Title: Donald Trump Weakens State Dept As Vladimir Putin Would Want Source:
YouTube URL Source:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzYjebmHlPM Published:Mar 9, 2017 Author:TRMS/MSNBC Post Date:2017-03-09 09:44:17 by Willie Green Keywords:None Views:20441 Comments:152
Why should Trump have to work with Obama appointees?
They're not partisan appointees. They're career staffers who span multiple administrations.
Trump is damaging the State Department Infrastrucure... the Institutional Memory that provides stability, congruity & continuity to our foreign policy.
They're not partisan appointees. They're career staffers who span multiple administrations.
Some are partisan appointees while the majority are not….but they are worse than partisan appointees.
They are confirmed loyal diehard “card carrying” Democrats whose employment span multiple administrations and need to be "drained from the swamp.”
Records show that of the roughly $2 million that federal workers from 14 agencies spent on presidential politics by the end of September [2016], about $1.9 million, or 95 percent, went to the Democratic nominee’s campaign.
Employees at all the agencies analyzed, without exception, are sending their campaign contributions overwhelmingly to Clinton over her Republican counterpart.
Several agencies, such as the State Department, which Clinton once led, saw more than 99 percent of contributions going to Clinton.”
HUNDREDS of ways,just like every other national leader meddles in the politics of every other government on the planet in order to seek better deals for his or her own nation.
#33. To: sneakypete, ConservingFreedom, Willie Green, Vicomte13, TooConservative (#32)
"How exactly Putin meddles in American politics?
HUNDREDS of ways,just like every other national leader meddles in the politics of every other government on the planet in order to seek better deals for his or her own nation.
It's a prime part of the job.
I know, but I expected something more spectacular - like Russian hackers falsifying American elections or at least putting some stuff in Mrs Clinton's coffee to make her say stupid things during her presidential campaign.
I know, but I expected something more spectacular - like Russian hackers falsifying American elections or at least putting some stuff in Mrs Clinton's coffee to make her say stupid things during her presidential campaign.
Clearly, the Xlinton campaign was totally inept at computer security. Their own fault, particularly Podesta's emails. Their errors were pretty much self-inflicted.
To the extent that the Russians "hacking" (i.e. revealing that the DNC stacked the deck against Bernie, the true disparaging opinions of Xlinton insiders like Podesta toward their own voters) affected the election, it was because the voters had accurate info about the candidate and how much she and the Xlinton gang despised pretty much everyone.
As SoS, Hitlery did meddle in Vlad's 2011 election, more to delegitimize his inevitable election rather than a serious attempt to unseat him. So Vlad was, in many ways, trying to return the favor to her. We should not too readily dismiss a certain Russian habit of revenge for perceived insulting behavior.
I don't think the Russians ever imagined, any more than anyone else in the West, that Trump would actually beat Hillary. I do think that Vlad would find delegitimizing the American election, worthwhile in itself but even more so against Hitlery, to be in his own interests as he is not a fan of democracy to begin with. He tolerates it, or at least the trappings of it.
Vlad made a typical Russian play to downgrade a democratic election in the leading Western country with an eye to upcoming elections in the EU, eastern Europe and Turkey. Russia is authoritarian and prefers to deal with other autocratic regimes.
I was telling your forum he'd win as soon threw his red MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN hat in the ring... and your PAULTARD posting cult that lives here mocked me.
Trump, making America AMERICAN again, one smelly illegal alien at a time. (That's my original quote, you may use that).
Most of the people here you call paultards voted for Trump.
They say they did and if they did….then it proves that a few Paultard libertarians can occasionally display some good sense.
But that does not hold true for the numbers of libertarians who are emerging as Trump resistance. As some Never Trumpers slowly fade off into the sunset….libertarians have taken up the cause.
You find the voices that have aligned with liberty movement are more often among the loudest ones now pushing back on Trump and his various proposals as libertarians continue to express misgivings.
The priorities are diverse in the often-contrarian liberty movement, and there has been diversity, too, in their criticism, ranging from the sense that the “Wall Street establishment” has been overly empowered by a number of Trump’s personnel selections who have deep ties to Goldman Sachs, to fears for civil liberties protections. Many libertarians were also plenty critical of George W. Bush, some activists note, so it’s not a big leap for them to express concerns about another Republican president.
Libertarians are a fickle group….unreliable and unpredictable.
Don’t believe me….that libertarians are anti-Trump?
Then just take a look at what the libertarian’s Bible, reason.com, has to say about it:
You find the voices that have aligned with liberty movement are more often among the loudest ones now pushing back on Trump and his various proposals as libertarians continue to express misgivings.
Natural birth in a farmhouse with a neighbor lady from the next farm over attending.
How much more “being free” with a start in life like that could I possibly be?
I’ll answer my own question….NONE.
Ya know, I was born so free that even an ever popular song with music by John Barry and lyrics by Don Black was written about me.
Anyone who believes they are free because of the circumstances of their birth or because someone wrote a song about them is definitely a primary candidate for lemminghood. The psychological trick of coaxing people into submission by convincing them they are free is well established. That we were all taught growing up how lucky we were to be born in the USA being one prime example.
You, Gatlin, don't understand what freedom is. If you did, you wouldn't have your fetish about libertarianism, which has the principle of freedom defining it's foundation. I'm not saying you should be one, and I'm not saying that you shouldn't be able to argue, say, about marijuana use hurting society. You simply don't understand libertarianism and have no desire to. Hell, you only barely respect the First Amendment. You seriously have some fetish about the word that you do not have for communism or even criminal behavior.
Since you obviously have extreme difficulty with satire -
I don't. But satire only works when conducted by serious writers who can write about topic in an intelligent, critical fashion. When employed by people without that skill, the audience cannot tell it is satire because it is not materially different from their ordinary writings.
Next time, please leave satire to the professionals.
