Trump versus National Security

Uncategorized 1 Minute
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/after-a-congressional-briefing-on-election-threats-trump-soured-on-acting-spy-chief/2020/02/20/1ed2b4ec-53f1-11ea-b119-4faabac6674f_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_evening_edition&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_evening

The current acting-Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire is being removed to be replaced by a Trump loyalist. What did Trump-appointed Maguire do wrong? Easy. His staff briefed the House Intelligence Committee on the continuing efforts by Russia to interfere with the 2020 election.

Let this sink in. If your efforts to protect this country leads to facts that Trump does not like, out you go. No wonder people like Mattis, Kelly and Tillerson are gone and their vital functions are now being “handled” by hacks. Partisan hacks being in these positions is a real danger to the security and safety of this country.

Published by Paul Murphy

Published

21 thoughts on “Trump versus National Security”

  2. So Maguire fulfills his duties by having the Intelligence Committee briefed properly on goings on, Trump fires him, appoints a temporary director who is also the Ambassador to Germany (where he has been less than diplomatic) AND the special envoy to Bosnia-Herzegovina (the new King of Multi-tasking) and now considers someone who has made claims against intelligence agencies (without proof, of course) the nominee to be confirmed by the Senate.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/483996-trump-considering-doug-collins-as-nominee-for-director-of-national

    Being an optimist, I see this as a good thing. Collins gets the post, is no longer in the House, drops his run for Senate, and will be gone in a year. I’m actually good wit that.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  3. The WAPO story isn’t credible because all the key details come from anonymous sources. In substance, the story is gossip. Let the old women be shocked.

    Like

    Reply

    3. @Roberts

      Do not confuse “anonymous” with “unknown.” The WAPO reporters know very well who is describing the events. And, they know that these sources are in a position to know what they are talking about. They remain anonymous to make it harder for Trump to figure out whose loyalty is growing shaky.

      On a side note, do you never wonder why so many of the people close to Trump – people he put in place – are so eager to tell reporters what is going on no matter how ugly? Is he such a poor manager that – try as he might – he is incapable of inspiring others? Maybe abuse, threats and fear are not the best management techniques? What do you think?

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. RE: “Do not confuse ‘anonymous’ with ‘unknown.'”

        I don’t. Neither do I confuse “known” with “true.”

        RE: “What do you think?”

        Trump seems like an effective manager to me. I’m impressed at how he and his team continue to achieve stated objectives despite obstacles their opponents create.

        I’m comfortable with letting the man do his job.

        Like

        Reply

        1. @Roberts

          There is ZERO reason to believe that WAPO journalists are creating fake sources. They are doing what journalists have always done – provide a channel for people in the government to get information to the public. This is nothing new. If they report that Trump threw a hissy fit at acting-DNI Maguire, then it is overwhelmingly probable that they received reports that such a fit was thrown. Now, if Trump’s inner circle are telling lies to make him look bad, that too is a problem.

          Liked by 3 people

          Reply

  4. “There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump,” McCarthy said, the Post reported, citing a recording it obtained of the conversation. Dana Rohrabacher is a Republican congressman from California known for his staunchly pro-Russia views.

    “When some of his audience laughed at the comments, McCarthy added: “Swear to God,” the Post reported.”

    “Ryan reportedly ended the conversation and insisted those present to not discuss it with the press.”

    “This is an off the record,” Ryan told staffers, laughing. “NO LEAKS…alright?! This is how we know we’re a real family here.”

    Rep. Steve Scalise, the majority whip, chimed in: “That’s how you know that we’re tight.”

    “What’s said in the family stays in the family,” Ryan said.”

    https://www.businessinsider.com/kevin-mccarthy-trump-putin-paying-2017-5

    In light of recent developments, that little tidbit seems to be much more relevant.

    Either Trump is so engrossed in soothing his insecure ego regarding the legitimacy of his election win or he is so indebted to Russian and former Soviet Bloc oligarchs for financing his ventures that he will make decisions that risk our national security.

    And these situations are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

    Meanwhile, Trump will surround himself with sycophants, raise fears of “savage animals” crossing the border, try to outlaw abortion and/or birth control, destroy our air and waters and pardon his close criminal associates who obey “omertà”.

    We have the makings of a great movie.

    IMHO

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  6. And the liberal ridiculousness continues. Does anyone really not know that you brief your boss first before whispering in Schitt’s ear? There is more to this story than is being released.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Perhaps you are correct about there being more to the story. I surmise that Mick Mulvaney was briefed by the Intel community, knew the boss didn’t want to hear it, and told them not to brief Trump on the facts and analysis. THen they fulfilled their responsibilities and duties by briefing COngress.

      The Congressional briefing is a requirement and regardless of whether Trump likes the news or not, the Intel folks did their duties.

      Apparently oversight is a four-letter word in trump land.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. I have to ask, exactly what military did you serve in and how long? You know as well as I that Schitt is one of THE most partisan jackasses In Congress. I surmise that is why you rush to that putrid worm’s defense. I just haven’t thought to identify a suitable moniker for Murphy yet. Cheers…

        Like

        Reply

Leave a comment