President Trump- The Implications

[guido911]

He said he wasn't aware. What exactly is his role with the IC since Trump became president?

That's your response? Asking a question? But since you obviously have more information than Brennan does, we will rely on you.

[guido911]

And so I am clear, I do not know what Trump or his staff knew or did re: Russia. My "beef" is largely just the immense hypocrisy being exhibited by Swake, the media, and others when it comes to this entire thing. Freakin Obama told Russia after the 2012 election he would have more flexibility.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsFR8DbSRQE

To me, that is way more concerning than any of this Russia disclosing Hillary's and DNC's emails those people drafted. Or that Trump benefited or not from those disclosures. And Hillary's Russian uranium deal? That bothers me too. But hell, I have not become singularly obsessed with this stuff because I do not believe for one damned minute that Hillary, Obama, or Trump are/were working with "the enemy" to destroy this country.

[swake]

That's your response? Asking a question? But since you obviously have more information than Brennan does, we will rely on you.

You seem upset.

[swake]

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats would not comment during a Senate Armed Services hearing Tuesday on the Washington Post report that he was asked by President Trump to push back on the FBI probe into Russia-Trump campaign links.

Asked if by Armed Services Chair John McCain (R-AZ) if the Post report was accurate, Coats said he did not feel it was "appropriate to characterize discussions and conversations with the president."

"I have always believed that given the nature of my position and the information which we share, it is not appropriate for me to comment publicly on any of that," Coats said.

The top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) followed up on the report and asked specifically about its revelation that other White House officials reached out to the intelligence community seeking that the investigation into former National Security Advisor Mike Flynn be dropped.

"I am not aware of that," Coats said.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) asked if Coats would turn over to former FBI Director Robert Mueller, who has been appointed special counsel in the FBI's probe,  any memos he had documenting conversations with Trump regarding the Russia investigation, to which Coats replied that he had no such documents.

She then asked if he would testify in front of the Senate Intel Committee for their Russia investigation.

"I do believe the information, the discussions that I have with the president are something that should not be disclosed," Coats said. "On the other hand, if I am called before a investigative committee, I will certainly provide them with what I know and what I don't know."

Coats went on to say, when asked by Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-MN), that he would be forthcoming with Mueller on the details about his conversations with Trump about the Russia probe if Mueller sought those details.

Towards the end of the hearing, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) asked Coats if he discussed with National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers — who was also reported by the Washington Post to have received a request from Trump to push back on the Russia probe — efforts by Trump to "stifle" the investigation.

After a long silence, Coats dodged the question.

"That is something that, I, um would like to withhold, that question at this particular time," he said.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/coats-report-russa-probe-request

[guido911]

You seem upset.

Upset? I prefer to appear balanced, well adjusted, and non-obsessed. You know (or you don't), normal.

[guido911]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/coats-report-russa-probe-request

Wow. Talking Points Memo? Couldn't find a a Daily Kos source? Bet your azz if I linked to a Breitbart article you would accept that as something meaningful.

[swake]

Upset? I prefer to appear balanced, well adjusted, and non-obsessed. You know (or you don't), normal.

Sure thing Hannity

[swake]

Wow. Talking Points Memo? Couldn't find a a Daily Kos source? Bet your azz if I linked to a Breitbart article you would accept that as something meaningful.

it's a transcript.

[guido911]

Sure thing Hannity

Back at ya Maddow. That person is almost as obsessed with Russia as you are.

[Red Arrow]

Maddow was on Colbert's hate Trump fest last night.  She supposedly has the #1 show of her sort now.

[rebound]

And so I am clear, I do not know what Trump or his staff knew or did re: Russia. My "beef" is largely just the immense hypocrisy being exhibited by Swake, the media, and others when it comes to this entire thing. Freakin Obama told Russia after the 2012 election he would have more flexibility.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsFR8DbSRQE

To me, that is way more concerning than any of this Russia disclosing Hillary's and DNC's emails those people drafted. Or that Trump benefited or not from those disclosures. And Hillary's Russian uranium deal? That bothers me too. But hell, I have not become singularly obsessed with this stuff because I do not believe for one damned minute that Hillary, Obama, or Trump are/were working with "the enemy" to destroy this country.

You know, I don't really have a major issue with your position here, but I'll rebut just a bit for the sake of argument.

First off, so that I completely open here, I viscerally cannot stand Donald Trump.  That has nothing (directly) to do with his political positions, etc, he is simply the kind of person that I immediately dislike, and so my opinion of everything he does is clouded by that innate emotional response.   Still, even with that, I had expected (hoped?) that he was smart enough to moderate his demeanor once he became president.  Somehow, to become "Presidential".  So far, that hasn't happened.  But I'm trying to separate the person that is Trump from President Trump.  (I am really, really, trying...)

The major difference, as I perceive it, between Trump and Obama or Hillary, is not policy.  Heck, we can debate policy all day.  It is simply that I don't think that he understands, or cares to understand, statecraft.   Obama and Hillary, for both good and bad, understand politics and how to play the long game.  Trump simply doesn't, and his very nature is set against that kind of thinking.  He is a deal maker.  He thinks in terms of immediacy and near-term goals, to the exclusion of long-term gain. I get it.  I understand it.  I just don't think it is the best way for a President to go about business.

When Obama said "I'll have more flexibility..."  that was a power play.  Basically, "let me get elected and then we can negotiate".  Again, long-term thinking.  Trump didn't tell the Russians "let me get elected".  He said "hey, you got any dirt on Hillary that would benefit me".  (OK, paraphrasing, but that is pretty much what he said.)  Trump encouraged the Russians to interfere in the election for his personal short-term gain.

And, full disclosure, I don't like the Uranium deal either.  But that is much more nuanced than anything Trump has done.  Actually, that's very Reagan-esque.  Saint Ronnie (and I actually like most of what Reagan did) made deals that were definitely illegal, but that were designed (wrongly or rightly) to have a long-term gain for the US as a whole.  Same with the Uranium deal.

The gist is that while I can disagree with Reagan, Bush, Obama, and Hillary, I am certain that regardless of the specifics of a position they had understanding of the long-term ramifications of their position.  Trump?  Not so much.  I simply don't think he has the intellect or the emotional fortitude to think past the immediate deal.

So, TLDR,  the difference is that Trump, whether I agree with a specific policy or position,  simply doesn't understand what he's doing.   I rather have "the devil  you know" over a loose canon any day.

[Red Arrow]

I rather have "the devil  you know" over a loose canon any day.

A lot of people wanted something else, and they got it.

Remember the MASH episode where everyone was tired of (I believe) liver for dinner.  The dinner chant was "We want something else."  Unfortunately, I don't remember what they did get but it was a let down.

Edit:
Easier to find than I thought.  It was the Adam's Ribs episode.  They were tired of liver and fish. 
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0638244/quotes

[guido911]

[swake]

According to the CBO report out today the Trumpcare plan that was passed in the house would take away insurance from 23 million people

How does it do that?
$834 billion in cuts to Medicaid
$276 billion in cuts to healthcare subsidies
Those amounts are offset by $117 billion spent to reduce premiums for a net cut of $993 billion in healthcare spending for the poor and middle class

What is done with that money?
$210 billion dollars in no penalties to employers or individuals for not offering/carrying insurance
$119 billion in deficit reduction
$664 billion tax cut to the top 2% of taxpayers

[Hoss]

According to the CBO report out today the Trumpcare plan that was passed in the house would take away insurance from 23 million people

How does it do that?
$834 billion in cuts to Medicaid
$276 billion in cuts to healthcare subsidies
Those amounts are offset by $117 billion spent to reduce premiums for a net cut of $993 billion in healthcare spending for the poor and middle class

What is done with that money?
$210 billion dollars in no penalties to employers or individuals for not offering/carrying insurance
$119 billion in deficit reduction
$664 billion tax cut to the top 2% of taxpayers

I'm waiting for the counselor's crying about being biased against rich people....