Trump suggests venerated Navy SEAL commander should have found bin Laden faster
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
“Wouldn’t it have been nice if we got Osama bin Laden a lot sooner than that, wouldn’t it have been nice?” the president said. “You know, living — think of this — living in Pakistan, beautifully in Pakistan, in what I guess they considered a nice mansion, I don’t know, I’ve seen nicer, but living in Pakistan right next to the military academy. Everybody in Pakistan knew he was there.”
Tags
Who is online
78 visitors
Donald Trump has got to be the stupidest, not to mention the most misleading, dishonest, etc., man on the face of this planet.
Remember, according to Trump he knows more than the generals...He gained all that knowledge from military school that he attended or it could have been from his combat experience in Vietnam...Oh wait.
I know, right?
On behalf of my brother who died while serving in the United States Navy, my father who served in the United States Air Force, my 3 uncles who also served in the United States Navy, my grandfather who served in the United States Army, I'd like to tell Cadet Bone-spurs to blow it out his big, fat, bazoo. Sideways.
A big salute to your family service members, Sister.
He earned two purple hearts in the cafeteria and a bronze star in gym class.
I thought the bronze was for avoiding STDs.
Trump must have a chest of fruit salad. I wasn't aware of that service ribbon.
Well, it would complement his face full of word salad.
I didn't need that mental image, especially today.
EWWW just ewwwwwwwwww
Kind of turns you off of salad don't it?
Don't forget the STD's!
Damnit, beat me to it.. LOL
Great minds...
Despite the fact that I eat it I don't do it because I like it. I do it because I am trying to not get fat. I'm not aware of any woman who eats salad because they like they crave the flavor of iceberg lettuce, carrots, and radishes.
The Asian papaya salad or tabbouleh beats any western tossed salad.
Believe it or not, I actually love a salad.
But I don't use iceberg lettuce. I like radishes, but they give me heartburn every. single. time.
I buy the bagged blends but they always get slimy before I finish them. Iceberg lettuce tastes like green packing peanuts to me, even it is is supposed to be healthy.
I first tried the SE Asian papaya salad at a Cambodian restaurant and I love it but it is not something to make at home.
I like radishes but I get heartburn from blue cheese, even if I crave it.
Keeps for several weeks, and tastes better than iceberg. I avoid the bagged blends because of the sliminess.
I'll look for that. The bags get slimy after 2-3 days being opened if I squeeze the air out and bag them in a zip bag.
I always thought the best salad came from your garden, picked fresh daily and, made daily.
It does, but lettuce and spinach typically only grow for about a month in my garden before the temps get too high, and they start tasting bitter.
The only thing for that is to buy them in a store and, grow everything else but, only get enough lettuce and, spinach for the amount of salad you plan on making. Also, if you put the lettuce or, spinach in a bowl and, then put that bowl into some ice and, cover it with wrap it helps to keep the lettuce and, spinach from going "slimy" so quick.
Thank you for the laugh. I needed it.
It's cold, green, and crunchy but it has no real flavor of its own. It's what I imagine a packing peanut would taste like if you kept it in the 'fridge.
The lettuce from the link I posted actually stays nice and crisp for quite a while. That's what I use when the lettuce and spinach I grow each year have gone to seed. I use a salad spinner, and that leaves just enough moisture to keep it from wilting, but not enough to encourage spoilage.
I try to keep a salad in the fridge most of the time. It helps me avoid making lousy food choices when I get home from work and I'm hungry.
Before they came up with all this fancy stuff for salads like salad spinners my mother use to take damp paper towels and, cover the lettuce leaves in layers to keep them just moist enough to keep them crisp as well.
Thanks, Kav. Both my mom and dad were recently buried at the Dallas Ft. Worth National Cemetery. I never knew a cemetery could be that beautiful. On a lighter note, my mom will be on top...forever. She's probably nagging the crap out of him right now and there's not a thing he can do about it.
We also just learned that even though my brother's remains were never recovered, a memorial plaque will be included in an area of remembrance there.
Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Trust me on this one thing: Drowning it in homemade bleu cheese dressing makes it incredibly crave-worthy. On the other hand, I've been known to drink homemade bleu cheese dressing as a beverage.
I make a vinaigrette dressing for salads. I like blue cheese on Triscuit crackers or the ultimate decadence is blue cheese on a burger.
This is my problem. I also eat when I am stressed.
Trump would be a more effective leader if his mouth was stapled shut. I'm talking about 2 large box staples thru his lips on each side of a big plastic feeding tube in the center of his mouth, so he could suck down his daily regimen of KFC and Mc D's, after it's been thru the blender. Stitching his thumbs to his index fingers would help out a little too.
Stitching his thumbs to his index fingers would help out a little too.
That's a great idea, but I'm pretty sure it's going to take more than that to keep him from tweeting us into WWIII.
I'm flexible, have them stitched to his mushroom dick. It's probably the same length as his thumbs.
Nope. Trump would be a more effective...………….if his taxes were revealed, his Russian, Turkish, Saudi ties were revealed and his general distain of facts were unbiasedly revealed.
Come on man, no ones thumbs are that short.
Note to self: Purchase economy-sized mental eye bleach first thing in the morning.
or better yet...
Brain bleach? Perfect!! Although...I'm fairly certain that mushrooms will still be off the menu for a while.
Is that anything like bleach bit?
Sounds like ivanka could use it.
Donald Trump has got to be the stupidest,
Well, he did say to stop forest fires, all that has to be done is some raking of the leaves, he believes he is genius, his followers believes he is a genius, so here were are with 30% of the population holding this man as a genius while we are been flushed down the tubes with this genius...
While I am no fan if Donald Trump, please tell me how and where in the statement above he even comes close to blaming said Seal commander? Sounds to me like yoy are reaching quite a bit there.
But, of course, the former ADM can get away with his comments against Trump, right?
Are you advocating for censoring Adm. McRaven?
My friend Peter Ticktin, who was an A Company platoon sergeant, emailed me recently to say he saw Trump as someone who kept his thoughts to himself and delegated his responsibilities.
We did't have emails in 1964.
I'm not a Trump fan, but this article sounds it was written out of imagination. The NYMA does things like that to people.
Um....?
Wha?
How anyone can defend this pos is beyond my comprehension! He is a fucking disgrace to the office of the President. He is poor excuse for a human being.
At the end of John McCain's life the Potus and his staff ( Sadler, Huckabee, etal) couldn't stop mocking the Senator or his illness.
Now the President is picking on another legendary veteran who has retired from public life to deal with his chronic lymphocytic leukemia, a type of slow-growing blood cancer that he was diagnosed with in 2010 while in Afghanistan .
Sad.
Maybe he should take his wife's hypocritical advice and try to Be Best.
Absolutely. And use the 'Be Best' moment to cut more from the CHIP's Program.
At the very least! What I don't understand is how his veteran base can continue to remain silent as he craps all over those who have put their lives on the line just to keep us safe.
It's baffling. I don't know why I keep saying that.....hahahahaha
I keep waiting for them to rise to the occasion but they keep failing. There is something rotten in their core like the man they voted for. He is truly a mirror of his base.
seems it's not really that difficult for the diehard MAGA crowd. party over country, justice, etc, etc...
Ah yes It's funny how the left suddenly became big fans of McCain
Ahh. Bush eight years and no Osama.
Obama, about a year and half and Osama gone.
Trump. Nearly a decade for his Birtherism proof. His Taxes have been under audit since 1913. Still waiting for his 'physical examination' to see if his pecker matches the description claimed by Karen McDougal.
Gee Trump. Go rake some leaves.
....I have a few suggestions on where that could take place.
Is there a covfefe involved?
On Rye with Ketchup.
[Removed] Taxes since 1913 - c'mon - Trump wasn't even born then. Learn some facts before you type your responses.
Maybe all of you should actually read the quote and quit inserting your own words into it. Trump wasn't criticizing our military. He was wishing that Bin Laden had been taken out sooner and the the PAKISTANI govt knew where he was. Reading comprehension is a good thing.
Perhaps one should not 'insert' words or thoughts into what the Trump thinks, means or conjects. Hell, Trump does not have a clue. He only reacts to stimuli, like a paramecium.
trmp is a paramecium
I was just thinking the same thing after reading your comment.
Then I guess you can point me to where Trump mentioned the Navy SEAL team in his quote.
Considering your extraordinary level of intelligence, I'm surprised that you were unable to make the connection that has been bitch-slap obvious to so many others.
I guess making connections like that must be a symptom of TDS because healthy minded people don't read into things that aren't there.
form the interview as posted on XX's article;
Does this sound like praise for the Admiral, the CIA, Military intelligence or any of the units involved?
No
It is partisan criticism.
The main focus was on criticism of Pakistan and covering for Bin Laden. Just because somebody is high ranking in the military doesn't make them non partisan. I don't see a lot of love coming from the left over guys like Mike Flynn or David Patreus.
Mike Flynn?
Wow - why am I not surprised.
WALLACE: Bill McRaven, Retired Admiral, Navy Seal, 37 years, former head of U.S. Special Operations --
TRUMP: Hillary Clinton fan.
WALLACE: Special Operations --
TRUMP: Excuse me, Hillary Clinton fan.
WALLACE: Who led the operations, commanded the operations that took down Saddam Hussein and that killed Osama bin Laden says that your sentiment is the greatest threat to democracy in his lifetime.
TRUMP: OK, he’s a Hilary Clinton, uh, backer and an Obama-backer and frankly -
McRaven replies:
"I did not back Hillary Clinton or anyone else," McRaven said in a statement to CNN on Sunday in response to Trump's comments.
"I am a fan of President Obama and President George W. Bush, both of whom I worked for."
McRaven said he admires all presidents, "regardless of their political party, who uphold the dignity of the office and who use that office to bring the Nation together in challenging times."
"I stand by my comment that the President's attack on the media is the greatest threat to our democracy in my lifetime. When you undermine the people's right to a free press and freedom of speech and expression, then you threaten the Constitution and all for which it stands." (LINK)
"McRaven said he admires all presidents, "regardless of their political party, who uphold the dignity of the office and who use that office to bring the Nation together in challenging times." '
“Your leadership, however, has shown little of these qualities,” McRaven added. “Through your actions, you have embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation.”
Gads - love the show of admiration. Speaking with "forked tongue" there ADM?????
McRaven set a standard for his admiration of presidents:
Then he states why he feels that Trump fails to meet that standard:
So to answer your question:
The answer is NO. McRaven's statement was not false in any way.
Nice deflection. You still cannot or will not answer Rmando's question or mine. Where did he mention or assign blame to the Seal commander? Face it, you cannot answer truthfully can you?
To suggest that I would not post a truthful comment, whether in response to another comment, or simply making a statement appropriate to the thread, almost hurts my feelings.
That said...Trump's attack of Admiral McRaven, which includes the 'Wouldn't it have been nice' comment, was in response to statements made by Mr. Wallace regarding the op-ed published by McRaven.
Once again (or as usual) 1st is on the wrong side of the argument.
RNC backs Trump attack on retired Navy Admiral William McRaven
RNC is backed into a corner by the Trump.
Possible NRA receiving Russian/Saudi money----Possible RNC receiving Russian/Saudi money----Judicial Watch also on the list.
These are only three and there are more. The investigations are ongoing. There is so much stuff it is overwhelming. America's democracy is compromised.
Judicial Watch????
That's bad news for some NT'ers.....
Does that "R" stand for Republican?
Trump suggests venerated Navy SEAL commander should have found bin Laden faster
He would have but He had to stop and soak His bone spurs.
In other words, Mr. Trump has nothing to say to anyone who has served, President or not.
If I'm not mistaken, that decision is not up to theSEALS.
Another body (I believe its the CIA) decides what actions need to be taken-- and when. Then the CIA issues the orders.
Then the SEALS execute their orders. But they don't decide what must must be done, and when-- the CIA does that.
True. Except US INTEL must be absolutely positive and 100% confident that the 'target' is where it is and the operation will succeed.
For years nobody was sure where bin Laden was. For years many reports were received and all of them were determined false by their accuracy and/or intent.
How, I ask you, how can any in the military or any veterans still be blinded?
Aren't they paying attention? Military contractors at least have motivation$...
Maybe they have sympathy for the fellow Americans in uniform like our Border Patrol, ICE agents and local police who are all routinely vilified by left wing politicians and radicals.
Please cite a 'left wing politician' who has 'vilified' those who have served in the military MORE routinely than Trump?
Oh please that Harris bitch just called ICE the KKK.
Post 4.3 I showed the left respect for John McCain.
Oh I forgot anything that the left has done is old news because today is the new news why'll they constantly reinvent themselves.
So what are the lefts plans now other than crying about what President Trump said everyday?
ICE isn't the military
ICE isn't the military. Deflection.
No one you cited is a 'left wing politician'.
Citing what others have done to defend what Trump has done is whataboutism.
You'll have to wait and see.
I heard today that part of their 2020 strategy was to "fight racism". I hope they look deep into their own ranks for that fight. There are plenty.
[ deleted ]
Since you want to play, who said..."I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."
Who said … "[g]etting shot down, tortured, and then doing propaganda for the enemy is not command experience."
The ad, purchased by MoveOn.org, branded Army Gen. David Petraeus as “General Betray Us.”
Just own it for Christ sake, [ deleted: sweeping generalization ]
So you responded to Rmando by deflecting to the Military is that also whataboutism?
I think all left politicians spoke for themselves when they voted against military pay raises.
Gee one of your own has a new word for it its called a second viewpoint.
Just because you don't like it I really don't care what you call it. My point was made.
Thanks for admitting you don't have a clue either.
So you try to deflect from your whataboutism with more whataboutism.
What bill was that KD? Link please.
Nope, what you posted is not a 'second viewpoint', it's whatabout what X did/said. Hence whataboutism.
Great, your 'point' was whataboutism. Glad we cleared that up.
Here you go. Now you can do your spin...
Now that POS John Kerry really gets me. Makes me wonder about if his rumored actions in the service are actually true?
I don't see how any Military could vote for a Democrat.
Why are you bringing that up? Its totally irrelevant! Those agencies did not participate in the raid to capture/kill bin Laden!
(Look at a map-- if you don't have any idea where Pakistan is located, you can google to find a map of Pakistan. Its clearly not with-in their jusidiction!)
And when you have nothing this is what you deflect to as a response.
Here's my 'spin':
So to follow your lead, what about you posting a link to Trump's apology to McCain.
Many of the Marines I know would say hoo rah.
That's not 'vitriol' those are fact based opinions. If you need a touchstone for 'vitriol', go read what Trump said about McRaven and McCain.
That may have more to do with your limited world view than any reality. BTFW, I guess you didn't notice how many Vets ran and WON as Democrats in the midterms.
Since you didn't post a link to the bill, you seem to be the one who has nothing KD.
BTFW, how is calling out YOUR continued whataboutism, while talking about YOUR whataboutism, a deflection KD?
Bahahaha What a fail.
BTFW you asked for a left wing politician Denigrating the military. I provided it.
Many of the Marines I know hate the left and would never vote Blue.
Spin sputter nutter butter.
You can thank me later if you want for providing the information you wanted.
I don't think I need to post it twice. If you can't figure it out the first time WTF would I think you could do it the second?
Actually, I asked for a left wing politician who 'vilified' those who served in the military MORE than Trump. In that you failed miserably.
That may be the most poignant comment you've ever made.
Since that is the level of cogency I have come to expect from you, I doubt it.
You DID NOT post a link to the bill that you claim the Dems voted against raising military pay.
Please proceed.
John Murtha was a Marine's Marine.
Eagle Scout
Boot Camp, Paris Island, 1952
Drill Instructor PIMCRD
Officers Candidate School
Separated to the Reserves in 1955
Volunteered for VietNam 1966-67
serving as a battalion staff officer (S-2 Intelligence Section), receiving the Bronze Star with Valor device, two Purple Hearts, and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry. He retired from the Marine Corps Reserve as a Colonel in 1990, receiving the Navy Distinguished Service Medal. Wiki
I may not have always agreed with him, but damn it, he earned the right to speak his opinions.
Semper Fi
Good for you.
What does your comment have to do with Dulay wanting to know when a Left wing politician has vilified the military?
Please try to stay on the subject. Nobody asked for John Murtha's Credentials.
I missed it, as well. Please post it again.
Maybe you and Dulay can get together and figure it out together?
Perhaps you can make an attempt to 'adult' and support the assertion that you made.
I'm pretty sure that you pulled your claim out the inner recesses of your nether region and neither I nor Sister have any intention of delving into your 'source'.
You keep intentionally ignoring the MORE than Trump predicate. Why?
Thank you for your suggestion. I'll take it under advisement. In the meantime, please repost your link.
From your link in your comment. You introduced Murtha as a Democrat who vilified the military,
which could not have been further from the truth.
Next time use your head and your words.....
That's your opinion.
Don't tell me WTF to do. You Jump in with a topic that had nothing to do with my response to Dulay.
Tell you what, you feel so compelled to help Dulay maybe you can direct him to the link I posted about Democrats Voting against Military pay raises. Maybe the 3 of you can accomplish that?
Wow. If falsely calling Marines murderers of civilians isn't vilifying them, I don't know what is.
Political parties vote against different bills for different reasons. That's politics. HR1735 was introduced in April 2015 and there was no way it wasn't going to be a 6 month ordeal of negotiating.
No one really cares how Paul Ryan feels about a meaningless vote on the House floor in May 2015. ( ) Particularly Paul Ryan. He set it up.
It's all Paul Ryan's opinion. What else would you expect from the Leader of the House? He set the Dems up for that vote because he could and because he & others could point to it in the future as if it had any meeting whatsoever and say "See, see how they voted"?
Anyone who voted against HR 1735 did so because it was
HR1735 was a GOP grandstand act which Obama promised to veto all year long, and eventually he did veto it on Oct 15, 2015.
Voting against a defense bill is not the same as voting against military pay raises.
You are trying to tie together two totally different things. There was never a stand alone bill for a military pay raise. It was all tied together within a large omnibus bill which included all of government.
To say that they voted against military pay raises is disingenuous at best.
That is not disparaging the military. Actually he is correct. My great Uncle was a pilot during the second world war. He said the same thing. All he had to do was fly over and drop his load. Never had to see what the aftermath was. Until one day he found out he bombed a school full of children as the nazi regime liked to hide munitions dumps under public buildings.
Everyone here can see that your comments claiming that you posted a link are lies. Why persist?
Don't see a fucking word about a pay raise but I'm sure there's some small print somewhere in that bill that qualifies.
BTW, were the politicians on the right who voted against that bill vilifying the military MORE than Trump too?
Disingenuous at best is the best that he's got.
For the record, you never provided a link to any bill proving that Democrats voted against military pay raises.
The "article" you linked was an opinion piece put out by The Speaker of the House bitching about the 143 Democratic no votes on 05/15/2015
for a Defense budget bill which passed 269 - 151
That means by Paul Ryan's own math, that 8 Republicans voted with the minority Dems (no condemnation of the Republicans)
and 23 Dems voted with the majority. ( no credit given to those Dems, in other words a worthless political stunt by Ryan )
BTW Dulay is not a "him".
Since I am a democrat and a veteran never say that to me again
Jack Murtha was a Marine and the Marines job is to kill people and break things. At least that's what the Marines I know tell me all the time
Who went off topic first?
General Petraeus did betray his oath:
We've heard 'LOCK HER UP!' ad nauseam for what was an unintentional mishandling of documents while Petraeus go off with a slap on the wrist for intentionally disclosing 'CODE NAME' level information for personal gain and then LYING about it to the FBI. The Obama DOJ and DOD cut Petraeus far more slack than he deserved IMHO.
Note that there wasn't a peep from the right demanding that they throw the book @ Petraeus. Hell, Trump even considered Petraeus for a position in his Administration.
Now that's funny.
How does one unintentionally set up a private server to handle government documents? Did she trip and accidentally install it in her basement?
What does any of that have to do with Trump lying about a real hero?
Weren't YOU the one that insisted that the predicate for a discussion about this issue should be based on the presence of 'classified' information?
Yep, that was YOU.
So please don't back peddle and try to pretend that you think the issue should revert to 'government documents' for Clinton but NOT for Ivanka Trump.
Is that the excuse Ivanka is using? FYI, Hillary lives with a former POTUS...
I was laughing at your statement that Hillary "inadvertently" mishandled government documents. So please explain how she managed to set up her private server inadvertently. The classified not classified distinction has nothing to do with preposterous statement you made. No one inadvertently sets up a private unsecured server to work from.
But if Ivanka pulled a Hillary and recklessly handled classified information, I would say she should be criminally punished. But of course, there's zero evidence that she did behave like Hillary and mishandle any classified information. So the situations are not comparable. And even if Ivanka did expose classified information to our enemies, the Hillary standard would keep her from any criminal sanction anyway.
That won't stop shameless Democrats from arguing Ivanka should go to jail, because they've always believed the laws don't apply to their god/emperors like the Clintons. Laws are for others to follow.
Democrats have made the argument that mishandling classified information is no big deal, to make a big deal of what Ivanka did is hypocrisy of the greatest order.
Here's an easy guide to distinguishing between the two situations for our liberal friends who may be lacking in critical thinking capacity:
Mishandling CLASSIFIED Information is really bad. It's not the same thing as mishandling non-classified information. Things that are different are treated differently!
The FIRST time the term "inadvertently" was used in this seed is in the following comment:
So if you're laughing at a statement that includes that term, you must have heard it from the voices in your head.
Since there is 'zero evidence' that Clinton 'exposed classified information to our enemies, your 'Hillary standard' is merely another one of your fabrications.
Please provide a link to a Democrat making that argument.
BTFW, Trump has 'exposed classified [Top Secret] information to our enemies' and claimed Executive privilege to do so at will.
Daddy has stated that it's all fixed now and there is NOTHING to see here. Ivanka's lawyers have reviewed the emails and forwarded those that were 'government business' to the Presidential records.
So OTHER government employees could and SHOULD expect the SAME treatment from Daddy's OPM when they use private email servers for government business right? All they need do is have lawyers 'fix' it right? It's the SAME after all...right?
Workplace discrimination cases are judged based on ALL employees being treated the same...preferential treatment is verboten, even from Daddy.
I'm sorry. You said she unintentionally set up a private server that she controlled in her home to handle her work emails. People "unintentionally" purchase and install private email servers all the time, right?
dence' that Clinton 'exposed classified information to our enemies
Of course she did. Unsecured servers are by their nature exposed.
Please provide a link to a Democrat making that argument.
Read this thread and the entire other seed dedicated to claiming Ivanka should be investigated/jailed etc... by those who claim HRC did nothing wrong.
Workplace discrimination cases are judged based on ALL employees being treated the same
Again, you seem to not get the difference between mishandling classified information, and mishandling non-classified information. Those are two different classes of behavior and thus not comparable.
Moreover, even if Ivanka did recklessly mishandle classified information, she can't be punished under the Hillary precedent that Democrats championed.
Actually NO, I didn't say that either.
READ MORE CAREFULLY.
Since it wasn't an 'unsecured server', your statement is moot.
So you've got nothing.
Oh I get it. Hence my statement about other employees doing the SAME thing Ivanka did who could and should claim the SAME treatment. You conveniently IGNORED that part I see...
Sure you did. You claimed she "unintentionally" mishandled documents, when it's undisputed she set purposely set up an unsecured, private server in her house to handle her work emails.
Since it wasn't an 'unsecured server', your statement is moot.
Of course it was. It was not secured for handling classified information. This isn't debatable. Why are you wasting time with such nonsense?
So you've got nothing.
I'm assuming you understand what has been argued. Perhaps you don't.
mployees doing the SAME thing Ivanka did who could and should claim the SAME treatment
Why wouldn't they be?
Nope, you're conflating issues.
I'm merely replying to what you actually SAID, not what you meant to say.
Glad we agree. They may as well shit can the regulation since no one will be reprimanded or loose their job for violating it in the future.
Trump has been a great president for military and Veterans. A welcome change from Hussein Obama
Yep probably a good idea though if you intend on insulting leaders of other countries trying to get what ya want though so.. yeah trump wants a strong military behind him and the country and he's seeminly pisssed congress and Obama didn't as much.
I just hope some of the waste is curtailed. I kinda doubt it is, if so that would be new and our money would go a lot further !
Barack Obama is Most Admired Man in the World. Trump is Most Dispised...
That Hussein Obama is admired by anyone shows how stupid and ignorant people can be
trump has never visited the troops, ever.
Making fun of someone's name shows how stupid, childish and ignorant people can be.
Unlike Trump, ZERO Obama officials have ever been indicted...
Tell that to veterans who haven't received their benefits.
Mine have never stopped and in fact my veterans healthcare has improved
Name a Trump official that’s been indicted
I call him by his name
the military and veterans disliked Obama and support Trump because of their policy differences
Trump military Approval
Trump is a rock star among the military compared to Obama
“Just 15% of active-duty servicemembers gave Obama a thumbs up in the annual Military Times survey and more than half -- 55% -- say they disapprove of Obama's job as commander-in-chief. The President has struggled to gain the approval of troops throughout his time in office, but these numbers reflect a new low for Obama, who finished his first year in office with a 35% approval figure and only 4 in 10 disapproving, according to the Military Times survey.”
“WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s approval rating among active-duty military personnel has slipped over the last two years, leaving today’s troops evenly split over whether they’re happy with the commander in chief’s job performance, according to the results of a new Military Times poll of active-duty service members.
About 44 percent of troops had a favorable view of Trump’s presidency, the poll showed, compared to 43 percent who disapproved.
The results from the survey, conducted over the course of September and October, suggest a gradual decline in troops’ support of Trump since he was elected in fall 2016, when a similar Military Times poll showed that 46 percent of troops approved of Trump compared to 37 percent who disapproved. That nine-point margin of support now appears gone.
Troops surveyed continue to give high marks to the president for his handling of military issues specifically. More than 60 percent said they believe the military is in better shape now than it was under President Barack Obama, and nearly the same number have a favorable view of his handling of the military.”
Last year, about 8,000 veterans got a message in their inboxes telling them they may qualify for a new law that restores education benefits to GI Bill users whose schools have abruptly closed.
Nine months later, Veterans Affairs Department officials are trying to figure out why fewer than 20 percent have applied — and whether there’s cause for concern.
“We thought that we’ve been doing a good job of getting the word out,” said Charmain Bogue, deputy director of operations for education service in the department’s Veterans Benefits Administration. “I feel like we don’t have all the pieces of the puzzle yet to say this was a success or this wasn’t a success.”
Military Times.
This one has been indicted and convicted,
Do you remember Paul Manafort?
Michael Cohen,
Mike Flynn,
Rick Gates,
That’s BS
Merkel and Macron would love to have Trump’s approval rating
Of those you listed, only Flynn was a member of the Trump Administration. And Flynn has been cleared by the FBI of any wrongdoing with Russia
https://nypost.com/2017/01/24/fbi-clears-michael-flynn-in-probe-linking-him-to-russia/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons
ZERO Obama campaign or administration officials have ever been indicted for malfeasance. Not One. Noda! Zip! Two years out and Trump and the gop could not find one indictable offense. Two years in and the indictments for Trump and Co are piling up. Jared Kushner, Don Jr and Roger Stone indictments are sealed and waiting to be served. You can't get closer to Trump than that. So, Reality Check, Reverend...
Of those you listed, only Flynn was a member of the Trump Administration. And Flynn has been cleared by the FBI of any wrongdoing with Russia
https://nypost.com/2017/01/24/fbi-clears-michael-flynn-in-probe-linking-him-to-russia/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons
And Papadopolous was an unpaid volunteer not officially even part of the 2016 campaign and has appealed his guilty plea for supposedly about the date of a conversation with a professor (who turned out to be a CIA plant)
Well then, I take it that you concede that Obama is The Most Admired Man in The World and that Trump is despised internationally...
So veterans not applying for a new benefit is Trump’s fault?
Nonsense, I would never make that kind of idiotic statement
Hussein Obama is an enemy of our Constitutional Republic and everyone who loves liberty
No Obama campaign/administration official was ever indicted for crimes.
What you said is preposterous. Obama served for eight years with honor...
Correct! And he doesn't always drink beer-- but when he does, he prefers Dos Equis!
Flynn was convicted of lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russia. He will be sentanced in the next week or so.
You sited Trump 'officials', NOT members of the Trump Administration. You're moving the goal posts.
Oh and BTFW, Cohen was installed by Trump as the Deputy National Finance Chairman for the RNC. Therefore he WAS a 'Trump official' even AFTER the inauguration.
Draft Dodger in Chief Trump.......literally HATES the military. Mocks POW's.......Skips Veterans Ceremony, TWICE.....whines about a Navy SEAL???
He is a fucking disgrace!!!!!
Signed a Marine Gold Star Mom
I am a vet and I can tell you that you are wrong. Sorry.
Their stupidity and ignorance only exceeded by those that admire Trump.....
BTW his name is President Barack Hussein Obama....Rather childish or ignorant of you to try to insult by using his middle name and dropping his first name. Though it's not unexpected.
You can't be serious...
Blind sycophants genuflect to their Jess Willard despite REALITY!
No One Disrespects the Troops More Than Donald Trump
Last Saturday morning, just before Veteran's Day, Trump skipped out on a ceremony commemorating the 100th anniversary of the end of World War I. He was scheduled to lay a wreath at the Aisne-Marne American cemetery, where more than 1,800 Americans, who fought alongside the French to repel Germans, were buried. But he cancelled, citing "scheduling and logistical difficulties caused by the weather," otherwise known as light rain. The sprinkling of water didn't keep any of the other world leaders from attending scheduled events, nor WH chief of staff John Kelly and Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, from going to the cemetery in his stead. Back in DC on Monday, he blew off Veteran's Day altogether, canceling another pre-scheduled visit, this time to Arlington Cemetery, a mere 12-minute drive from the White House.
Winston Churchill's grandson called Trump "pathetic" in near disbelief that he "couldn't even defy the weather to pay his respects to The Fallen." Ben Rhodes, a foreign policy advisor to President Barack Obama, dismissed the lame bad-weather excuse out of hand, tweeting that "there is always a rain option. Always." The MAGA crowd of course said nothing; they certainly won't miss the next rally. Just as they have when Trump, who dodged the Vietnam war by claiming "bone spurs," attacked three Gold Star families ; called the late Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) " no war hero ;" and lied about donating $1 million to veterans' nonprofits until media pressure forced him to make good on his pledge. Whether you ascribe to military heroism or not, it's unequivocally true that no one disrespects the troops more than Trump. He famously once said that he could "stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot someone" and "not lose any voters"—the same would hold true if the someone he shot was a decorated vet.
While the MAGA crowd's flagrant hypocrisy is hardly surprising, manufacturing phony outrage has long played a crucial role in the GOP playbook. In 2014, the perpetual aggrievement machine kicked into high gear when Obama saluted marines with a coffee cup in his hand while disembarking Marine One; the National Republican Congressional committee tweeted , "Wait - did President Obama just salute the Marines with a LATTE in his hand?!" Today, the NRCC has been mum on Trump skipping veteran commemorations, here and abroad. Republicans have also engaged in outright slandering of veterans as in the infamous Swift Boating of John Kerry, who earned a Silver Star, a Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts for his service during the Vietnam War, but was falsely attacked by GOP Super PACs, funded by Texas Republican donors, like billionaire Harold Simmons. For Trump, as well as the GOP establishment, "respecting the troops" has long been a cudgel to wield as a political bludgeon when convenient, but not one worth honoring when it stands in the way of smearing an opponent or winning elections.
Just Monday morning, Trump tweeted that "large numbers of new ballots showed up out of nowhere" and that the Florida vote count "must go with Election Night," despite the fact that the state accepts overseas and military ballots through November 16 as long as they are postmarked by November 6. In other words, Trump would rather disenfranchise active troops than assent to election results in which all votes are counted. For Trump, the troops aren't so much American citizens fighting for democratic values as political props whose worth is in demonstrating authoritarian might, as evidenced in his fantasies about staging Stalin-like military parade to the tune of $92 million . Unlike his predecessors, Trump hasn't even bothered visiting the troops in overseas combat zones during his first two years in office. He did, however, deploy 5,600 soldiers to the southwest border, with no combat pay and little infrastructure, as part of his midterm election strategy of chest-thumping war bluster about an "invasion" of a migrant caravan of asylum-seeking Central Americans still hundreds of miles way. As soon at the elections passed, Trump dropped the fear-mongering hysterics over tired, poor, and hungry immigrants, but those deployed soldiers will still spend Thanksgiving needlessly away from their families because it served the president's get-out-the-base stunt; it will also likely cost Americans upwards of $200 million by the year's end.
The Trump administration has also taken to hacking away at protections of the military. They dismantled financial protections from predatory lenders who target military members; eliminated requirements for federal contractors to disclose past violations of labor laws protecting veterans; and expanded the privatization of VA healthcare —under the favored conservative pretense of "choice"—while also making it easier for insurers to deny mental health coverage to veterans. All the while, Trump has also been letting his looney rich Mar-a-Lago cronies run the VA in some shadow hierarchy circumventing Senate confirmation. When it comes to access to quality healthcare, financial protections, and even the ballot, Trump will screw those who serve so long as it serves his billionaire friends and his very own ego.
For many, the sight of black Americans exercising their First Amendment rights over civil rights will always arouse more outrage than a white president stripping away protections for those who have served. Their hollow indignation over symbolic gestures is largely absent when the president can't be bothered to get his hair wet in the rain to honor those who gave their lives. That's not patriotism; it is, indeed, pathetic.
Get real!
I've saluted officers with a donut in my hand.....
I agree with Trump that we should have killed Bin Laden long before we did. We should have had him within 6 months after 911. Definitely within a year at the most.
We did have him, orders from the top let him walk away.
Let's see those orders to let Bin Laden get away.
Yep! A SEAL team had obl in their sights and Clinton would not let them shoot. The Sudan was going to turn him over to us but Clinton turned them down . Just think 3000 people died because Clinton was too busy getting a blow job .
Of course there was also the time that Afghanistan wanted to turn him over to us but, Bush said no and, sent our troops to Afghanistan and, then Bush said this,
Okay,
Oh. So you have nothing.
An "offer to discuss" turning over Bin Laden if the US ceased bombing.....Don't tell me you think that was meaningful?
Where's the order not to capture Bin Laden and to let him escape?
One of my conservative friends was called up in early 2002. He was Naval Intel Reserve and they stationed him in Turkey. He's one of those officers standing in front of the green screens watching the actions from 'eyes in the sky' and giving orders.
We sat one night, over a couple [okay maybe 3] of bottles of wine and he told me about watching OBL walk out of Tora Bora Afghanistan and into Pakistan. There was much screaming and yelling and throwing things during the days that they 'observed' his movements. They had a POSITIVE ID on OBL, they BEGGED everyone who would answer a phone to be given a green light. The answer every time was to 'stand down'.
Months later they BEGGED him to reup because his reserve tour was up. He told them to go to hell and that he wasn't going to put his life on the line to watch our enemy walk away. They sent him into the streets of Lebanon for the rest of his tour because he would not play their game anymore. After three more months, under cover in safe houses, he came home and he is STILL extremely pissed off.
Sounds to me like somebody fed you a line of shit.
Number one if this was true it would be classified information. And the information you provided would be enough to track down this individual who provided you with this so called information.
I have numerous friends and family that were in the military and were purvey to classified information and special OP's but I have yet for them to start telling Government secrets after a couple or three bottles of wine.
Yeah sounds to me like someone with a chip on his shoulder told you a whopper. Do you have any links to support your claims?
But hey cool story though. I can see our government letting him go so they can spend millions of dollars and torture terrorist for shits and giggles when they knew where he was all along just so the poser in Chief Obama could call for his head.
And to top it off you yourself are on a public web page devolving classified info. Wouldn't that be a violation of the CoH?
So it's a line a shit and a whopper but you still claim I am DEVULGING classified information. Hilarious.
BTFW, perhaps your family and friends who are PRIVY to classified information don't trust you enough to confide in you, no matter how much they drink...
Well do you?
Who are you quoting in that comment and why are you using it in a reply to me?
Funny coming from the guy who was too much of a pussy to serve a single second in the military or in any other way contribute to the security of this country in any way shape or form.
Someone goes to lengths to attack Trump and people applaud. Trump answers, and the headline is always Trump Attacks [that person] as if the focus of Trump's comments are innocent people minding their own business and Trump is being a big bully.
Donald Trump Jr could not have said it worse nor been more wrong...
[deleted]
McRaven comments were in reaction to Trump's 'attack' on Brennen. That does NOT constitute an 'attack'.
So you're inferring that somehow McRaven is guilty of something? What exactly?
McRaven is a US citizen of deserved acclaim, who has EVERY right to voice his opinion and to stand with a colleague for whom he has great respect.
Trump isn't being a 'big bully', he is being a narcissistic partisan who has no way to defend his actions other than attempt to demean others.
No, you're inferring.
You mean like a crime? I didn't say anything like that.
Of course he does. So does Trump. McRaven's opinions have been full of personal attacks on Trump, calling him a threat to democracy, a national embarrassment, saying he has humiliated the country, and on and on. That goes ignored in the reporting. Trump's opinion was a response to that, and not nearly as scathing, but the headline is "Trump attacks Navy Seal" as if the man had been quietly minding his own business and Trump lashed out at him for no reason. It's not truthful.
You cited 'innocent people' Tacos!. The antonym to innocent is guilty.
So yes, YES you did 'infer' that McRaven and other Trump detractors were guilty of something.
No, not 'personal attacks', they are opinions of Trump's ACTIONS and STATEMENTS as the 'leader of the free world'.
Your own comments refute that Tacos!. You know verbatim what McRaven stated and you know WHY. Stop pretending that reporting hasn't been transparent. It has.
It IS a truthful assessment of Trump's statements Tacos!.
Why do you think that the actions and statements of Trump are nobodies business, especially not McRaven's business? You acknowledge that McRaven has the right to voice his opinion about Trump then chastise him for not 'minding his own business'. That's contradictory, even hypocritical.
IMHO, there is NO excuse for Trump to 'lash out' at people.
BTFW, you misstated the headline in your comment. Why?
You inferred. I imply. You still haven't explained what you meant by "guilty." I asked if you meant criminally, but you haven't responded. If McRaven is factually (not criminally) guilty of something, it's of starting the fight with the president. The president's comments driving the news story were a response to those attacks.
It's time for you to be honest, or at least open your eyes. I was talking about the responses and the coverage. You know that. You get that. Obviously, you can find almost anything on the internet. But the fact remains that McRaven's comments are barely mentioned and in several stories, he is never quoted. Just Google "McRaven and Trump" and check out the resulting headlines:
What you won't see is a headline that says "Trump responds to vicious repeated personal attacks from McRaven" or anything like that.
This has always been the case, going back to his ongoing feud with Rosie O'Donnell. It doesn't matter that someone else almost always starts it. Invariably, they rip Trump for what he said, often blowing it out of proportion, and mentioning the initial attack on him only in-passing, if they mention it at all.
Consider the disparate level of outrage over Trump's and McRaven's statements. He called McRaven a Hillary fan, which isn't a terribly nasty thing to say and then he said it would have been nice if we had caught bin Laden sooner. Vague, but arguably obnoxious. That's it! Compare that with the stuff McRaven has said about Trump (greatest threat to Democracy, embarrassing, humiliating, etc.) and it's hardly a close contest, but Trump is the one who is portrayed as the bad guy while McRaven was merely exercising his 1st Amendment rights.
Oh but Trump is the president! you might say. He should be above that sort of thing, right? OK, fair enough. I myself would prefer if Trump ignored attacks like that. But how about McRaven? The man is an Admiral - albeit retired. Shouldn't he refrain from attacks on the president? As a military man shouldn't he be publicly non-partisan? or is he fixing to run for office? Shouldn't he be supporting the commander-in-chief whether he agrees with him, likes him, or not? Where is the criticism of McRaven's attacks on Trump? I hear only crickets.
How would you, the news media, or Democrats have responded to a former general or admiral criticizing President Obama? Would you have been applauding his exercise of his First Amendment rights? If Obama had answered back would you have been upset about Obama attacking a military man?
I never said that. In fact, I said he had every right to express his opinion. Why do you ignore that?
I did not chastise him for not minding his own business. I said the story was presented as if McRaven had not said anything to inspire a response, as if he had not criticized the president at all. There's nothing wrong with criticizing the president or anyone else for that matter, but if you are going to do it, you should be prepared to be criticized right back. This story is presented as if McRaven is some kind of sacred creature (in fact, one of the headlines above uses the word "sacred") who is protected from criticism.
This is the whole point. Trump didn't just lash out. McRaven has been publicly critical of Trump in a nasty way more than once. Trump was asked about it in an interview and responded to the question. Trump is not the one who brought it up.
You seem to be saying that the president is not allowed to say anything negative about someone else. Why do you deny 1st Amendment rights to the president but allow them for everyone else?
I'm not misstating anything. I wasn't trying to quote a specific headline. It's a simplified example I created to make the point that there is a consistent specific theme to the coverage of these types of stories. Please try to catch the overall message of my comments and not get bogged down in taking snippets out of context.
What part of guilty is the antonym of innocent don't you understand Tacos!?
I take umbrage in you implying that I am not being honest. Stop.
What headlines you've seen and what you make up is irrelevant. READ the content and FIND the facts.
Your whataboutism is noted.
I didn't see you or the other neo-nationalists up in arms when Flynn express his opinions about Obama and Clinton. In fact, most of y'all cheered. So why hold McRaven to a different standard?
McRaven wasn't the instigator in this exchange, Trump lashed out at a RESPONSE from McRaven.
I also note your use of 'attack' when it's against Trump and 'criticism' when it's by Trump.
Trump seems incapable of comity and has a propensity to 'punch down'. McRaven stated cogent, thoughtful criticism of Trump, Trump's reply was petty and petulant.
Labeling McRaven a 'Hillary fan' is one of the worse things Trump can say about someone as far as Trump's base is concerned. You know that. You get it.
It isn't up to me to 'catch' your overall message. It's on each of us to communicate our meaning.
It's ironic that you would decry 'taking snippets out of context' since you truncated a vast majority of my comment in your reply and pick and choose what to reply to.
You often say a lot of random stuff but fail to make a point. It kind of makes it hard to know what to respond to or how.
He wasn't? You might want to consider that McRaven began attacking Trump way back in February of 2017 , when he had been president for barely a month . What's more, he did it with a straw man attack, actually lying about what the president said and then attacking him based on the lie.
‘Greatest threat to democracy’: Commander of bin Laden raid slams Trump’s anti-media sentiment
McRaven backs journalists, stresses value of communication in Moody talk
Here's the problem with that: He was referencing a Tweet Trump had sent out a few days prior. The statement from Trump was not that "the news media is the enemy of the people." He specifically said "fake news." He also named certain specific news media outlets, and not the news media in general.
So this all started with McRaven dishonestly attacking Trump.
Meanwhile, as we can all see 21 months later, the news media is doing just fine. They are still free to report whatever they want to report. No one in the media has been arrested or investigated (if only Obama's record was so clean) for anything they have reported.
McRaven's attacks continued this summer. In June, he wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post that is basically a personal attack from head to toe.
He then went on to group him with other leaders, whom he described as
And the attacks continued :
We saw it again in August, when he attacked Trump for revoking John Brennan's security clearance . It wasn't enough to simply disagree with the decision, he felt it necessary to attack Trump personally :
In short, McRaven has gone way out of his way to not just criticize Trump's decisions, but to attack him personally. So, when asked about it, Trump gives a tiny jab about catching bin Laden sooner and the press explodes with "Trump attacks McRaven" headlines as if Trump had no reason to have even the slightest bit of animosity toward him. Ridiculous!
That's an unusual statement from someone who tends to reply to me point for point.
Try starting with the stuff ending with question marks.
I reviewed the linked articles. Neither cites an 'attack' on Trump. Your claim that the statement made by McRaven was an attack lacks all credulity. BTFW, Trump was attacking the media for over a year starting just after he came down the escalator in Trump tower.
Your sycophantic equivocation is noted.
Tacos!, that op-ed is written by John Brennan.
Note my restraint in posting an appropriate emoji.
Again, you call a cogent, thoughtful expression of opinion, an attack. Ironically, you cited a heartfelt statement from McRaven as a 'personal attack' even though it is CLEARLY states it is about Trump's ACTIONS.
We'll have to agree to disagree about Trump's having 'righteous' reasons for lashing out. I for one have given up all hope of Trump 'rising to the occasion'.
No no, a giant pussy, as usual. Trump isn't a bully, he's a bitch.