Trump: I don't trust U.S. intelligence information
85 replies, posted
[media]https://youtu.be/eBt26ef9O_c[/media]
[quote]Donald Trump offered a blunt explanation for why he wants retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn at his side as he gets his first classified briefing at FBI headquarters on Wednesday — he doesn't trust intelligence information coming from those currently in charge.
[/quote]
[quote]Earhardt followed up by asking whether Trump trusts "intelligence."
"Not so much from the people that have been doing it for our country. I mean, look what's happened over the last 10 years. Look what's happened over the years. It's been catastrophic. And, in fact, I won't use some of the people that are sort of your standards, you know, just use them, use them, use them, very easy to use them, but I won't use them because they've made such bad decisions," said Trump, who will also be joined by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie at the inaugural briefing. "You look at Iraq. You look at the Middle East. It's a total powder keg. It's a — if we would have never touched it, it would have been a lot better. I mean, we would have been much better off. On top of which, we've spent probably $4 trillion. Nobody even knows what we've spent. So, no, I have great people, and Gen. Flynn is one of them."[/quote]
[url=http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-us-intelligence-briefing-227109]source[/url]
Fox News video is similar to the one in the source, can't embed that one.
He's got all the great people on board, like Ailes and Manafort and Bannon.
Trump's already proven he's uninterested in listening to experts. He'd rather trust his gut feeling on issues like tax policy and national security instead of discuss the effects with experts and do research on the best possible policy. He'd happily ignore the experts, because he's ignorant and narcissistic and he doesn't think he can be wrong. Good thing he lost already.
Title is a reasonable assertion imo...
[QUOTE=.Isak.;50907224] He'd happily ignore the experts, because he's ignorant and narcissistic and he doesn't think he can be wrong.[/QUOTE]
He does have a consistent advisor on foreign affairs:
[quote]Donald Trump finally shared the name of someone he consults on foreign policy: himself.
Asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” who he talks with consistently about foreign policy, Trump responded, “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things."
"I know what I’m doing and I listen to a lot of people, I talk to a lot of people and at the appropriate time I’ll tell you who the people are," Trump said. “But my primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct for this stuff."
[/quote]
[url]http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/trump-foreign-policy-adviser-220853[/url]
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50907231]Title is a reasonable assertion imo...[/QUOTE]
How? Why?
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;50907271]How? Why?[/QUOTE]
hes pretty much stating that he thinks obama (for whatever reason) would give him bad intel. this is a bullshit accusation just like his assertion that the election will be rigged. these things are supposed to prevent a candidate from being completely wrong on fogeign policy but if he chooses to ignore it completely theres nothing we can really do
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;50907271]How? Why?[/QUOTE]
Considering just a week ago a Congressional panel determined that [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/12/us/politics/isis-centcom-intelligence.html?_r=1]US military officials were distorting intelligence about ISIS[/url] I really don't think it's unreasonable to bring someone with familiarity with military intelligence as a second opinion.
He should bring along Alex Jones while he's at it
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;50907318]He should bring along Alex Jones while he's at it[/QUOTE]
gotta win the war on info
I am always really confused whenever I see Trump talk or his quotes.
like is this just a joke? I mean, Who the fuck actually talks like that?
[QUOTE=.Isak.;50907224]
Trump's already proven he's uninterested in listening to experts. He'd rather trust his gut feeling on issues like tax policy and national security instead of discuss the effects with experts and do research on the best possible policy. He'd happily ignore the experts, because he's ignorant and narcissistic and he doesn't think he can be wrong. Good thing he lost already.[/QUOTE]
"President Trump, we've got Russian fleets closing in on New York"
"Get every ship in Hawaii ready to intercept them!"
[QUOTE=Valiantttt;50907677]I am always really confused whenever I see Trump talk or his quotes.
like is this just a joke? I mean, Who the fuck actually talks like that?[/QUOTE]
I still don't know if he's intentionally dumbing down his language to a fourth-grade level to appeal to as many idiots as possible, or if that's actually just how he talks and he has the speech patterns of a nine year old.
Couple months ago I'd say option one because I thought he was pandering to the far right for the primary, now I think his diction just reflects his (lack of) intelligence.
iirc, we had people in intelligence telling us not to do the shit we did, but we did it anyways, so basically, congrants Trump, you are making the same mistake
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50901200]Will somebody finally be briefing him on how terrorist networks operate so that he can understand why his plan to ban Muslims is stupid as fuck and actively counter-productive?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50901294]Given that that kind of information is more or less common knowledge, I doubt a security briefing will help any.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=CroGamer002;50901599]Nah, he'd just fire those people if he wins presidency.[/QUOTE]
Yep, ya'll were right. Trump isn't interested in the truth. He doesn't care what intelligence services have to say on the matter unless they're feeding into his delusions.
This fucking clown shouldn't even come within spitting distance of any real power, and the fact that he's now actually a goddamn [B]presidential nominee[/B] is absolutely disgusting. Anybody who has cast a vote for this guy should be ashamed of themselves. It's absolutely humiliating.
[QUOTE=catbarf;50907313]Considering just a week ago a Congressional panel determined that [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/12/us/politics/isis-centcom-intelligence.html?_r=1]US military officials were distorting intelligence about ISIS[/url] I really don't think it's unreasonable to bring someone with familiarity with military intelligence as a second opinion.[/QUOTE]
Jokes aside, though, you're not wrong. There have been multiple senate and congressional panels that show a lot of poor intelligence-gathering tactics over the years - like the blatantly incorrect Intel that said there were WMDs in Iraq. It's fair to be skeptical of the accuracy/efficacy of our intelligence operations, but Trump isn't the one who will be improving those systems.
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;50907271]How? Why?[/QUOTE]
Read some wikileaks articles, or the news, or look at their track record. US intelligence has been used to manipulate basically everyone and their sister.
Im not saying obama deliberately does things to make trump look dumb, trump has that pretty much covered... but to steer policy in general or to ignore one side of the story because of personal bias... the US intelligence has verifiable been used and been wrong time and time again.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;50907224]He's got all the great people on board, like Ailes and Manafort and Bannon.
Trump's already proven he's uninterested in listening to experts. He'd rather trust his gut feeling on issues like tax policy and national security instead of discuss the effects with experts and do research on the best possible policy. He'd happily ignore the experts, because he's ignorant and narcissistic and he doesn't think he can be wrong. Good thing he lost already.[/QUOTE]
And you say good thing to that? Why do you neo liberals always say that? HOW IS CLINTON A GOOD THING? She will fuck you over as much or more than Trump.
"good thing that psycho made me chug sulphuric acid instead of bleach"
That "good thing" attitude is fucked up and you should not act like this is a victory for you while hillary is still in the campaign.
"I won't use US intelligence information"
Okay, yeah I can understand that like all espionage it could be wrong, but what exactly is the alternative?
Is he going to rely on CNN and Fox News on information about North Korea and Russia? Is he going to stick his fingers in his ears and ignore everything and do whatever comes to his 3rd grade level brain?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50907983]"I won't use US intelligence information"
Okay, yeah I can understand that like all espionage it could be wrong, but what exactly is the alternative?
Is he going to rely on CNN and Fox News on information about North Korea and Russia? Is he going to stick his fingers in his ears and ignore everything and do whatever comes to his 3rd grade level brain?[/QUOTE]
trying to find a sensible reasoning behind it i assume he thinks he can reform the intelligence agencies to be better once he becomes prez.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50907995]trying to find a sensible reasoning behind it i assume he thinks he can reform the intelligence agencies to be better once he becomes prez.[/QUOTE]
He can't even reform his own campaign, how would he improve any government agency?
We'll see a new CIA director every other week.
My money is on a Trump presidency changing out its [I]entire[/I] cabinet every 3-4 months.
[editline]18th August 2016[/editline]
Trump will make Reagan's line about "government is the problem" as literal as possible.
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;50907950]And you say good thing to that? Why do you neo liberals always say that? HOW IS CLINTON A GOOD THING? She will fuck you over as much or more than Trump.
"good thing that psycho made me chug sulphuric acid instead of bleach"
That "good thing" attitude is fucked up and you should not act like this is a victory for you while hillary is still in the campaign.[/QUOTE]
His post doesn't say it's a good thing Clinton is winning, it says it's a good thing Trump is losing.
I've yet to see how Clinton's plan is just as bad as Trump's when Trump's plan has included:
1. Defaulting on our debt. This will ruin foreign investment and 401Ks.
2. A tax plan that adds ~10 Trillion to our deficit and stunts our economic growth.
3. Stripping US citizens of their rights to a fair trial and presumed innocence AND extending punishment to their families potentially.
4. Shutting down the department of education.
5. Abandoning our NATO allies.
6. Ignoring the threats posed by global climate change and enacting policies/practices that will accelerate the damage that's already been done.
What has Clinton said that comes anywhere near any single one of these issues?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50908011]He can't even reform his own campaign, how would he improve any government agency?
We'll see a new CIA director every other week.
My money is on a Trump presidency changing out its [I]entire[/I] cabinet every 3-4 months.
[editline]18th August 2016[/editline]
Trump will make Reagan's line about "government is the problem" as literal as possible.[/QUOTE]
Stuff like this just makes me cringe. Yes trump is probably not a heavyweight on political knowhow, yes he probably isnt the smartest pea in the pond but to dismiss him like this like he is some fool is dangerous... and is the reason he got this far.
The only reason he started to droop imo is because MSM started to treat his campaign with a respectable odd at winning...
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;50907950]And you say good thing to that? Why do you neo liberals always say that? HOW IS CLINTON A GOOD THING? She will fuck you over as much or more than Trump.
"good thing that psycho made me chug sulphuric acid instead of bleach"
That "good thing" attitude is fucked up and you should not act like this is a victory for you while hillary is still in the campaign.[/QUOTE]
I like how you straight up decided to call out the so-called neoliberals.
What are your sources that say that she will fuck over the American government and people more than Trump's insane combo of neutering all the existing free trade policies and agreements, literally gutting whole state departments, and destroying any semblance of hope of American citizens having affordable health insurance for a "new plan" that will leave millions in the dust? Where will he get, for instance, the half trillion dollars needed to pay for those reforms alone, after potential savings were calculated? Conduct austerity policies to fuck over the economy some more, because austerity worked so well for the other countries that tried implementing it, right?
Please, I'm interested in hearing your side of the story, as long as you have legitimate backing for these claims that aren't fearmongering or thinly veiled conspiracy theory bullcrap about how 'everybody associated with clinton died' which got disproved a long time ago.
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;50907950]And you say good thing to that? Why do you neo liberals always say that? HOW IS CLINTON A GOOD THING? She will fuck you over as much or more than Trump.
"good thing that psycho made me chug sulphuric acid instead of bleach"
That "good thing" attitude is fucked up and you should not act like this is a victory for you while hillary is still in the campaign.[/QUOTE]
Because Hillary's tax plan won't immediately end any hope I have of achieving a sustainable middle-class lifestyle, while Trump's would bring socioeconomic mobility to a dead stop. Because Hillary won't stifle innovation on the Internet by eliminating net neutrality, like Trump has repeatedly pledged to do. Because Hillary won't eliminate the ACA, the only way my family was able to get decent healthcare after I spent my entire childhood going to express clinics. Because Hillary won't turn the US into the laughingstock of the Western world. Because Hillary's never expressed confusion about the concept of mutually assured destruction. There's about a thousand reasons why I prefer Hillary over Trump.
Hillary has low ratings whole running and consistently moderate-to-high ratings while actually in office. This was true as senator and as secretary. I don't see why the presidency will be different.
Also, Hillary could lose every single battleground state right now - including Pennsylvania, where she's like 12 points up - and she's still win. She's pretty much locked in at this point. Sorry, the globalist neoliberal shills ruined America again, just like with every other democrat.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50908035]Stuff like this just makes me cringe. Yes trump is probably not a heavyweight on political knowhow, yes he probably isnt the smartest pea in the pond but to dismiss him like this like he is some fool is dangerous... and is the reason he got this far.
The only reason he started to droop imo is because MSM started to treat his campaign with a respectable odd at winning...[/QUOTE]
Not knowing 'political knowhow' is pretty damn bad. Generally speaking, how someone runs their campaign is the best example of how they'll run their office.
Trump has fired and switched out 3 or 4 major campaign runners in the past 6 months. Not only does that cause havoc for all the staffers who must readjust for a new boss each and every time, but it's a clear example that Trump just does not know [I]who[/I] to put into the right office.
Now picture that for an entire presidential cabinet. Having a new secretary of state every month will cause havoc with international affairs, having a new secretary of defense could hurt our military.
When doodling on paper, being an idiot isn't dangerous. When being a president, being an idiot [I]is dangerous.[/I]
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50908035]Yes trump is probably not a heavyweight on political knowhow[/QUOTE]
understatement of the millennia
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50908115]Not knowing 'political knowhow' is pretty damn bad. Generally speaking, how someone runs their campaign is the best example of how they'll run their office.
Trump has fired and switched out 3 or 4 major campaign runners in the past 6 months. Not only does that cause havoc for all the staffers who must readjust for a new boss each and every time, but it's a clear example that Trump just does not know [I]who[/I] to put into the right office.
Now picture that for an entire presidential cabinet. Having a new secretary of state every month will cause havoc with international affairs, having a new secretary of defense could hurt our military.
When doodling on paper, being an idiot isn't dangerous. When being a president, being an idiot [I]is dangerous.[/I][/QUOTE]
Even if we were to try to spin his constant staff shuffling as something good (he's flexible? hah.) rather than a glimpse into the impending train wreck that his presidential term would be, the people he's been picking have all been [I]consistently awful[/I]. Not only does he not know how to run his campaign, not only does he not know much of anything on foreign policy, science based issues, or the English language, he's [I]consistently[/I] picking idiots, and in his terms, he's picking [B]losers[/B].
So Trump dose not trust intelligence?
Makes sense.
[QUOTE=elitehakor;50908147]understatement of the millennia[/QUOTE]
The fact that Trump has zero political experience is immediately disqualifying. Same goes for Stein. To be the president, you [I]require[/I] a great degree of "political knowhow" that you only get from holding elected office. The only other replacement for political experience is military experience, because success in the military (like Eisenhower) shows phenomenal leadership capability, strong communication skills, and excellent critical thinking skills.
Inheriting money from your daddy and sinking it into real estate while failing to grow your father's fortune significantly isn't indicative of leadership ability, communication skills, political knowhow, tact, and most importantly, [I]knowing how to take advice.[/I] Trump is fundamentally unqualified for the job. Hillary is an awful presidential candidate, but she's a capable and experienced politician. The choice is so fucking obvious it's hard to understand how anyone is still latched on to Trump.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;50908229]The fact that Trump has zero political experience is immediately disqualifying. Same goes for Stein. To be the president, you [I]require[/I] a great degree of "political knowhow" that you only get from holding elected office. The only other replacement for political experience is military experience, because success in the military (like Eisenhower) shows phenomenal leadership capability, strong communication skills, and excellent critical thinking skills.
Inheriting money from your daddy and sinking it into real estate while failing to grow your father's fortune significantly isn't indicative of leadership ability, communication skills, political knowhow, tact, and most importantly, [I]knowing how to take advice.[/I] Trump is fundamentally unqualified for the job. Hillary is an awful presidential candidate, but she's a capable and experienced politician. The choice is so fucking obvious it's hard to understand how anyone is still latched on to Trump.[/QUOTE]
"B-But Hillary is corrupt"
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.