggrieved, cheated and unheard.
As for the Democrats, Hillary will probably not need the super delegates to capture the nomination and Bernie is not going to buck his party so there will not be a great deal of blood on the floor of their convention unless The FBI concludes she is what most believe she is - a liar, a crook who is above the law.
I believe Trump has proven The Establishment is deaf and do not know what to do about him which really means they do not know how to answer the fiery mood their own failures have helped create and which has consumed them.
If truth be told, neither party exists at the Presidential level any more. Democrats have become totally Socialistic, have cut all ties to identifying with The Constitutional America which de Tocqueville described in his: "Democracy in America" or for that matter Joe Churba in his: "Retreat From Freedom."
The Republican Party, at the presidential level, also left their principles on the cutting floor of Congress and have fractured leaving those they trapped into believing they meant what they said, in dismay.
The party system's failures have contributed to weakening our nation as their members place re-election above their focus, obligation and commitment to the nation. Where this leaves us, as we face real threats to our freedoms both from within and without, is anyone's guess.
Frankly, I believe, after Obama, the ability of any mortal to govern is going to be virtually impossible because so much of what happens will be beyond their control - ISIS, Russia, Iran and China will see to that. Why anyone in their right mind would want the job of president is beyond me and this makes me suspect of any candidate, even one I might personally want to support.
What a mess we are in and the way out is fraught with even more uncertainty and thorns.
I am not a defeatist but there are times when realism can be overwhelming. (See 1 and 1a below.)
===Anti-Semitism takes many forms. Some more subtle and intellectual than others but the hatred is still there. You just have to dig a little deeper and connect a few more dots.
Remaining silent in the face of it is understandable because often one's first reaction is denial because we prefer tranquility, we do not want to offend and we wish to avoid confrontation. This is a big mistake because when you feed bullies with silence, when you allow ignorance to occupy the stage it encourages hatred appetites to grow and they will. Eventually you will be forced to confront a bigger enemy and the task only gets more difficult.
You are welcome to visit the graves of the silent dead but they can no longer tell you how they got there. The task is left to historians and who reads about history anymore? (See 2 below.)
===
Dick
========================================================================
1)What The Media Miss About Trump's Appeal
By Charles Lipson
Television, radio, print publications, and podcasts have spent thousands of hours describing Donald Trump’s spectacular rise—and his dominance of the Republican primaries. So you might think his appeal has been thoroughly explained. Not so.
What’s been well covered is his populist allure, his nativist bombast, his blunt statements and swaggering threats, his vast riches, and, of course, his ability to surprise and entertain. That’s all accurate. So is his appeal to a dark undercurrent of voter resentment and anxiety, what historian Richard Hofstadter once called the “Paranoid Style in American Politics.”
What’s missing, then? The public’s sense that, whatever Trump’s failings, he is actually competent. That’s a compelling proposition to many Americans, who don’t think Washington bureaucrats or bloviating senators could organize a two-car funeral.
These voters look past the gale-force winds of The Donald’s hot air. They believe that he knows exactly what he is doing and that his impressive record of accomplishments proves it. They see his office buildings, golf courses, and apartment towers and conclude he can smash through Washington’s gridlock.
Trump can manage tough, complicated projects and complete them. If his managers don’t get the job done, he’ll fire them. He won’t just talk about negotiating a tough deal, as President Obama or John Kerry do. He’ll use leverage effectively, hold his cards close, and wring every last nickel out of a deal.
With characteristic marketing savvy, Trump has turned his wealth from a liability into an asset. His money didn’t come from financial sleight-of-hand, as did that of some Wall Street bankers. It came from building stuff people wanted. That, his voters say, proves he can deliver the goods. And that’s exactly what they want in Washington.
What they don’t want is more corporate lobbying, earmarks, and insider deals. Trump has effectively exploited this revulsion, saying his billions insulate him from Washington’s sweetheart deals, which favor special interests at the expense of average folks.
That’s Trump’s own narrative. Many voters buy it and find it a welcome contrast to the stumbling incompetence and self-dealing they see from their government every day.
This powerful element of Trump’s appeal has been hiding in plain sight. Voters haven’t forgotten Washington’s countless fiascos. They know, too, that hardly anyone in government is ever fired or held to account. They shudder at the costly, disastrous rollout of Obamacare and the lethal mess at veterans’ hospitals. They remember the bungling after Hurricane Katrina, capped by George Bush congratulating his Federal Emergency Management chief for a job well done. They remember Bush and his intelligence chief saying Iraq absolutely, positively had weapons of mass destruction and then compounding their mistake by launching a massive invasion with no plans to stabilize the country after overthrowing Saddam Hussein. They saw the same chaos erupt in Libya after NATO chased out Muammar Gaddafi and his thugs. Nobody bothered to think what would happen next.
To Trump voters, U.S. Mideast policy under Democrats and Republicans alike is akin to building apartment towers without installing elevators—or, rather, leaving empty elevator shafts where stairwells should be—with equally disastrous results.
They saw a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans killed in Benghazi, followed by the administration’s repeated false claims they were killed in a riot sparked by an Internet video. No one, except the filmmaker, was held to account. They saw an American president draw a red line in Syria, saying America would act decisively if Bashar al-Assad’s regime used chemical weapons. When such weapons were used, America did nothing. They saw vacuous promises to roll back Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea. The list goes on and on.
Everybody, it seems, gets shuffled into a different government job, pockets a bonus and pay raise, and eventually becomes a lobbyist. This dismal record of incompetence and corruption is bipartisan. Primary voters in both parties know it, and they feel betrayed by it.
A big part of Trump’s appeal is his promise to stop this marathon of malfeasance. That’s a compelling message when Americans have a palpable sense of national decline and believe their government is failing to meet its core responsibilities. With a bittersweet slogan printed on his cap, Donald Trump promises to reverse all that and “make America great again.”
Many voters look at his business record and think it’s not an empty promise. His political future depends on how well it withstands the harsh scrutiny soon to come from Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Hillary Clinton, and an American media that, so far, has missed a central feature of Trump’s appeal.
1a)
Clinton tried to change rules to use BlackBerry in secure facility for classified information
Less than a month after becoming secretary of state, and registering the personal email domain that she would use exclusively for government business, Hillary Clinton’s team aggressively pursued changes to existing State Department security protocols so she could use her BlackBerry in secure facilities for classified information, according to new documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.
“Anyone who has any appreciation at all of security, you don’t ask a question like that,” cybersecurity analyst Morgan Wright told Fox News. “It is contempt for the system, contempt for the rules that are designed to protect the exact kind of information that was exposed through this email set up. “
Current and former intelligence officials grimaced when asked by Fox News about the use of wireless communications devices, such as a BlackBerry, in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) emphasizing its use would defeat the purpose of the secure facility, and it is standard practice to leave all electronics outside.
A former State Department employee familiar with the Clinton request emphasized security personnel at the time thought the BlackBerry was only for unclassified material, adding their concerns would have been magnified if they had known Clinton's email account also held classified material.
“When you allow devices like this into a SCIF, you can allow the bad guys to listen in,” Wright added.
A February 17, 2009 email marked SECRET and cleared through the NSA says, “Ms. Mills described the requirement as chiefly driven by Secretary Clinton, who does not use standard computer equipment but relies exclusively on her Blackberry for emailing and remaining in contact on her schedule etc. Ideally all members of her suite would be allowed to use Blackberries for communication in the SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility)”
Cheryl Mills was Clinton’s chief of staff from 2009-13.
The emails, obtained by Judicial Watch as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit also show that a specialized NSA team was brought in to assess the vulnerabilities and feasibility of using wireless communications, including within a secure facility.
The NSA State Department liaison, whose name was withheld, told Mills in a now highly redacted email: “Sometimes the distinction between what can be done and what is, or is not, recommended to be done differ; this is one of those instances. (State Department Diplomatic Security) DS’s response illustrates their level of concern based on their extensive professional expertise. “
Another memo from March 2009, obtained by Judicial Watch through its FOIA lawsuit, from Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Eric Boswell to Mills explicitly warned, “the vulnerabilities and risks associated with the use of Blackberries in Mahogany Row [seventh floor executive offices] considerably outweigh their convenience.” Clinton has claimed she used the personal account and BlackBerry for convenience.
Clinton never used a State Department issued BlackBerry. It is not clear from the documents whether Clinton and her team went ahead and used their BlackBerrys in SCIFs despite the concerns, including those of the NSA. Though a state department official said "no waiver allowing PDAs within Mahogany Row was granted.".
A February 18 2009 email from the State Department’s Senior Coordinator for Security Infrastructure, Donald R. Reid, states “…once she (Clinton) got the hang of it, she was hooked, now every day, she feels hamstrung because she has to lock up her BB up. She does go out several times a day to an office they have crafted for her outside the SCIF and plays email catch-up. Cheryl Mills and others who are dedicated BB addicts are frustrated because they too are not near their desktop very often during the working day…”
The reference to a secondary office for Clinton appears to conflict with a February statement from the State Department that no stand-alone computer was set up outside Clinton’s main office on the executive floor, known as Mahogany Row, to check her personal account.
On February 25, Fox News pressed the State Department spokesman about a January 2009 email, also obtained by Judicial Watch, between Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy and then Clinton chief of staff Mills where Kennedy said it was a “great idea” to setup a stand-alone PC for Clinton to check her email.
The State Department said Wednesday no computer was set up but confirmed there was a space created to accommodate Clinton's personal email use. "There is an area dedicated to supporting the secretary outside but in the immediate vicinity of the secretary's secure office. Secretary Clinton, as with anyone, could use such non-SCIF spaces to check personal devices.," a State Department official said.
Clinton did not use a government-issued BlackBerry that was certified as secure for government use. Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy recently told the Benghazi Select Committee that he knew about Clinton's personal account from the earliest days, but did not understand the extent of its use, even though he sent State Department business to Clinton via the Clintonemail account.
In January 2009, Clinton signed at least two non-disclosure agreements in which she promised to protect classified information. Since then, more than 2,100 emails containing classified information have been identified, as well as 22 Top Secret that are too damaging to national security to release.
Earlier this week, Judicial Watch presented the federal court in Washington with a list of 7 Clinton aides it wants to question under oath about Clinton’s use of a private email sever when she was secretary of state.
=======================================================================2)
No comments:
Post a Comment