Arizona Sen. John McCain (R) reportedly said Tuesday that scandals within President Trump's administration are reaching a "Watergate size and scale."
McCain made the statement at a International Republican Institute dinner on Tuesday night. Multiple reporters said that during a speech at the event, McCain compared recent reports surrounding Trump's administration to Watergate.
McCain lost his spine when he rolled over and allowed Palin on his ticket. He talks a big game but when it comes time for the rubber to meet the road he happily confirms any people this administration nominates. Scandals are caused by corrupt and inept people and one should not be so willing to confirm people nominated by those corrupt and inept people. The fact DeVos was confirmed says it all about McCain, Rubio and others who want to talk tough but do nothing.
I can't help but wonder if Pence didn't House of Cards this. Didn't think he could win a presidential race himself so join the ticket of the guy likely get himself turfed from office...
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ernie For This Useful Post:
Lost in the absolute clusterbleep that is this week, is an interesting Manafort development. Federal investigators have subpoenaed all of Manafort's financial and bank records.
It seems he got a $3.5M mortgage from a lender owned by a Ukranian oligarch buddy of Putin's that was never filed with the government to purchase a home in the Hamptons. As it turns out according to Manafort, he didn't know the lending company was owned by this guy, and the lender says it was coincidence as the lender and Manafort's shell corporation were introduced by a mortgage broker.
So basically, the day Manafort left the Trump team, he opened a shell corporation that bought a $3.5M house with funds from a lender that didn't bother keeping record of the mortgage.
But nothing Trump said could have easily compromised the Israeli operatives, it wasn't until the media reported there were actual Israeli operatives to the world that they became threatened.
Except that everything he has said on this topic in the past two pages makes some sense. But of course, if it isn't unequivocally critical of Trump / the Republican party, rather than someone else, it's blasphemy and he must be an apologist.
What exactly is the point of talking about any of this if there's only one prescribed, permissible reaction to anything bad that happens, and it's "This is 100% Donald Trump's fault"? We might as well all just shut up and leave it to Duffman, he's got that stuff on lock.
hahahahahaha, What a laugh.
Start a Trump / GOP is right, thread or something like that. I'm sure it will be stocked with useful facts
McCain lost his spine when he rolled over and allowed Palin on his ticket. He talks a big game but when it comes time for the rubber to meet the road he happily confirms any people this administration nominates.
He is the first Republican to mention Trump and Watergate in the same breath, at least he is saying something, as opposed to Paul Ryan and Mitch McTurtle.
Him and Graham have been the only vocal critics of Trump so far, so he at least has some spine.
Thinking back on that Palin thing now, maybe he was ahead of his time, throwing someone like her on the ticket. I mean, Trump is the President. Trump an Palin both have a lot in common, and I would suppose many people voted for Palin, because she was Palin. Maybe that was a shrewd move that was ahead of it's time.
Trump was wrong in sharing the Intel with the Russians.
The Media was wrong in sharing too many specific details with the public.
They aren't mutually exclusive, and believing the second is true doesn't preclude someone from believing in the first one (and certainly doesn't imply defending Trump in the slightest)
May 10: Trump meets with the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and his infamous Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The media is forced to rely on photos from the Russian news agency TASS because Trump barred American journalists. It was revealed that the recently dismissed FBI Director James Comey was fired right after asking for more resources for his Russia investigation. Meanwhile, in Virginia, federal prosecutors issued grand jury subpoenas to business associates of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Polls show Trump’s disapproval rating hits a new high of 58 per cent.
May 11: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, furious that the White House was saying Comey’s dismissal was his idea, reportedly threatens to resign. A commission is announced to investigate Trump’s voter claims (which have been proven false repeatedly). It is revealed that the Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who had promised to recuse himself from the Russian investigation due to his own involvement, would nonetheless interview candidates to replace Comey.
May 12: Trump threatens to cancel White House press briefings. He then publicly threatens Comey by suggesting he may have recordings of their conversations. Comey replies that he hopes this is true and then leaks the fact Trump had tried to have him pledge personal loyalty to the President. In an interview with Lester Holt, Trump drops a bombshell stating the Russian investigation was the reason he fired Comey—contradicting several of his own staffers who had sworn that was not true.
May 13: Trump floats idea of replacing his communications team with Fox News personalities. Comey states he is willing to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee, but only in public. The President passed the day golfing at one of his resorts, where he has now spent approximately a quarter of his time in office.
May 14: There is speculation the ongoing Comey controversy has killed the President’s legislative agenda for the rest of the year. Former director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, says American democracy is now “under assault” by the President. Leaks from the White House suggest Trump is planning to fire several of his most senior staff for incompetence. Once again, the President golfed.
May 15: The Washington Post reveals that Trump, in a massive breach of intelligence protocols, revealed highly classified information during his meeting with the Russians. Meanwhile, in the House, Republican legislatures look at cutting $400 billion from welfare, food stamps and Medicaid to fund their promised balanced budget. North Korea test fires a missile and the official White House statement strangely leads with the point Trump “cannot imagine that Russia is pleased”. It is revealed that the reason Trump avoids exercise is because he believes the body contains only a finite amount of energy, and using it up too fast will hasten one’s death.
May 16: Trump concedes he did share intelligence with the Russians and claims he had every right to do so. This once again contradicts several of his staff, including National Security Advisor Gen. H.R. McMaster, who had promised no such thing had happened. Later in the day White House insiders, in an attempt to defend the President, state that he could not have intentionally leaked secrets to Lavrov because Trump never reads his briefs and doesn’t understand them anyway. That evening, in the biggest scandal of his Presidency (so far) accusations emerge that Trump encouraged the FBI Director to drop his investigation into Michael Flynn’s Russian connections and to imprison journalists.
Trump was wrong in sharing the Intel with the Russians.
He most certainly was, seeing there was Russian media in the room at the time. Intel is to be shared only with those individuals who are cleared to receive it, and have the appropriate understanding of the subject matter to disseminate it accordingly. The audience in question was neither. If intelligence information was to be shared it should have been between intelligence agencies, not between diplomats. Diplomats are rarely read in on the complete nature of the intel, so it is not their position to share it. The only thing Trump did here was damage relations within the intelligence community and sources key to helping achieve out political endstate.
Quote:
The Media was wrong in sharing too many specific details with the public.
If you're going to play the card that Trump was okay to share the information, then the media was more than free to share all details revealed in that meeting. The media has responsibility to maintain the integrity of sources and data received from those sources. If they receive compartmentalized information they have a responsibility to, and usually do, maintain that compartment. But in this instance, Trump supposedly declassified the information, so that makes it all free game. You see, a President does have the legal right to classify and declassify information, but he does not have the right to declassify then reclassify it, especially when it is to cover up his own incompetence. That's what the EO 11652 said and started us down this rabbit hole, and what EO 13526 states and still is the rule for such action.
Quote:
They aren't mutually exclusive, and believing the second is true doesn't preclude someone from believing in the first one (and certainly doesn't imply defending Trump in the slightest)
You're right, they aren't. Except in this particular instance, the argument being made is doing just that.
The problem is that damn free media reporting things to the public that they find out about. It's not that the administration is like a Sizzlin' Cool Octopus Sprinkler when it comes to classified information.
Trump should stamp out the freedom of the press.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
He most certainly was, seeing there was Russian media in the room at the time. Intel is to be shared only with those individuals who are cleared to receive it, and have the appropriate understanding of the subject matter to disseminate it accordingly. The audience in question was neither. If intelligence information was to be shared it should have been between intelligence agencies, not between diplomats. Diplomats are rarely read in on the complete nature of the intel, so it is not their position to share it. The only thing Trump did here was damage relations within the intelligence community and sources key to helping achieve out political endstate.
If you're going to play the card that Trump was okay to share the information, then the media was more than free to share all details revealed in that meeting. The media has responsibility to maintain the integrity of sources and data received from those sources. If they receive compartmentalized information they have a responsibility to, and usually do, maintain that compartment. But in this instance, Trump supposedly declassified the information, so that makes it all free game. You see, a President does have the legal right to classify and declassify information, but he does not have the right to declassify then reclassify it, especially when it is to cover up his own incompetence. That's what the EO 11652 said and started us down this rabbit hole, and what EO 13526 states and still is the rule for such action.
You're right, they aren't. Except in this particular instance, the argument being made is doing just that.
Kind of a strange argument to say while Trump was legally ok but ethically wrong to leak, then say press is legally ok and ignore ethical argument
The Following User Says Thank You to Street Pharmacist For This Useful Post:
Kind of a strange argument to say while Trump was legally ok but ethically wrong to leak, then say press is legally ok and ignore ethical argument
Why? The ethics of the release of information is no longer relevant. The executive just declassified the material, making it public information. The press has no expectation of, nor moral responsibility, to safeguard the material. It's public information!
Democrats to put forward motion to impeach Trump in Congress today. Though this will still require house leader Paul Ryan to allow the vote.
Quote:
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) says he plans to call for President Trump to be impeached on the House floor on Wednesday morning.
“Today on the floor of the Congress of the United States of America, I will call for the Impeachment of the President,” Green tweeted.
During a news conference Monday afternoon, Green accused the president of obstructing the ongoing investigation into possible ties between his campaign and Russia, saying “the mantra should be ITN: Impeach Trump now."
Green initially said Monday he would wait a few weeks before starting the impeachment process, KHOU Houston reported.
It’s not the political expedient thing to do, this is what we must do to maintain our democracy," Green said.
“A good many people assume that impeachment means that the President will be found guilty. It does not. Impeachment is the genesis of the process. The revelation are likely to be revealed in the Senate and that’s where the trial actually takes place."
Why? The ethics of the release of information is no longer relevant. The executive just declassified the material, making it public information. The press has no expectation of, nor moral responsibility, to safeguard the material. It's public information!
Leaking this information, regardless of which moth it came from had the potential to put a life/lives in danger. If Trump is wrong to put that life in danger, so are the press.
Your being obtuse if you're equating declassified information with publicly available information. The press involved chose to make it publicly available in an effort to outscoop each other
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
Kind of a strange argument to say while Trump was legally ok but ethically wrong to leak, then say press is legally ok and ignore ethical argument
The issue is that we have no idea what the media confirmed or didn't before reporting the information they did. They could've confirmed that it wouldn't be harmful before publishing. As noted, Israel subsequently confirmed the information, suggesting they didn't consider it overly harmful. I don't doubt that the NYT or Wapo could have called up sources in Israel prior to publishing.
Trump sought no assurances, and we know that. Drawing an equivalence between the two actions is wrong because we do not know the steps taken by the press.
The issue is that we have no idea what the media confirmed or didn't before reporting the information they did. They could've confirmed that it wouldn't be harmful before publishing. As noted, Israel subsequently confirmed the information, suggesting they didn't consider it overly harmful. I don't doubt that the NYT or Wapo could have called up sources in Israel prior to publishing.
Trump sought no assurances, and we know that. Drawing an equivalence between the two actions is wrong because we do not know the steps taken by the press.
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
We know equally as much from both sides...
There are multiple reports of Israeli intelligence and leaders being "stunned" at Trump's disclosure to the Russians. I have seen no reports of Israeli leaders or anyone at all in Israel sharing concern over Wapo's naming of the country in question or giving details. If you could point me that way, great.
The Following User Says Thank You to AltaGuy For This Useful Post:
