More than 5 months ago, I stated that if Trump screwed up, people would abandon him like rats from a sinking ship. I thought it would be easier keeping track of his administration given a brand new start.
It wasn't. It isn't.
So, I don't believe I can keep up with this tireless tirade of tyrannical leftists ... Trump is a bozo and I cringe when I hear or see him, but they are despicable.
The whole Russian thing - nothing. There is nothing there. What they have is ... the democratic party was hacked by Russians who released their emails, along with Hillarys emails. So say the Democrats and Hillary. But, Wikileaks says it wasn't, and Assange is quite certain. As certain as he was when he went after Bush and the left rejoiced at his every release. They salivated waiting his next release. Today, not so much. It wasn't the Russians. Any high school hacker could access the emails.
Instead you blow it up. The Russians did it and the fact Trump won't answer means they did, and they are still in control and when he denies it, it means they are controlling him.
And then Kushner did X, and that only proves the ties are deeper than previously known. And because of that it proves the Russian connections, and that Russia did influence the election.
Yet, IT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING. It is just mindless drivel spit out at a public either salivating with desire to know more dirt, or people sickened by the shit coming from the NYT and WP.
Another
Washington Post anonymously sourced hit job dropped on the Trump
White House — this one about Jared Kushner asking the Russian
ambassador for a “secret channel.”
The story about Kushner is basic Poli Sci 101 - back channels are always set up (
even with Obama), with countries you have so-so relationships with. We have a back-channel with Iran, but the WP doesn't go on about that. We use Switzerland. We have a back-channel to North Korea - we use China. I would also bet we have low level back channel, through individuals who met and know the North Korean leader. There are multiple levels to back-channel relationships done for any number of reasons. We had them in place during the Cold War - Armand Hammer was used by the Nixon and Carter administrations. Democrats know this. And legitimate and objective reporters know this.
Mindless drivel by petulant children and you wonder why Trump disregards you. You are not worth paying attention to. Honestly.
The below is taken from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/05/28/thanks-to-trump-germany-says-it-cant-rely-on-america-what-does-that-mean/?utm_term=.eae377d6d51c
Agence France-Presse
reported Sunday that German Chancellor Angela Merkel has told a crowd
in southern Germany that Europe can no longer rely on foreign partners.
The
times in which we could completely depend on others are on the way out.
I’ve experienced that in the last few days,” Merkel told a crowd at an
election rally in Munich. “We Europeans truly have to take our fate into
our own hands,” she added. While Germany and Europe would strive to
remain on good terms with America and Britain, “we have to fight for our
own destiny.”
This is an enormous change in
political rhetoric. While the public is more familiar with the “special
relationship” between Britain and the United States, the German-U.S.
relationship has arguably been more important. One of the key purposes
of NATO was to embed Germany in an international framework that would
prevent it from becoming a threat to European peace as it had been in
World War I and World War II. In the words of NATO’s first secretary
general, NATO was supposed “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in,
and the Germans down.” Now, Merkel is suggesting that the Americans
aren’t really in, and, by extension, Germany and Europe are likely to
take on a much more substantial and independent role than they have in
the past 70 years.
This is thanks to Trump
Merkel’s
comment about what she has experienced in the past few days is a clear
reference to President Trump’s disastrous European tour. Her belief that
the United States is no longer a reliable partner is a direct result of
Trump’s words and actions. The keystone of NATO is Article 5, which has
typically been read as a commitment that in the event that one member
of the alliance is attacked, all other members will come to its aid.
When Trump visited NATO, he dedicated a plaque to the one time that
Article 5 has been invoked — when all members of NATO promised to come
to the United States’ support after the attack on Sept. 11, 2001.
However, Trump did not express his commitment
to Article 5 in his speech to NATO, instead lambasting other NATO
members for not spending enough money on their militaries. When Trump
went on to the Group of Seven meeting in Italy, he declined to recommit to the Paris agreement on climate change, leaving the other six nations to issue a separate statement.
This
cements the impression of the United States as an unreliable partner.
Trump has ostentatiously refused to express his commitment to an
agreement that has been the bulwark of Europe-U.S. security relations
over the past three generations. He also has declined to say that the
United States will work within the previously agreed framework on global
warming. While many authoritarian states are cheered by Trump’s
election and actions, since he is unlikely to press them on human rights
and other sore points, traditional U.S. allies are enormously
disheartened.
Yet another bit of witless wonder from the WP -
But some former administration officials on Sunday criticized the use of such secret channels, especially during a presidential transition, saying they could send a confusing message and be manipulated by a foreign power.
I really need to go back to UCLA and request a refund from the courses taken in poli sci, because apparently people like Dukakis and Dallek, and other professors I took classes from were wrong compared with these 'experts'!
BULLSHIT.
Facts? Or just OPINION mixed with a few details that have no bearing on anything written above.
Henry Farrell is a poor example of a writer. You should do creative writing, because that is what your article is. Creative writing. A poor example of, but still, far from serious news reporting.
This is an example of what has been tossed at Trump for the last 5 months. Shit. And his inability to restrain his fingers from tap tap tapping away, only makes it worse, and they play on it. Sad stupid people.
I do recall a statement from Der Spiegel - in which Merkle stated that she did not TRUST Obama, and he was not trustworthy. Poland didn't think we were either, they set up relationships because Obama didn't show respect for the security of Poland. Ukraine - they were left on their own, and felt we had abandoned them - Hillary and Obama. Latvia - they needed to create alliances because NATO made it clear they would not help. Estonia same thing. South Korea - as the US pulled troops out of Korea, we made it clear we could not be counted on to protect them from N Korea. In fact, if you are that animated about all this - look into 1993-1998, Clinton White House and North Korea, as to who provided North Korea with what today is the basis of their most worrisome weapon system.
Given all that - and the fact that on DAY ONE, HOUR ONE, Obama called not the Canadian Prime Minister, nor the British ... he called Abbas in West Bank. Abbas was also his last call. THAT showed how the US would treat our ally Israel. That showed how valuable we prized the relationship with Canada. And then, Obama making it clear in his words, that our relationship with England was important and valuable ... but he did not use the words special. He signaled a change.
The former French President Sarkozy turned away from the US, The English were not engaged. The Australians were dictated to - Obama forced them to accept terrorists from Guantanamo Bay. They did not want nor ask for them, but he made them take them, thus placing Australians at greater risk.
The French, Estonians, English, Latvians, Ukrainians, Polish, Hungarian, South Korean, Canadian, Israeli ... and Germans ... all saw the writing on the wall. He worked with them, but they knew they had to build their own alliances because the US wasn't willing to continue our defensive efforts to protect those countries. We would go so far, but not beyond.
THAT is a bloody disgrace.
Trump comes along and says - Euros, pay what the NATO Charter says you will pay. We will always be here for you, but you need to be responsible and keep up your end of the treaty. We will do our part.
And for that the WP says "This
cements the impression of the United States as an unreliable partner" Ha ha ha ha. To whom. Your readers. You are a joke. The writer of this trash is a disgrace. You are pathetic - both as a newspaper and the writer who most likely thinks of himself as a journalist. Ha Ha.
It is too much though. It is everyday, every article. They never tire. They have no conscience.
Do you want something to investigate besides North Korea and Bill Clinton?
Look at how much money Hillary and Bill received from Russian sources (government, or NGOs or personal parties who are Russian).
Look into how much money John Podesta made from Russian stocks and or received from Russian sources.
That is something real!
That is worth noting given her billion dollar funding source she calls a non-profit ... which was originally set up for ??? what reason??? And of the total $1 received in donation, how much was spent and where????
That is something real!
Posts
