Fifty of the nation’s most senior Republican national security officials, many of them former top aides or cabinet members for President George W. Bush, have signed a letter declaring that Donald J. Trump“lacks the character, values and experience” to be president and “would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.”Mr. Trump, the officials warn, “would be the most reckless president in American history.”The letter says Mr. Trump would weaken the United States’ moral authority and questions his knowledge of and belief in the Constitution. It says he has “demonstrated repeatedly that he has little understanding” of the nation’s “vital national interests, its complex diplomatic challenges, its indispensable alliances and the democratic values” on which American policy should be based. And it laments that “Mr. Trump has shown no interest in educating himself.”“None of us will vote for Donald Trump,” the letter states, though it notes later that many Americans “have doubts about Hillary Clinton, as do many of us.”Among the most prominent signatories are Michael V. Hayden, a former director of both the C.I.A. and the National Security Agency; John D. Negroponte, who served as the first director of national intelligence and then deputy secretary of state; and Robert B. Zoellick, another former deputy secretary of state, United States trade representive and, until 2012, president of the World Bank. Two former secretaries of homeland security, Tom Ridge and Michael Chertoff, also signed, as did Eric S. Edelman, who served as Vice President Dick Cheney’s national security adviser and as a top aide to Robert M. Gates when he was secretary of defense.
Robert Blackwill and James Jeffrey, two key strategists in Mr. Bush’s National Security Council, and William H. Taft IV, a former deputy secretary of defense and ambassador to NATO, also signed.
The letter underscores the continuing rupture in the Republican Party, but particularly within its national security establishment. Many of those signing it had declined to add their names to a similar open letter released in March. But a number said in recent interviews that they changed their minds once they heard Mr. Trump invite Russia to hack into Mrs. Clinton’s email server — a sarcastic remark, he said later — and say that he would check to see how much NATO members contributed to the alliance before sending forces to help stave off a Russian attack.He's all wrong for this country.
Of course, as we alway must say these days, so is Hillionaire.
But your Big Dick cheney endorsed him months ago. What did Rummie do? It don't matter, you Pubs will be on the outside looking out in that department and its doubtful Nettie will pull any more crap like coming to speak before Congress next term. Perhaps he'll end up marginalized like Cheney, Rummie et al.
ReplyDeleteJust because I hate Nettie doesnt mean he lives inside my head rent free. I only think about him when blogging here.
ReplyDeleteEasy to find, another one of your former heroes 10 years ago when I first began blogging here, Don the Man Rummie Rumsfeld endorsed Don the Man Trumpie the Trumpster around the summer solstice. He stated he's clearly voting for Trump. Want your beloved preemptors back? Vote for Trump then take a dump.
ReplyDeleteOnce again, proof of Netanyahu Obsession Syndrome.
ReplyDeleteRichard Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld happen to be wrong about this one. So is John Bolton. All three are men I deeply admire. I suspect they are taking the we-have-t-go-with-him-since-it's-a-binary-choice position, as is Dennis Prager, whom I also deeply admire but who is mistaken on this. (See the Kevin Williamson quote in a recent LITD post.)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBullies of a testicular mettle clang together.
ReplyDeleteWhen people say they have doubts about Hillary Clinton they might recall that no President does it all alone. It all gets done by the people they surround themselves with. I would imagine a lot of the folks from the previous Clinton administration will be on board for this one too. And, really, things were not so bad back then. We don't need a mouth that roars, that's for sure. There is no comparison between Hillary and Trump. She is a breath of fresh rational air when juxtaposed to Trump. I see now that they are trying to claim she suffers from Parkinson's disease. What a nasty campaign, 3 long months to go and then on to another 4 years of much similar bitching from your ilk that occurred during the previous Clinton administrations and super-charged during the Obama administrations. Can't say anything but the Tea Party and hence the Republican Party has put forth a monster who will (you must say must) be soundly defeated. Where is all the hate gonna go then when it has no leadership. Revolution? Good luck with that.
ReplyDeleteShe's a redistributionist, an Alinskyite, an empty suit (she did noting of consequence as Senator), was a catalyst for various disasters as Secretary of State), and an enabler of her husband's sexual predations. Her foundation is beholden to foreign actors that have paid to have an influence on US foreign policy. Secret Service agents during the Billy Jeff the Zipper era considered it punishment to be assigned to her detail. She is overwhelmingly unpopular with the post-American public. Most importantly, she should be in prison for the way she handled classified information while at the State Department.
ReplyDeleteBad news, and LITD will work tirelessly to point that out, from now until whenever it is that she is no longer on the scene.
Borrrrrringgggggg. Oh, I sure pity the poor Secret Service agents. They have their own scandals to contend with. Your ilk failed in its attempt to impeach Bill and though you would have loved to seee a messy divorce, failed to get even that. Now you call her an enabler. I always knew you were hung-up, but a window peeper and a tight-ass moralist? Of course she is unpopular with the American public due to all your efforts to impugn her. Negative advertising is as effective as persuasive advertising. We have continually been bombarded with vile about the Clintons from your camp. I'm surprised you don't like Trump because insults and disparagement are his modality too. I'll probably have to stop pestering you here after the election because I'm sure it will be a repeat of the same old complaiing. You've lost credibility my man, as many of your past heroes I've continually railed against here have joined the Trump camp. I know you're disappointed and have nowhere to turn now but to continue to carp and obstruct. and saying someone should be in prison, hmm, go for it dude; you got her convicted and sentenced in your own mind. Then you attribute her freedom from prosectuion to near preternatural powers when it is simply because they and the people they surround themselves with are better lawyers and can beat your ilk's lawyers. Perhaps you should get thee to a monastery.
DeleteIf you think many people know what you are talking about when you call her an Alinskyite you are sorely mistaken and, though you might attribute that to them being clueless cattle, it's really because Alinsky really did not matter much outside of Chicago and the fact that some crazed 60s radicals started to read him. There are 2 sides to every coin and fact that Saul Alinsky was able to accomplish positive things on the south side of Chicago organizing poor black people. What's the crime? Should he have gone to jail too?
DeleteAlinsky's tactics included tying up bank teller lines with volunteers repeatedly exchanging a $100 bill for pennies and vice versa as a way to protest banking institutions, said John Kretzmann, professor at Northwestern University's School of Education and Social Policy. Another involved Alinsky's followers threatening to occupy all the bathrooms atO'Hare International Airportfor an entire day. The threat alone granted Alinsky a meeting with then-Mayor Richard J. Daley, Kretzmann said.
"Newt realizes this is just an act, saying Alinsky is a dangerous radical. Gingrich is enough of a historian to know what Alinsky was about," Horwitt said. "This is something that he is feeding to a part of the conservative right. (Alinsky) was not a bomb-throwing radical by any means."
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-01-24/news/ct-talk-saul-alinsky-0124-20120124_1_sanford-d-horwitt-saul-alinsky-newt-gingrich
Te Party had nothing to do with the rise of Squirrel-Hair.
ReplyDeleteTo some, his rise is clearly the Tea Party’s fault. The right-wingers, this argument goes, weakened and divided the party, stoking people’s rage against Washington and government. With racial undertones, their rallying cries preyed on fear and hatred. Figures like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh spent years telling the conservative base that Republican officeholders were selling them out at every turn, and that the only solution was to toss out anyone who’d been in office for more than five minutes—to elect new representatives whose answer to everything, even funding the normal operations of government, would be: “Hell, no.” They encouraged the base’s paranoia and conspiracy theories; its distrust of institutions, including political parties and the media; and its irrational hatred of anything associated with Barack Obama.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/did-the-tea-party-create-donald-trump/482004/
That vile shit about the Tea Party having anything to do with racial fear and hatred is completely without a basis in reality
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOK, here, I took that out
ReplyDeleteTo some, his rise is clearly the Tea Party’s fault. The right-wingers, this argument goes, weakened and divided the party, stoking people’s rage against Washington and government. Their rallying cries preyed on fear and hatred. Figures like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh spent years telling the conservative base that Republican officeholders were selling them out at every turn, and that the only solution was to toss out anyone who’d been in office for more than five minutes—to elect new representatives whose answer to everything, even funding the normal operations of government, would be: “Hell, no.” They encouraged the base’s paranoia and conspiracy theories; its distrust of institutions, including political parties and the media; and its irrational hatred of anything associated with Barack Obama.
Since you're not a conservative, you're utterly unequipped to appreciate how disgusted were with:
ReplyDelete1.) Boehner and McConnell making no effort to lead a resistance on executive overreach re: immigration, EPA regs, DoJ intrusion into local matters re: schools and police
2.) The above taking government shutdown off the table as a possibility, and caving over and over again on the debt ceiling
3.) The above not trying to mount any kind of effort to repeal and replace - or at least defund - the "A"CA
4.) the pathetic 2008 and 2012 presidential nominees
And there's nothing "irrational" about considering Barack Obama an enemy. He is a radical socialist with an agenda of planned decline.
Tell me you don't use Alinsky's Rule 12 in your efforts to destroy the Clintons and Obama and anyone else you don't agree with.
DeleteRULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
The Rules are admittedly very unChristian. Alinsky was a jew. What's your excuse?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bestofbeck.com/wp/activism/saul-alinskys-12-rules-for-radicals
No. Refuse to accept premise. Only reason I ever go after persons is to work to defeat bad, wrong principles
ReplyDeleteI hate redistributionism, moral relativism, planned decline, race hustling, and appeasement of obviously evil actors in order to preen as some kind of moral visionary.
ReplyDeleteRigor mortis of the soul. You mean progressive taxation, intellectual freedom, cyclical economic fluctuation, bigotry and hate, and negotiation?
ReplyDelete