Trump Tracker Too (2 Trump 2 Tracker) (1 Viewer)

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

The football board had the very useful Daily Trump Tracker thread, which was a good place to briefly discuss the latest ridiculous thing that might have ended 97% of prior Presidential administrations even if it didn't necessarily justify an entire thread devoted to it in 2017-2019 (because of the sheer volume of these things). Since I don't see anything like that here already, I'll add one myself.

 

[SystemShock]

The best part is that he offered bringing back Gone with the Wind as an alternative.

To be fair, you have to remember, he's playing to his audience.

 

[insidejob]

A senior U.S. intelligence official told lawmakers last week that Russia wants to see President Trump reelected, viewing his administration as more favorable to the Kremlin’s interests, according to people who were briefed on the comments.

After learning of that analysis, which was provided to House lawmakers in a classified hearing, Trump grew angry at his acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, in the Oval Office, seeing Maguire and his staff as disloyal for speaking to Congress about Russia’s perceived preference.

The intelligence official’s analysis and Trump’s furious response ruined Maguire’s chances of becoming the permanent intelligence chief, according to people familiar with the matter who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter.........

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

And people still wonder why there are serious concerns about Trump's perceived loyalty to Russia over his own country's intelligence agencies.

 

[JimEverett]

And people still wonder why there are serious concerns about Trump's perceived loyalty to Russia over his own country's intelligence agencies.

I wonder why people continue to buy, hook-line-and sinker - reports centered on unnamed intelligence officials.

 

[coldseat]

I wonder why people continue to buy, hook-line-and sinker - reports centered on unnamed intelligence officials.

Why do we even have intelligence officials at all then? It seems like to you they're useless. Maybe we should just scrap the CIA, NSA, DNI, etc. all together.

Also, the DNI officials reporting to the House Intelligence isn't exactly unnamed.

 

[JimEverett]

Why do we even have intelligence officials at all then? It seems like to you they're useless. Maybe we should just scrap the CIA, NSA, DNI, etc. all together.

What? So you think the purpose of intelligence officials is to provide information to the press anonymously - or have their classified briefings be reported to the press by anonymous political players?

 

[coldseat]

What? So you think the purpose of intelligence officials is to provide information to the press anonymously - or have their classified briefings be reported to the press by anonymous political players?

What does the press have to do with their classified briefings to House Intelligence committee? This came out because of Nunes running to Trump again and leaks in the white house.

 

[MT15]

So, Jim, I agree this is an anonymous report. But that’s what we have to explain a rather inexplicable action. Trump suddenly getting rid of a respected professional at DNI and replacing him with a complete political hack, even if only temporarily.

The report fits with Trump’s established patterns of behavior, does it not? And fits Nunes’ pattern of past behavior to boot.

I think it deserves serious consideration.

 

[MT15]

If Trump wants to counteract this report, he could disclose the reason for the sudden firing.

 

[JimEverett]

What does the press have to do with their classified briefings to House Intelligence committee? This came out because of Nunes running to Trump again and leaks in the white house.

Why would criticism of media reports centering on unnamed intelligence official result in your claim that I a not for having an intelligence service? That is a ridiculous leap.

What does the press have to do with a story written on classified briefing to a House Committee????? Really? Well, "the press" wrote the story for one thing. And presumably someone in on the briefing, or directed by someone in on the briefing, released some information to the press - most likely for political purposes.

 

[coldseat]

Why would criticism of media reports centering on unnamed intelligence official result in your claim that I a not for having an intelligence service? That is a ridiculous leap.

What does the press have to do with a story written on classified briefing to a House Committee????? Really? Well, "the press" wrote the story for one thing. And presumably someone in on the briefing, or directed by someone in on the briefing, released some information to the press - most likely for political purposes.

Maybe the DNI should give you a briefing personally, so that you will believe them.

This is just silly.

 

[JimEverett]

It is silly that after all the lies that come out based around "unnamed intelligence sources" that people still fall for it.
Intelligence is in the business of creating false reports. Not only that, but they are a perfect source to leak by others because they cannot publicly contradict a report based on their information.

 

[coldseat]

It is silly that after all the lies that come out based around "unnamed intelligence sources" that people still fall for it.
Intelligence is in the business of creating false reports. Not only that, but they are a perfect source to leak by others because they cannot publicly contradict a report based on their information.

You can believe or not believe what you want Jim. I think you're being ridiculous to think this is some kind of lies by the press, but whatever. We've known this was going to happen since 2016. If you can't comprehend it or fathom it, then live in ignorance for all I care.

 

[The moose]

I wonder why people continue to buy, hook-line-and sinker - reports centered on unnamed intelligence officials.

I wonder why people continue to buy hook like and sinker that news is fake from a human with extreme problems being truthful about everything under the sun.

From crowd size to weather maps! Stuff that is pointless and still can't except the truth.

You know that makes far less sense to me.

 

[insidejob]

I wonder why people continue to buy hook like and sinker that news is fake from a human with extreme problems being truthful about everything under the sun.

From crowd size to weather maps! Stuff that is pointless and still can't except the truth.

You know that makes far less sense to me.

And he's back on a kick about windmills again. They now put bad stuff into the atmosphere.

 

[wardorican]

And people still wonder why there are serious concerns about Trump's perceived loyalty to Russia over his own country's intelligence agencies.

I wonder why people continue to buy, hook-line-and sinker - reports centered on unnamed intelligence officials.

Just because they think it will be favorable to them (meaning he is easy to work with, gullible, or seems to believe misinformation, especially if it provides confirmation bias), it does NOT mean he is loyal to Russia.

Let's chill out with that. He's not a russian agent. He lacks an intellectual curiousity to verify stuff before he passes it on. They can just view him as a useful idiot.

However, it isn't fiction to believe that Russia prefers Trump (and that I intelligence is accurate there), since he's open to letting them off the hook for past transgressions (cause he doesn't care), and he falls for fake news often. Again, a useful idiot.

 

[insidejob]

Just because they think it will be favorable to them (meaning he is easy to work with, gullible, or seems to believe misinformation, especially if it provides confirmation bias), it does NOT mean he is loyal to Russia.

Let's chill out with that. He's not a russian agent. He lacks an intellectual curiousity to verify stuff before he passes it on. They can just view him as a useful idiot.

However, it isn't fiction to believe that Russia prefers Trump (and that I intelligence is accurate there), since he's open to letting them off the hook for past transgressions (cause he doesn't care), and he falls for fake news often. Again, a useful idiot.

I've never implied he's a Russian agent. I do think he's what's considered a useful idiot. But there is no denying that he takes the word of Putin over his own intelligence agencies. He even stood on a stage with Putin and said he didn't believe they interfered in the 2016 election after it'd been confirmed by 17 agencies that they did.

“My people came to me, Dan Coats came to me and some others, they said they think [2016 election hacker] is Russia. I have President Putin; he just said it's not Russia. I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be.”

 

[JimEverett]

Just because they think it will be favorable to them (meaning he is easy to work with, gullible, or seems to believe misinformation, especially if it provides confirmation bias), it does NOT mean he is loyal to Russia.

Let's chill out with that. He's not a russian agent. He lacks an intellectual curiousity to verify stuff before he passes it on. They can just view him as a useful idiot.

However, it isn't fiction to believe that Russia prefers Trump (and that I intelligence is accurate there), since he's open to letting them off the hook for past transgressions (cause he doesn't care), and he falls for fake news often. Again, a useful idiot.

There is a difference between saying "it is not true" and pointing out a reason to be skeptical given the sourcing. I am in the latter. It is as if people have learned nothing from "Iraq had WMDs" to "Trump is a Russian agent" and all sorts in between - which were all sourced from unnamed intelligence sources.

 

[Farb]

I love the logic that is displayed a lot on this board and in the wild. If you disagree with something then you OBVIOUSLY have to want or support the extreme opposite.
If you questions unnamed intelligence sources in political reports then you have to be against all intelligence services and in fact want them all disbanded.

If you disagree with a statement that there is a reasonable assumption it was made in error or from information not known at the time then you obviously support lying. Why do you support this person lying to you?

If you think national borders should be controlled, it is because you OBVIOUSLY hate a certain group of people.

If you have a different opinion on kids being in drag shows and kids being given hormones blockers then you are obviously a trans phobic.

Only Sith's deal in absolutes. - Ben Stiller