Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And when Romney spoke against Russia you neocons were cheering him on and in lockstep about the evil Russian menace. Now your Il Duce is kissing Putin's butt and the story is they are just nice guys we should court.
Please make up your minds and ditch the hypocrisy.
The fact is, most do not see "Russia" as an enemy. Rather, we know for a fact that Russian politicians interfered with our election and we have no idea of the extent to which the incoming trump administration colluded in this.
Putin, like trump, is a well-known and admitted fraud and liar. In Putin's case, a murderer or at least someone who has had murder committed for him.
These are not nice, good guys.
They are, instead, autocrats who seek to complete the work necessary to make both nations essentially oil companies with armies, forever profiting from wars.
And when Romney said Russia is our biggest threat, liberals snickered! Now liberals claim Russia is our biggest threat. So which is it? Romney was just that much more perceptive than Obama--Obama is not the sharpest knife in the kitchen.
In Clinton's case, she is a well-known and admitted fraud and liar. Hillary and Bill Clinton have had individuals silenced through 'unexplainable' accidents (mechanical failures) and surprising 'suicides' when these people knew of their dirty dealings and could possibly threaten their position/power in the U.S.
Clintons are not nice, decent people. Trump isn't exactly either, but he doesn't pretend to be. He is not a phony. Hillary is a huge phony and fraud.
If I read you incorrectly, I apologize up front if I am wrong.
IMO, it is ALL ABOUT PARTISANSHIP.
These are mostly Obama leftovers and wanted to continue his policies with Hillary and will do whatever they can , and get awat with, to help destroy Trump's presidency.
Oh, nonsense.
The Intelligence Community is made up of 16 agencies with almost a half million government employees (including military). The career and senior level people (GS-12 to 15 and Senior Executive Service) are people who have been in the Intelligence Community through five to seven presidential administrations.
The Intelligence Community is made up of 16 agencies with almost a half million government employees (including military). The career and senior level people (GS-12 to 15 and Senior Executive Service) are people who have been in the Intelligence Community through five to seven presidential administrations.
I think you are jumping to conclusions and m misrepresenting what I have said.
I THINK it is the political appointees, or former appointees, of which there are plenty of them.
"Tony Shaffer, a retired lieutenant colonel and intelligence expert,"
"Employees of the intelligence agencies Shaffer suspected to be involved in the leaks are "mid-level managers" and "former political appointees who burrowed themselves into the infrastructure as career intelligence officers."
"Tony Shaffer, a retired lieutenant colonel and intelligence expert,"
...
He cold be right or he could be wrong.
We NEED to find out.
...
The issues @ the heart of the matter need to be investigated & resolved. Shaffer's charges are peripheral - this is a retired Lt. Col. from the US Army Reserve, & apparently the source on Able Danger & a memoir & a novel. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthon...nce_officer%29
It's not clear to me - was he ever regular US Army? His memoir is back from when he was a reports officer in Afghanistan.
& no offense to the Reserves - they served a brutal number of rotations in the Middle East, as the US regular troop strength was drawn down & the Reserves had to be ready to step in. The Reserves suffered a lot of casualties, WIA & KIA.
I think you are jumping to conclusions and m misrepresenting what I have said.
I THINK it is the political appointees, or former appointees, of which there are plenty of them.
"Tony Shaffer, a retired lieutenant colonel and intelligence expert,"
"Employees of the intelligence agencies Shaffer suspected to be involved in the leaks are "mid-level managers" and "former political appointees who burrowed themselves into the infrastructure as career intelligence officers."
The issues @ the heart of the matter need to be investigated & resolved. Shaffer's charges are peripheral - this is a retired Lt. Col. from the US Army Reserve, & apparently the source on Able Danger & a memoir & a novel. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthon...nce_officer%29
It's not clear to me - was he ever regular US Army? His memoir is back from when he was a reports officer in Afghanistan.
& no offense to the Reserves - they served a brutal number of rotations in the Middle East, as the US regular troop strength was drawn down & the Reserves had to be ready to step in. The Reserves suffered a lot of casualties, WIA & KIA.
"The issues @ the heart of the matter need to be investigated & resolved."
I think you are jumping to conclusions and m misrepresenting what I have said.
I THINK it is the political appointees, or former appointees, of which there are plenty of them.
"Tony Shaffer, a retired lieutenant colonel and intelligence expert,"
"Employees of the intelligence agencies Shaffer suspected to be involved in the leaks are "mid-level managers" and "former political appointees who burrowed themselves into the infrastructure as career intelligence officers."
Do you know each and everyone of these PERSONALLY?
"Who are these....?"
THAT is what an investigation should find out.
P.S. It is NOT unusual for tis to happen.
I have witnessed it personally during my career with Uncle Sam.
I ALSO am FROM D.C. and have seen a lot of "stuff" going on.
I know how careers in the Beltway intelligence community work. The people in substantive intelligence production roles will not be appointed wunderkinder, they will be people who have been in the business for decades.
There are only so many and certain positions that can even be appointed by the president rather than filled through the Civil Service mechanism--and Civil Service people will make sure those are tightly controlled--so any appointed positions can be identified by anyone who claims their occupants are working in the interests of a past administration.
It's up to the person making a new assertion to prove it. Presidential appointments are not secret, every one is public information. So if someone is asserting that they're causing trouble for the new president, then name their names.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The issues need to be addressed
