Assessing the mythical first 100 days of the Trump presidency

As expected, the media has been making much of the first 100 days of the Trump presidency, with the focus primarily on his failures and his less than stellar approval/disapproval ratings. It’s a continuance of their hatred – yes hatred – of the man who stole the election from their candidate, Hillary Clinton. Continue reading

Flynn’s resignation, and more …

WAS THE PRESIDENT TOO HASTY in asking Mike Flynn for his resignation? I wonder. Word is that it was a matter of trust, and not the fact that he spoke to the Russian ambassador. He wasn’t honest with Vice President Mike Pence. ” The idea that one should be all aghast because the incoming national security advisor spoke with the Russian ambassador and spoke about sanctions seems to me to be perfectly reasonable,“ said commentator Charles Krauthammer. “The idea that it was illegal is preposterous … it’s a cover-up without a crime.”

I don’t understand why Flynn thought that he couldn’t be truthful regarding his discussion of matters with the ambassador that included sanctions. He should have publicly apologized and sought support. Regarding the president’s desire for trustworthiness in his staff – I get it – but I believe he should have come out when the story was fresh. Now some are asking the familiar question, “What did he know and when did the president know about it,” and the media is having a field day.

ELI LAKE, a digital reporter at Bloomberg, writes, “In the end, it was Trump’s decision to cut Flynn loose. In doing this he caved in to his political and bureaucratic opposition,” adding that “next it will be Kellyanne Conway, then it will be Steve Bannon, then it will be Reince Priebus.” Obviously, he doesn’t know the president very well.

REP. DAVID NUNES (R-CA) Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence said, “There does appear to be a well-orchestrated effort to attack Flynn and others in the administration.”

JIM WEBB, former Democrat senator and 2016 presidential candidate, appearing on Meet the Press last Sunday, said, “There is a campaign among DC media insiders, media and academia to personally discredit President Trump and the people around him.”

 DID YOU HEAR that Bilal Ahmed Askaryar, a gay human rights refugee from Afghanistan, has been charged with assault in the attempt to block newly confirmed Education Secretary Betsy DeVos from entering a Washington DC school? There’s more. He is a contributor to NPR.

WALL STREET JOURNAL Editor in Chief Gerard Baker upset a number of staffers when he demanded that it would be the WSJ’s policy to be objective when reporting on President Trump and his administration.

IT’S HARD TO BELIEVE that the president didn’t ask for the resignation of IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, who escaped impeachment, but is still under investigation by the Judiciary Committee. Surely his transition team has resumes of a number of individuals who could clean up that agency.

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON, in his 1995 State of the Union Address, said, “We are a nation of immigrants, but we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it.”

 

“W” was correct

“To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to Al Qaeda. It would mean that we’d be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we allow for terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean we’d be increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.” – President George W. Bush, July 12, 2007 press briefing.

july 12, 2007 press brfg fox news

A prophetic President Bush speaks of an Iraq left without U.S. troops in 2007. (foxnews.com)

While reading of the slow build-up of troops in Iraq, I was reminded of how prophetic President George W. Bush was as he was preparing to leave office, warning of the consequences of an early withdrawal from Iraq.

The handwriting was on the wall when Vice President Joe Biden failed to secure a status of forces agreement with Iraq and President Obama pledged to remove all troops from the country. ISIS took control of a major portion of Iraq and captured cities our troops had died for earlier. Continue reading

General Campbell takes principled stand on Afghanistan

“Based on conditions on the ground, I do believe we have to provide our senior leadership options different from the current plan we are going with.” – Gen. John Campbell, Oct. 6, 2015

I have frequently been critical of President Obama’s “lead from behind” foreign policy and his decision to fulfill his campaign promise to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan regardless of advice he gets from the Pentagon.

imageGen. John Campbell (stripes.com)

Gen. John Campbell (stripes.com)

At the same time, I have been critical of those generals who salute and obey the orders of the commander-in-chief to protect their careers. My Sept. 25, post, “Our military on “hold” until January 2017,” was my most recent piece on this subject.

Yesterday, however, Gen. John Campbell, our top commander in Afghanistan, told the Senate Armed Services Committee, that our long-standing plan for troop reductions there should be revised in favor of a larger U.S. presence. He referred to the changes on the ground  over the past two years, since the president last issued his plan for troop removals. Continue reading

Our military on “hold” until January 2017

As someone who believes in a strong defense, over the past six years I have watched President Obama weaken our military and the reputation it has enjoyed globally for years.

Austin_Lloyd - Commander, US Central Command

U.S. Army Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III (defense.gov)

I recently witnessed an embarrassing testimony by Army Gen. Lloyd Austin before the Senate Armed Services Committee, in which he said, “Despite some slow movement at the tactical level, we continue to make progress across the battlespace in support of the broader U.S. government strategy to degrade and ultimately defeat ISIS.”

In view of information that reports out of General Austin’s U. S. Central Command were overstated to paint a rosier picture of its success in Iraq and Syria, the Senators weren’t pleased with his testimony. It was learned that analysts were told to revise their reports of U.S. air strike damage to support command assessments of mission success. They were also urged to state that the killing of certain ISIS leaders would diminish the organization and lead to its collapse. Continue reading

Did Hillary Clinton’s naivete’ unintentionally tip off Benghazi attackers?

“I’m certainly aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.” – Hillary Clinton

If Hillary Clinton neither sent nor received classified information, just how did she carry out the normal day to day business of a secretary of state?

clinton1truthrevolt.org

Did the Benghazi attackers learn of Hillary’s plan to cut back on security through her unclassified e-mails? (truthrevolt,org)

Even her daily itinerary should have been classified. Friendly and unfriendly countries alike want to know who she’s meeting with and where.

One of the e-mails recently released by the State Department included a five-page, heavily redacted e-mail from Britain’s foreign secretary concerning Afghanistan. It had been forwarded to Hillary’s private e-mail account by her top aide, Huma Abedin.

I tried to imagine the likes of Dean Acheson, John Foster Dulles and Henry Kissinger operating without classified communications, but soon recognized that Hillary operated not as a secretary of state but as someone protecting her future candidacy for president.

On April 19, 2012, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responded to the request for more security at the Benghazi consulate articulating instead a plan to scale back security assets. Since she didn’t send classified information, one can suppose that those who attacked the Benghazi facility, killing the ambassador and three other Americans five months later, might have known they would encounter little or no resistance.

As I have written before …. and she wants to be president.