The Trump impact on US policy

[TheCurmudgeon]

Azor,

Do you know how the first openly gay linguist at the NSA was able to keep his security clearance?

"officials believed that a talented NSA linguist might be gay and stripped him of his security clearance, according to James Bamford, author of "The Puzzle Palace," a history of the code-breaking agency. But the linguist, represented by gay rights attorney Franklin E. Kameny, fought back. NSA Director Bobby Ray Inman agreed to a deal: The linguist could keep his job if he signed a document stating that he was gay, and if members of his family signed it, too, eliminating any possibility of blackmail."

Once information is open to the public, there is no longer a threat of blackmail. As long as personal information is withheld from the public ... well, you get the idea.

[Azor]

... and yet, you go straight to Hillary.

This is no longer an exchange of ideas. I wish you luck in you future endeavors.

Interesting, considering you replied to my post. Here are your ideas:

• Azor, get over your Hillary complex.

• What seems clear is your total lack of understanding of how intelligence is gathered, processed, and presented.

• You are missing the point.

Oh, and I forgot your bit about how Trump was going to allow Putin to just waltz into the Baltics, although I forgot to query you on why he would need his "little green men" if Article V was a dead letter...

You as well.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Interesting, considering you replied to my post. Here are your ideas:

• 
  
• 
  

Oh, and I forgot your bit about how Trump was going to allow Putin to just waltz into the Baltics, although I forgot to query you on why he would need his "little green men" if Article V was a dead letter...

You as well.

Thanks. I am glad we can at least be civil.

[Azor]

Azor,

Do you know how the first openly gay linguist at the NSA was able to keep his security clearance?

"officials believed that a talented NSA linguist might be gay and stripped him of his security clearance, according to James Bamford, author of "The Puzzle Palace," a history of the code-breaking agency. But the linguist, represented by gay rights attorney Franklin E. Kameny, fought back. NSA Director Bobby Ray Inman agreed to a deal: The linguist could keep his job if he signed a document stating that he was gay, and if members of his family signed it, too, eliminating any possibility of blackmail."

Once information is open to the public, there is no longer a threat of blackmail. As long as personal information is withheld from the public ... well, you get the idea.

I actually am aware of that story, although I had forgotten the name of the person and the agency.

But I don't see the relevance here.

With respect to Trump and Russia, the compromising materials are already in the public forum, right? Much of the damage is done as millions of Americans now believe that Trump is not only a Russian agent but sexually perverted as well. In many respects this is a rather ironic reversal of the "birther" movement, albeit one that cannot be so easily dispelled.

The burden of proof is on Trump, despite the fact that his die-hard followers will dismiss the allegations. How does one disprove something that doesn't exist and is supposedly in the hands of a rival that denies it?

[TheCurmudgeon]

Oh, and I forgot your bit about how Trump was going to allow Putin to just waltz into the Baltics, although I forgot to query you on why he would need his "little green men" if Article V was a dead letter...

I stand by this statement. Let's watch what happens in the Baltics over the next two years.

Lets see if Trump continues Obama's expansion of our European Reassurance Initiative, or if the money for American rotational Brigades in Poland and Estonia dries up.

[TheCurmudgeon]

I actually am aware of that story, although I had forgotten the name of the person and the agency.

But I don't see the relevance here.

With respect to Trump and Russia, the compromising materials are already in the public forum, right? Much of the damage is done as millions of Americans now believe that Trump is not only a Russian agent but sexually perverted as well. In many respects this is a rather ironic reversal of the "birther" movement, albeit one that cannot be so easily dispelled.

The burden of proof is on Trump, despite the fact that his die-hard followers will dismiss the allegations. How does one disprove something that doesn't exist and is supposedly in the hands of a rival that denies it?

Actually no. None of the financial information is in the public forum.

Trump was always a sexual pervert. That was never in question. Nor does he really care about that (that I can tell). He never claimed that the tapes of him talking about groping women was false. I think he (and his big hands), rather enjoy the notoriety. What he cares about is his image as a business mogul. Now, should his financials show that he is not actually a billionaire, but simply a multi-millionaire, that would hurt his image.

To be perfectly honest, I don't care if he likes to have sex with goats. I care about whether he is vain enough to make decisions based on a threat of releasing negative information. I care about whether, once he takes the oath to support and defend the Constitution, he will place his personal vanity above that oath.

He disproves it by making all the relevant data public. He disproves it by releasing his financial data.

[Azor]

I stand by this statement. Let's watch what happens in the Baltics over the next two years. Let’s see if Trump continues Obama's expansion of our European Reassurance Initiative, or if the money for American rotational Brigades in Poland and Estonia dries up.

Presently, only Poland and Estonia seem to be taking the threat from Russia seriously enough to devote 2% or more of their GDP to defense.

Nevertheless, none of these countries are taking the Russian threat as seriously as Americans would believe, or else you would see defense expenditures rise well above 2% of GDP, perhaps more in line with South Korea and Israel. Moreover, many in Germany, France, Italy and Greece aren't particularly interested in Eastern European concerns, although they are in no hurry to shrug off the American umbrella.

The European Reassurance Initiative for just that, reassurance of the Europeans, rather than for the deterrence of the Russians. Yet there are no indications that Putin is not fully aware of the differences between NATO and non-aligned countries, and if he was intending on a small and restricted conflict in order to break NATO’s political will, then why would he have to strike in Narva or the Suwalki Gap? Why not settle any outstanding Arctic disagreements with Canada, Denmark or Norway? After all, some military posturing over uninhabited ice floes and unexploited undersea energy resources is a far cry from turning Narva into Donetsk. The ERI is no more than a tripwire and Washington would have to abrogate the CFE Treaty (already withdrawn from by Moscow) in order to deploy the necessary heavy brigades to the Baltic region and possibly change the Russian military calculus.

Actually no. None of the financial information is in the public forum.

The accusations of his indebtedness to Russia are. Again, has the FBI not vetted him?

Trump was always a sexual pervert. That was never in question. Nor does he really care about that (that I can tell). He never claimed that the tapes of him talking about groping women was false. I think he (and his big hands), rather enjoy the notoriety. What he cares about is his image as a business mogul. Now, should his financials show that he is not actually a billionaire, but simply a multi-millionaire, that would hurt his image. To be perfectly honest, I don't care if he likes to have sex with goats. I care about whether he is vain enough to make decisions based on a threat of releasing negative information. I care about whether, once he takes the oath to support and defend the Constitution, he will place his personal vanity above that oath. He disproves it by making all the relevant data public. He disproves it by releasing his financial data.

In my personal opinion, his reluctance to release the tax returns is due to having a lower income than one would ascribe to a person with a nine-figure net worth. He is a "businessman", but makes his money on branding himself.

Nor do I think that the Russia issue will be put to bed if he releases his tax returns.

As for personal vanity, well…that was a given no matter who you voted for on November 8th.

[TheCurmudgeon]

The accusations of his indebtedness to Russia are. Again, has the FBI not vetted him?

Who, The President Elect? No, the FBI does not vet him.

[TheCurmudgeon]

In my personal opinion, his reluctance to release the tax returns is due to having a lower income than one would ascribe to a person with a nine-figure net worth. He is a "businessman", but makes his money on branding himself.

Nor do I think that the Russia issue will be put to bed if he releases his tax returns.

The shear fact that he does not release them means that it is important enough to him that it can be used against him. I don't care what his personal reasons are. Reality is, he does not want them released. The only question is, how far will he go to keep them private.

[Azor]

Who, The President Elect? No, the FBI does not vet him.

I thought that the FBI did some background checking...

Perhaps they should in the future.

[TheCurmudgeon]

I thought that the FBI did some background checking...

Perhaps they should in the future.

under what provision of the Constitution? As long as he is thirty-five years of age, born in the U.S, and elected by the Electoral College, there is nothing any other agency can do to limit his powers as the president. It would not matter if the FBI came out and said "We have evidence of Trump taking bribes from the Russians," he would still get the highest level security clearance and access to all information until his impeachment.

[TheCurmudgeon]

I really hope I am wrong. Even though I have personal disdain for Trump on a multitude of levels, I would really rather eat crow and take back my words when I find out that he becomes the best President since Reagan. Even though I am bound by my oath to obey his orders. I really worry that he will place his own interests above his duty as a public servant.

This is just my humble opinion based on what I have observed so far.

When it comes to matters of National Security, I am not a republican, democrat, nor an independent. I am an American.

Blame it on the scotch (Glenmorangie 12 year old Quinta Ruban), but that is just the way I feel.

[TheCurmudgeon]

When it comes to matters of National Security, I am not a republican, democrat, nor an independent. I am an American.

Blame it on the scotch (Glenmorangie 12 year old Quinta Ruban), but that is just the way I feel.

Okay, I admit that being an American, I should prefer Bourbon over Scotch, but what can I say ... I am an Anglophile.

[Azor]

I really hope I am wrong. Even though I have personal disdain for Trump on a multitude of levels, I would really rather eat crow and take back my words when I find out that he becomes the best President since Reagan. Even though I am bound by my oath to obey his orders. I really worry that he will place his own interests above his duty as a public servant.

This is just my humble opinion based on what I have observed so far.

When it comes to matters of National Security, I am not a republican, democrat, nor an independent. I am an American.

Blame it on the scotch (Glenmorangie 12 year old Quinta Ruban), but that is just the way I feel.

Trump's certainly not ideal. Even after Bush's, McCain's and Palin's gaffes, if you had told me in 2008 that Trump would become president in 2016, I would have laughed it off as insane. Romney would have been a good President, albeit uninspiring...

I do hope that Trump rises to the occasion or at least that his administration does.

In many respects, once you take away the "infotainment" aspect of modern governance, Trump seems as though he might be the Reagan to Carter's Obama. Carter was a highly underrated President and Reagan highly overrated; much of the criticism of the former and lionizing of the latter is due more to style than substance, especially where defense and foreign policy are concerned.

Both Trump and Clinton ran scorched earth campaigns, and had Clinton won, she would be subject to the same attempts to de-legitimize her win (substitute Russia for Qatar) as well as calls for impeachment on day one.

It is my suspicion that this dossier is simply unused ammunition left over from the election campaign, but I may be wrong. Either way, it needs to be dealt with.

Whether by Putin's hand or not, faith in American democracy has taken some body blows in 2016...

[Azor]

Okay, I admit that being an American, I should prefer Bourbon over Scotch, but what can I say ... I am an Anglophile.

Americans developed a taste for sweeter whiskeys during Prohibition, when they were forced to turn to Canadian whiskey which was far from rye...

I'll take Bourbon, Scotch or Rye. It is Winter, after all...

[TheCurmudgeon]

Trump's latest tweet explains my disdain:

Russia just said the unverified report paid for by political opponents is "A COMPLETE AND TOTAL FABRICATION, UTTER NONSENSE." Very unfair!

Okay, I did not receive $100,000,000 from my father. Nor did I receive an education at special prep schools, nor have my college education paid for. I earned everything I have through my own effort.

Obviously Trump's idea of what is "very unfair" and mine are not the same.

This distinction makes me wonder what he thinks his oath means? Will it be "very unfair" for him to have to put the good of the nation above his own personal interests?

[OUTLAW 09]

Interesting, considering you replied to my post. Here are your ideas:

• 
  
• 
  

Oh, and I forgot your bit about how Trump was going to allow Putin to just waltz into the Baltics, although I forgot to query you on why he would need his "little green men" if Article V was a dead letter...

You as well.

Azor...will give you a short lesson on just how humint works...someone presents you information...first question is "access" meaning just how they got it..next question how long do you know the individual who is reporting and last one is can you verify anything that is being provided.....

Here we have a retired and evidently quite successful MI6 agent known for his Russian intel quality that comes to a degree out of the Russian community in east and west and business types....

THEN we have the issue with what CNN and others have pointed out ...Cohen was not in Prague...BUT WAIT...appears that the Czech BIS is confirming that indeed a M. Cohen was in fact in Prague on the stated day..more they are not saying.

Could it be a second Cohen ...my full name minus middle initial is in Berlin on any given day a minimum of three times...

Trump and his team thus defined the entire report "fake news" the easiest way to push back and he is still using this...TRYING desperately to deflect/dismiss/distort the report....THREE of the Russian SIX Ds of propaganda....

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 38m
38 minutes ago

We had a great News Conference at Trump Tower today. A couple of FAKE NEWS organizations were there but the people truly get what's going on


BTW...ask yourself the simple question WHY is Trump spending an amazing amount of time trying to discredit US MSM.....???

BUT to a huminter the single fact that yes the name did in fact exist and was in Prague on that stated date verifies to a degree what they individual is saying thus the rest of the report takes on a new quality.....

I get going back to my previous comments.....WHY was the report credible enough to be included by the FBI AND vetted by the ODNI and accepted by the ODNI??????

THAT Trump has not answered.....NOR has the IC.....

REMEMBER they knew Trump's opinion of them as he has repeated his distrust bordering virtually on dislike of them SO WHY include something that reinforces that opinion????

UNLESS you are sending him a clear and concise warning....

REMEMBER Trump and his natsec...uttered nothing about this AFTER their own specific briefing...

IF it was you and or me...we would be screaming this to the heavens when we came out of that briefing IF we were in fact innocent in order to get ahead of potential damage.....

BUT DID we hear a single word about this...nothing...until people started digging in the unclassed version and found the short para where it was vaguely mentioned...and when that did not grap the US MSM then came Buzzfeed to break the news....

THEN we get hammered by the Trump crew about this mistake or that mistake thus FAKE NEWS.....even CNN actually failed to mention in several of their comments...the simple caveat "this report is raw intelligence information"....

I will give you an example...I had someone come to me who wanted to talk about the local Salafist insurgent groups in Baqubah Iraq then the literal Wild West..during those talks I was amazed at the vast and wide knowledge the person was trying to tell me...first I was skeptical as I had not heard of many of the groups nor their leader names and numbers of fighters.....

BUT when I dug into the story it was determined that the person was always cooking for those who were using the house for their meetings...the person knew virtually everything....then we raided one site to confirm and or deny the information and it was a major success and then we raided on everything that was provided rolling up group after group driving almost all Salafist groups out of Baqubah...normally one does not raid on what is referred to as "single source information".........

So treat this report with the same skepticism I initially did until I reread it a number of times BUT do not rule out the simple fact...portions of it might in fact be totally correct....AND even a few things being correct that is massively bad.....

THIS is the approach BBC is taking....and if you really want to become knowledgeable on Trump's Russian money flows PAY close attention to the reports being published and largely ignored by US MSM by Financial Times....extremely detailed and thorough and fact checked that reinforce the Buzzfeed article....

[Azor]

Reviewing the dossier in greater detail, it can be distilled into the following themes:

• Trump sought to do business in Russia, but was rebuffed. He settled for sexual services instead
  
• Trump declined financial inducements from the Kremlin in the way of "sweetener real estate business deals", but was compromised by a sex tape involving prostitutes and "golden showers"
  
• Trump has been in contact with the Kremlin for 5-8 years plotting this campaign for the presidency
  
• Trump has received Russian intelligence on the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton. In exchange, Trump has provided intelligence on Russian oligarchs residing in the US
  
• Putin encouraged and supported Trump’s bid for the presidency in order to render the US more isolationist, weaken NATO and give Russia a freer hand internationally
  
• Trump was pleased to have the election campaign revolve around US-Russian relations because he had extensive and corrupt business dealings in China and various emerging markets

My brief analysis

Aside from the well-worn accusations about Manafort, Stone, Cohen and Page, some of which are true (e.g. Manafort’s work for Yanukovych) and some of which are false (e.g. Cohen’s secret meeting in Prague), the only new allegations are as follows:

The supposed existence of a sex tape involving Trump and prostitutes
The assertion that Trump does not have business dealings in or illicit financial arrangements with Russia
rump’s supposed corrupt business dealings in China and other emerging markets

My Response

1. & 2. Unless the sex tape is made public, it’s existence is impossible to prove or disprove. Given that this is the major charge of the dossier and given that it conveniently fits with the Clinton narrative of Trump being misogynistic and Hillary’s campaigning on gender identity, it must be treated suspiciously. Supposedly the Kremlin needed the sex tape as leverage because Trump refused financial inducements, which is very curious because financial inducements would produce evidence of suspicious transactions. In addition, why would Trump require the services of Russian prostitutes, as opposed to American ones? Why would Trump pursue corrupt deals in other emerging markets but not Russia?

3. If Trump was engaging in corrupt transactions in China and other emerging markets (excluding Russia), why would Steele/Orbis not hunt that lead down? Why rely upon the say-so of various Russian informers who are not involved in those transactions? Surely the investigation could have been widened to encompass China and other countries…

In the final analysis, this dossier revolves around a sex tape, which is used as the honeypot (no pun intended) to lead the public to a mere regurgitation of allegations made against Trump and his advisors during his campaign against Clinton.

Given that The Interpreter, which is funded by RFE/RL and which is decidedly opposed to Putin, has dismantled the dossier’s credibility, there isn’t much to be gleaned by following the repetition in the mainstream media, which is more interested in the salaciousness of the story than its veracity.

[Azor]

RE: Chris Steele

This is an ex-intelligence officer who now works for whoever pays him, correct? Not unlike a police officer who becomes a private detective. Steele has admittedly worked for the Jeb Bush campaign and then unnamed Democrats following Bush’s withdrawal from contention. This seems to me to be unused ammunition left over from the Hillary-Trump war that was not used because perhaps the Democrats wanted to “go high” as Michelle Obama would have it, or perhaps because they feared dirty tricks blow-back.

When I think about an ex-SIS officer involving himself in the presidential campaign, I am reminded of Obama's involvement in the Remain campaign. Remember "back of the queue"? That was clearly written by the British and spoken by Obama as a favor to Cameron. What is to say that the US defense, foreign policy and intelligence hawks, all of whom sided with Hillary, didn't have their cousins across the pond do them a similar favor?

RE: Michael Cohen in Prague

Cohen denies being there or even having ever visited Prague, and there are suggestions that he was confused with another Michael Cohen or an “M. Cohen”. The denial is fairly unequivocal and so unless evidence comes to light that would make Cohen a complete liar, I will take him at his word for now. Trust, but verify.

RE: Trump and the MSM

The MSM, FOX aside, threw their hats in the ring with Clinton and got to work on “Project Fear”:

• Trump will crater the US economy
• Trump will start a nuclear war with Russia
• No. Trump won’t be assertive enough with Russia and let them take over
• Trump will dismantle NATO and then Russia and China will take over
• No. Trump will be too confrontation with China and risk war
• Trump is beholden to Russia
• No. Trump is actually beholden to China
• Trump is a racist and xenophobe
• No. Trump is overly supportive of Israel
• Trump is too isolationist
• No. Trump will be too confrontational with Iran and too harsh in attacking Daesh
• All of the above

What did they expect? They played hardball and now they’re complaining that there’s another Nixon in the White House…

RE: Trump Dossier

The IC did not claim that the dossier was “credible”, merely that the allegations were making the rounds and that Trump should be aware. Trump quickly decried the allegations and then attacked the media and whoever in the IC leaked the dossier to Buzz Feed.

As for “Russian money flows”, the dossier alleged that the compensation to Trump was in the form of intelligence and sexual services from prostitutes.

[OUTLAW 09]

Reviewing the dossier in greater detail, it can be distilled into the following themes:

• Trump sought to do business in Russia, but was rebuffed. He settled for sexual services instead
  
• Trump declined financial inducements from the Kremlin in the way of "sweetener real estate business deals", but was compromised by a sex tape involving prostitutes and "golden showers"
  
• Trump has been in contact with the Kremlin for 5-8 years plotting this campaign for the presidency
  
• Trump has received Russian intelligence on the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton. In exchange, Trump has provided intelligence on Russian oligarchs residing in the US
  
• Putin encouraged and supported Trump’s bid for the presidency in order to render the US more isolationist, weaken NATO and give Russia a freer hand internationally
  
• Trump was pleased to have the election campaign revolve around US-Russian relations because he had extensive and corrupt business dealings in China and various emerging markets

My brief analysis

Aside from the well-worn accusations about Manafort, Stone, Cohen and Page, some of which are true (e.g. Manafort’s work for Yanukovych) and some of which are false (e.g. Cohen’s secret meeting in Prague), the only new allegations are as follows:

The supposed existence of a sex tape involving Trump and prostitutes
The assertion that Trump does not have business dealings in or illicit financial arrangements with Russia
rump’s supposed corrupt business dealings in China and other emerging markets

My Response

1. & 2. Unless the sex tape is made public, it’s existence is impossible to prove or disprove. Given that this is the major charge of the dossier and given that it conveniently fits with the Clinton narrative of Trump being misogynistic and Hillary’s campaigning on gender identity, it must be treated suspiciously. Supposedly the Kremlin needed the sex tape as leverage because Trump refused financial inducements, which is very curious because financial inducements would produce evidence of suspicious transactions. In addition, why would Trump require the services of Russian prostitutes, as opposed to American ones? Why would Trump pursue corrupt deals in other emerging markets but not Russia?

3. If Trump was engaging in corrupt transactions in China and other emerging markets (excluding Russia), why would Steele/Orbis not hunt that lead down? Why rely upon the say-so of various Russian informers who are not involved in those transactions? Surely the investigation could have been widened to encompass China and other countries…

In the final analysis, this dossier revolves around a sex tape, which is used as the honeypot (no pun intended) to lead the public to a mere regurgitation of allegations made against Trump and his advisors during his campaign against Clinton.

Given that The Interpreter, which is funded by RFE/RL and which is decidedly opposed to Putin, has dismantled the dossier’s credibility, there isn’t much to be gleaned by following the repetition in the mainstream media, which is more interested in the salaciousness of the story than its veracity.

Azor... really rethink your comments....while virtually everyone you think including Trump has declared it "fake news"...what are the comments by very good ex spy types with years of experience in this type of Russian/Czech approach...as the Czechs had perfected it....

They are skeptical BUT they then state....some makes sense let's wait to see what else pops up and quietly they are waiting for more to pop up....they view these leaks as a series of not so subtle warnings to Trump and his four Russian advisors....

If one or two items in the report prove to be correct then they will take a totally different and more positive view....

BUT I am more interested in the words Trump and his team use.......in their deflection of this article as it goes to the words they used throughout the campaign....

Paula Chertok @PaulaChertok
I've analyzed some of Trump's propaganda toolkit. His use of language to divide & conquer is truly insidious
https://paulachertok.com/2016/10/24/...ook-language/#