America Is Under Attack and the President Doesn't Care

[homersapien 11,367]

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/america-is-under-attack-and-the-president-doesnt-care/553667/

Trump’s gravest responsibility is to defend the United States from foreign attack—and he’s done nothing to fulfill it.

DAVID FRUM   FEB 18, 2018

As the rest of America mourns the victims of the Parkland, Florida, massacre, President Trump took to Twitter.

Not for him the rituals of grief. He is too consumed by rage and resentment. He interrupted his holidaying schedule at Mar-a-Lago only briefly, for a visit to a hospital where some of the shooting victims were treated. He posed afterward for a grinning thumbs-up photo op. Pain at another’s heartbreak—that emotion is for losers, apparently.

Having failed at one presidential duty, to speak for the nation at times of national tragedy, Trump resumed shirking an even more supreme task: defending the nation against foreign attack.

Last week, Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted 13 Russian persons and three entities that conspired to violate federal election law, to the benefit of Trump and Republican congressional candidates. This is not the whole of the story by any means. This Mueller indictment references only Russian operations on Facebook. It does not deal with the weaponization of hacked information via WikiLeaks. Or the reports that the Russians funneled millions of dollars of election spending through the NRA’s political action committees. But this indictment does show enough to answer some questions about the scale and methods of the Russian intervention—and pose a new question, the most important of them all.

The new question is this: What has been—what will be—done to protect American democracy from such attacks in the future? The Russian attack in 2016 worked, yielding dividends beyond Vladimir Putin’s wildest hopes. The Russians hoped to cast a shadow over the Clinton presidency. Instead, they outright elected their preferred candidate. Americans once thought it was a big deal that Alger Hiss rose to serve as acting temporary secretary general of the United Nations. This time, a Russian-backed  individual was installed in the Oval Office.

From that position of power, Trump has systematically attempted to shut down investigations of the foreign-espionage operation that operated on his behalf. He fired the director of the FBI to shut it down. His White House coordinated with the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee to misdirect the investigation. He mobilized the speaker of the House to thwart bipartisan investigations under broadly respected leadership. He has inspired, supported, and joined a national propaganda campaign against the Mueller investigation.

And all the while, Trump has done nothing—literally nothing—to harden the nation’s voting systems against follow-on Russian operations. On Sunday, he publicly repudiated his own national-security adviser for acknowledging at the Munich Security Conference the most incontrovertible basics of what happened in 2016.

It’s worth thinking about what a patriotic president would have done in Trump’s situation. He would be leading the investigation himself. He would be scouring his own campaign—doing everything in his power to reassure the country that whatever the Russians may or may not have done, his government owed Putin nothing. He would have imposed penalties on Russia for their outrageous acts—rather than protecting Russia from penalties voted by Congress. Above all, he would be leading the demand for changes to election laws and practices, including holding Facebook to account for its negligence.

At every turn, Trump has failed to do what a patriotic president would do—failed to put the national interest first. He has left the 2018 elections as vulnerable as the 2016 elections to Russian intervention on his behalf.

The president’s malignant narcissism surely explains much of this passivity. He cannot endure the thought that he owes the presidency to anything other than his own magnificence. “But wasn’t I a great candidate?” he tweeted plaintively at 7:43 a.m on Sunday morning.

But Americans who cherish democracy and national sovereignty need to start discussing a bigger and darker question.

Authoritarian nationalist parties across the western world have outright cooperated with the Russians. Russian money has helped to finance the National Front in France, and the election and re-election of the president of the Czech Republic. In Germany, Russia first created a hoax refugee-rape case—then widely publicized it—in an effort to boost its preferred extremist party in that country’s 2017 election, the Alternative for Germany. Russia supported pro-AfD comment in media favored by Germany’s surprisingly substantial Russian-speaking communities.

CIA Director Mike Pompeo predicted to the BBC at the beginning of 2018 that Russia “will be back” to help its preferred candidates in November 2018. To what extent does President Trump—to what extent do congressional Republicans—look to Russian interference to help their party in the 2018 cycle?

Most observers predict a grim year for the GOP in 2018. But the economy is strong, and selective tax cuts are strategically redistributing money from blue-state professionals to red-state parents. The Republican national committee commands a huge financial advantage over its Democratic counterpart. (Things look more even at the level of the individual candidates.) A little extra help could make a big difference to Republican hopes—and to Trump’s political survival.

Nothing has been done in the past 15 months to prevent that help from flowing. You have to wonder whether the president does not privately welcome that help, as he publicly welcomed help from WikiLeaks in the summer of 2016.

Trump’s own tweets reveal that among the things he most fears is the prospect of Representative Adam Schiff gaining the gavel of the House Intelligence Committee from the clownish present chairman, Devin Nunes. How far would Trump go to stop a dreaded political opponent, inside the law and outside? How far has Donald Trump gone in the past?

Trump continues to insist that he and his campaign team did not collude with Russia in the 2016 election. We know that they were ready and eager to collude—that’s on the public record. (“If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”) The public does not yet know whether the collusion actually occurred, and if so, in what form and to what extent. But in front of our very eyes we can observe that they are leaving the door open to Russian intervention on their behalf in the next election. You might call it collusion in advance—a dereliction of duty as grave as any since President Buchanan looked the other way as Southern state governments pillaged federal arsenals on the eve of the Civil War.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

5 hours ago, homersapien said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/america-is-under-attack-and-the-president-doesnt-care/553667/

Trump’s gravest responsibility is to defend the United States from foreign attack—and he’s done nothing to fulfill it.

DAVID FRUM   FEB 18, 2018

As the rest of America mourns the victims of the Parkland, Florida, massacre, President Trump took to Twitter.

Not for him the rituals of grief. He is too consumed by rage and resentment. He interrupted his holidaying schedule at Mar-a-Lago only briefly, for a visit to a hospital where some of the shooting victims were treated. He posed afterward for a grinning thumbs-up photo op. Pain at another’s heartbreak—that emotion is for losers, apparently.

Having failed at one presidential duty, to speak for the nation at times of national tragedy, Trump resumed shirking an even more supreme task: defending the nation against foreign attack.

Last week, Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted 13 Russian persons and three entities that conspired to violate federal election law, to the benefit of Trump and Republican congressional candidates. This is not the whole of the story by any means. This Mueller indictment references only Russian operations on Facebook. It does not deal with the weaponization of hacked information via WikiLeaks. Or the reports that the Russians funneled millions of dollars of election spending through the NRA’s political action committees. But this indictment does show enough to answer some questions about the scale and methods of the Russian intervention—and pose a new question, the most important of them all.

The new question is this: What has been—what will be—done to protect American democracy from such attacks in the future? The Russian attack in 2016 worked, yielding dividends beyond Vladimir Putin’s wildest hopes. The Russians hoped to cast a shadow over the Clinton presidency. Instead, they outright elected their preferred candidate. Americans once thought it was a big deal that Alger Hiss rose to serve as acting temporary secretary general of the United Nations. This time, a Russian-backed  individual was installed in the Oval Office.

From that position of power, Trump has systematically attempted to shut down investigations of the foreign-espionage operation that operated on his behalf. He fired the director of the FBI to shut it down. His White House coordinated with the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee to misdirect the investigation. He mobilized the speaker of the House to thwart bipartisan investigations under broadly respected leadership. He has inspired, supported, and joined a national propaganda campaign against the Mueller investigation.

And all the while, Trump has done nothing—literally nothing—to harden the nation’s voting systems against follow-on Russian operations. On Sunday, he publicly repudiated his own national-security adviser for acknowledging at the Munich Security Conference the most incontrovertible basics of what happened in 2016.

It’s worth thinking about what a patriotic president would have done in Trump’s situation. He would be leading the investigation himself. He would be scouring his own campaign—doing everything in his power to reassure the country that whatever the Russians may or may not have done, his government owed Putin nothing. He would have imposed penalties on Russia for their outrageous acts—rather than protecting Russia from penalties voted by Congress. Above all, he would be leading the demand for changes to election laws and practices, including holding Facebook to account for its negligence.

At every turn, Trump has failed to do what a patriotic president would do—failed to put the national interest first. He has left the 2018 elections as vulnerable as the 2016 elections to Russian intervention on his behalf.

The president’s malignant narcissism surely explains much of this passivity. He cannot endure the thought that he owes the presidency to anything other than his own magnificence. “But wasn’t I a great candidate?” he tweeted plaintively at 7:43 a.m on Sunday morning.

But Americans who cherish democracy and national sovereignty need to start discussing a bigger and darker question.

Authoritarian nationalist parties across the western world have outright cooperated with the Russians. Russian money has helped to finance the National Front in France, and the election and re-election of the president of the Czech Republic. In Germany, Russia first created a hoax refugee-rape case—then widely publicized it—in an effort to boost its preferred extremist party in that country’s 2017 election, the Alternative for Germany. Russia supported pro-AfD comment in media favored by Germany’s surprisingly substantial Russian-speaking communities.

CIA Director Mike Pompeo predicted to the BBC at the beginning of 2018 that Russia “will be back” to help its preferred candidates in November 2018. To what extent does President Trump—to what extent do congressional Republicans—look to Russian interference to help their party in the 2018 cycle?

Most observers predict a grim year for the GOP in 2018. But the economy is strong, and selective tax cuts are strategically redistributing money from blue-state professionals to red-state parents. The Republican national committee commands a huge financial advantage over its Democratic counterpart. (Things look more even at the level of the individual candidates.) A little extra help could make a big difference to Republican hopes—and to Trump’s political survival.

Nothing has been done in the past 15 months to prevent that help from flowing. You have to wonder whether the president does not privately welcome that help, as he publicly welcomed help from WikiLeaks in the summer of 2016.

Trump’s own tweets reveal that among the things he most fears is the prospect of Representative Adam Schiff gaining the gavel of the House Intelligence Committee from the clownish present chairman, Devin Nunes. How far would Trump go to stop a dreaded political opponent, inside the law and outside? How far has Donald Trump gone in the past?

Trump continues to insist that he and his campaign team did not collude with Russia in the 2016 election. We know that they were ready and eager to collude—that’s on the public record. (“If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”) The public does not yet know whether the collusion actually occurred, and if so, in what form and to what extent. But in front of our very eyes we can observe that they are leaving the door open to Russian intervention on their behalf in the next election. You might call it collusion in advance—a dereliction of duty as grave as any since President Buchanan looked the other way as Southern state governments pillaged federal arsenals on the eve of the Civil War.

What a BS article. EVERYTHING is wrong with it. 

[homersapien 11,367]

5 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

What a BS article. EVERYTHING is wrong with it. 

Did you really need to quote my entire post just to say that?   

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

9 hours ago, homersapien said:

Did you really need to quote my entire post just to say that?   

Yes

[homersapien 11,367]

 

It’s Clear: Donald Trump Welcomes Russia’s Subversion of Our Democracy

The president’s response to Bob Mueller’s latest indictments is disturbing but all too expected at this point.

For at least two years, Americans have tried to make sense of Donald Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin and refusal to fully acknowledge and counter Moscow’s ongoing attacks on our democracy. We’ve heard the excuse that Trump simply views the Kremlin interference story as a partisan effort to delegitimize his election.

But Friday’s indictments from Special Counsel Robert Mueller, and the president’s response to them, point to a more troubling and increasingly likely motivation: President Trump does not want to stop Kremlin interference intended to sway our elections in his favor. Rather, he welcomes it.

The Special Counsel’s revelations provided a detailed description of part of the modern information warfare Russia has waged against our country since at least 2014. It was a highly-coordinated assault, employing foreign agents on U.S. soil as well as Moscow-based internet operatives.

And yet, in response to this news, the president still couldn’t muster a forceful rebuke of Putin’s regime. Nor would he vow to hold it accountable and deter future attacks. On the contrary, he tried to spin the entire ordeal as an exoneration.

This is either willful ignorance or, more likely, disloyal opportunism. That’s because, whether he admits it or not, the president must know that the story he publicly calls a “hoax” is real. We have detailed evidence of Moscow’s subversion of our democracy. But it seems unlikely that the president will change his tune and take action to counter it.

On this threat, the intel chiefs unanimously agreed: Russian information warfare against us continues unabated and the Kremlin will actively work to influence our upcoming elections. Trump’s own Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats even warned, “We need to inform the American public that this is real. We are not going to allow some Russian to tell us how we’re going to vote. There needs to be a national cry for that.”

Rather than echo this cry from our intelligence community, the president is actively obstructing efforts to stop the attacks.....

Read the rest at: https://www.thedailybeast.com/its-clear-donald-trump-welcomes-russias-subversion-of-our-democracy?ref=wrap

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

 

It’s Clear: Donald Trump Welcomes Russia’s Subversion of Our Democracy

The president’s response to Bob Mueller’s latest indictments is disturbing but all too expected at this point.

For at least two years, Americans have tried to make sense of Donald Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin and refusal to fully acknowledge and counter Moscow’s ongoing attacks on our democracy. We’ve heard the excuse that Trump simply views the Kremlin interference story as a partisan effort to delegitimize his election.

But Friday’s indictments from Special Counsel Robert Mueller, and the president’s response to them, point to a more troubling and increasingly likely motivation: President Trump does not want to stop Kremlin interference intended to sway our elections in his favor. Rather, he welcomes it.

The Special Counsel’s revelations provided a detailed description of part of the modern information warfare Russia has waged against our country since at least 2014. It was a highly-coordinated assault, employing foreign agents on U.S. soil as well as Moscow-based internet operatives.

And yet, in response to this news, the president still couldn’t muster a forceful rebuke of Putin’s regime. Nor would he vow to hold it accountable and deter future attacks. On the contrary, he tried to spin the entire ordeal as an exoneration.

This is either willful ignorance or, more likely, disloyal opportunism. That’s because, whether he admits it or not, the president must know that the story he publicly calls a “hoax” is real. We have detailed evidence of Moscow’s subversion of our democracy. But it seems unlikely that the president will change his tune and take action to counter it.

On this threat, the intel chiefs unanimously agreed: Russian information warfare against us continues unabated and the Kremlin will actively work to influence our upcoming elections. Trump’s own Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats even warned, “We need to inform the American public that this is real. We are not going to allow some Russian to tell us how we’re going to vote. There needs to be a national cry for that.”

Rather than echo this cry from our intelligence community, the president is actively obstructing efforts to stop the attacks.....

Read the rest at: https://www.thedailybeast.com/its-clear-donald-trump-welcomes-russias-subversion-of-our-democracy?ref=wrap

 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

23 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

What a BS article. EVERYTHING is wrong with it. 

Homie loves to write long verbose posts full of BS when he could save time by just saying "I hate Trump."

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

@homersapien Did you see Sanders’ press conference where she stated that Trump had done more to sanction Russia than Obama? 

I wonder if they dock her pay if she tells the truth or if she is just incapable? 

[homersapien 11,367]

4 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

Homie loves to write long verbose posts full of BS when he could save time by just saying "I hate Trump."

Why should I restrict my posting to your level?

[homersapien 11,367]

5 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Well, I am sure PT approves this post, but it's a total fail.

First, "rigging" the election is not exactly what the Russians are accused of.  The charge is influencing the election, which they did.

Secondly, Obama approached McConnel and other Republican leaders prior to the election with what he knew abou this and suggested they confront the Russians together, in a non-partisan way.  McConnel told him that if Obama brought up Russian involvment, the Republicans would consider it a partisan attack. 

Republicans apparently care more about their political agenda than our country's sovereignty.

Look it up.  Educate yourself.  

[homersapien 11,367]

3 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

@homersapien Did you see Sanders’ press conference where she stated that Trump had done more to sanction Russia than Obama? 

I wonder if they dock her pay if she tells the truth or if she is just incapable? 

Everyone that serves Trump winds up prostituting their integrity.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

29 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Well, I am sure PT approves this post, but it's a total fail.

First, "rigging" the election is not exactly what the Russians are accused of.  The charge is influencing the election, which they did.

Secondly, Obama approached McConnel and other Republican leaders prior to the election with what he knew abou this and suggested they confront the Russians together, in a non-partisan way.  McConnel told him that if Obama brought up Russian involvment, the Republicans would consider it a partisan attack. 

Republicans apparently care more about their political agenda than our country's sovereignty.

Look it up.  Educate yourself.  

Do you read the articles that you post? In regards to Russia as it pertains to the very article you posted, the author even says, "they outright elected their preferred candidate." How is that not an accusation of "rigging" the election? 

So even though this took place under Obama's watch, it's still republican's with the blame?

 

 

[homersapien 11,367]

6 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Do you read the articles that you post? In regards to Russia as it pertains to the very article you posted, the author even says, "they outright elected their preferred candidate." How is that not an accusation of "rigging" the election? 

So even though this took place under Obama's watch, it's still republican's with the blame?

 

 

It's possible they did.  They were certainly supporting Trump and it was a very close election.

You are really weird with these semantical arguments.  Rigging emplies messing with vote taking and counting.  Influence is exactly what it says.

And Obama solicited GOP support to make this an issue.  They refused and signaled they would treat it as a partisan attack.  

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

36 minutes ago, homersapien said:

It's possible they did.  They were certainly supporting Trump and it was a very close election.

You are really weird with these semantical arguments.  Rigging emplies messing with vote taking and counting.  Influence is exactly what it says.

And Obama solicited GOP support to make this an issue.  They refused and signaled they would treat it as a partisan attack.  

Which would mean that their interference would have impacted enough votes to put Trump in office. Good luck substantiating that one. Especially in light of what's been revealed about the practical effect/success of the 13 Facebook bots that spent an astounding 46K - in light of Trump and Clinton's $81M spent on Facebook ads. 

 

[homersapien 11,367]

2 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Which would mean that their interference would have impacted enough votes to put Trump in office. Good luck substantiating that one. Especially in light of what's been revealed about the practical effect/success of the 13 Facebook bots that spent an astounding 46K - in light of Trump and Clinton's $81M spent on Facebook ads. 

 

Exactly.

I never said it could be proven. It can't.

But it obviously haunts Trump.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

10 hours ago, homersapien said:

Exactly.

I never said it could be proven. It can't.

But it obviously haunts Trump.

I was thinking it haunts Democrats - another indictment, no collusion

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

4 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I was thinking it haunts Democrats - another indictment, no collusion

The only thing that haunts Democrats is the huge dumpster fire that is the White House. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 minute ago, GiveEmElle said:

The only thing that haunts Democrats is the huge dumpster fire that is the White House. 

I believe it. Every time they think they “got him,” it just turns out to be a nothing-burger. They want him gone, but he keeps winning.

[homersapien 11,367]

4 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I was thinking it haunts Democrats - another indictment, no collusion

Collusion is not a legal term so most Democrats don't expect an indictment for collusion. 

Besides, we already know the Trump administration attempted collusion.  Even Bannon admits that:

Trump Tower meeting with Russians 'treasonous', Bannon says in explosive book

"He is particularly scathing about a June 2016 meeting involving Trump’s son Donald Jr, son-in-law Jared Kushner, then campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower in New York. A trusted intermediary had promised documents that would “incriminate” rival Hillary Clinton but instead of alerting the FBI to a potential assault on American democracy by a foreign power, Trump Jr replied in an email: “I love it.”

If Trump get's indicted for a crime, it will likely be for money laundering.  As far as I am concerned, it will be enough to just reveal how in-bed Trump is with the Russians. The main thing is to get him out of office ASAP.

 

 

[homersapien 11,367]

11 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I believe it. Every time they think they “got him,” it just turns out to be a nothing-burger. They want him gone, but he keeps winning.

I fail to see how the progressive roll-up of Trump associates can be termed "winning".

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

17 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Collusion is not a legal term so most Democrats don't expect an indictment for collusion. 

Besides, we already know the Trump administration attempted collusion.  Even Bannon admits that:

Trump Tower meeting with Russians 'treasonous', Bannon says in explosive book

"He is particularly scathing about a June 2016 meeting involving Trump’s son Donald Jr, son-in-law Jared Kushner, then campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower in New York. A trusted intermediary had promised documents that would “incriminate” rival Hillary Clinton but instead of alerting the FBI to a potential assault on American democracy by a foreign power, Trump Jr replied in an email: “I love it.”

If Trump get's indicted for a crime, it will likely be for money laundering.  As far as I am concerned, it will be enough to just reveal how in-bed Trump is with the Russians. The main thing is to get him out of office ASAP.

 

 

Bannon. Ha!

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

11 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I fail to see how the progressive roll-up of Trump associates can be termed "winning".

You fail to see a lot of things. I’m not surprised 

[homersapien 11,367]

11 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

You fail to see a lot of things. I’m not surprised 

OK, please explain it to me, old wise one.  How does Mueller steadily rolling up Trump's associates constitute a "win" for Trump?

[homersapien 11,367]

14 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Bannon. Ha!

Yeah, you know, he was the CEO of the Trump Campaign and then Whitehouse Chief Strategist. 

[homersapien 11,367]

Nola I can't help but notice you seem to be avoiding addressing the substantive points of my posts.    

Care to explain why?  (As if I didn't know...)