Bolton:Trump ok'd China's camps, didn't know UK had nukes, thought Finland was Russia

[Dill]

(06-19-2020, 04:50 PM)hollodero Wrote: I call Bolton a despicable walrus for he's despicable, not because he's a walrus. Walrusses are cool.

To the larger point. Where do you draw the line? What does the public need to know? The next time, it could be a Biden advisor who writes a book about Biden's mental lapses while they were discussing stuff, or what that person believes to have remembered about those lapses.
And folks might just as well say we NEED to know if Biden is mentally incapable of being commander in chief, if he knows everything he needs to know, or if he has the right stances on this and that. As I said. You set a precedence and then theres really little to counter the opinion of conservatives that it is totally ok to inform the public about conversations an advisor had with president Biden.

Btw. Finland's prime minister taught Trump to rake the forest floors to avoid wild fire. I figure Trump did not take this guy as some kind of Russian governor.

I think my post above, #79, answers your questions somewhat.

I'll just add that the precedent which concerns you has already been set. (Samhain mentioned Dick Morris above.) Advisors have been kissing and telling for several decades now. The real serious break in our political protocol came when Monica's blue dress became the discussion of a Congressional investigation. 

There are, by the way, some legal and market constraints on "gossip."  Many kiss and tell books fall flat.

And there is another constraint as well--the bond people do or do not feel for the president they work for, the respect he does or does not inspire, and the people he chooses to work for him. Where are the nasty tell alls about Obama? If we get another Obama, or two, many of the previous norms and constraints may fall back into place.

[hollodero]

(06-19-2020, 04:52 PM)Dill Wrote: Our president didn't know Finland was an independent country (if Bolton is right).  I can't help feeling rather stressed and desperate, repeatedly hearing such things about the guy in charge of US diplomacy and national security strategy. Before Trump I'd have agreed--silence unless laws are broken. But now I insist it is material--a matter of public and national interest--whether a president has basic, 8th-grade knowledge of global affairs, and most especially with respect to a president given to breaking laws.

Yes, I agree. Going forward presidents will be more nervous about communicating with advisors who may kiss and tell. But unfortunately that is now the lesser evil.

OK, there might or might not be a bigger point I would be able to agree on. I don't think Bolton's book did much to shed light on this though. There was already enough light shed on this. No, your president has no basic knowledge of global or any affairs besides his own, and we were both aware of that before Bolton spoke up.

And those who weren't or chose to ignore it or paint it as CNN lies, well, they won't be persuaded now. I don't think there is any greater good involved that superseeds the evil you mentioned. Bolton's book (can I call him a despicable walrus one last time?) changes nothing in that regard and I consider that statement to be a fairly obvious one.

[hollodero]

(06-19-2020, 04:58 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It absolutely is something we need to know because we are the ones who decide who gets to be President.

It is very important for us to know if Trump is a complete moron.

Given a somewhat similar response to the one I gave Dill - you already knew Trump was a complete moron. As did I. This is not exactly breaking news.

And those who do not know or ignore it, well, they will keep ignoring it anyway.

[fredtoast]

(06-19-2020, 05:21 PM)hollodero Wrote: Given a somewhat similar response to the one I gave Dill - you already knew Trump was a complete moron. As did I. This is not exactly breaking news.

And those who do not know or ignore it, well, they will keep ignoring it anyway.

This is some ridiculous logic.

If nothing will change anything then why are Trumps poll numbers dropping?

Got to keep the pressure on.  Got to keep new stories working through the news cycle to keep Trumps incompetence on the front burner.  Just as the talk about Mattis trashing Trump starts to die down we get Bolton's book.  In a couple of weeks when the dust starts to settle from this I hope there will be another member of his own party shitting on him.  All the better when it is people Trump himself has fawned over when he first appointed them.

[hollodero]

(06-19-2020, 05:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is some ridiculous logic.

If nothing will change anything then why are Trumps poll numbers dropping?

I didn't say that. What I do think and did say is that further proof that Trump is a complete moron won't change anything.

Teargassing peaceful protesters or acts like those still very well might.

--- I have to say though, poll numbers dropping and especially approval ratings going down stopped to be breaking news to me either. Seemingly every other week his approval rating is way down, tumbling, tanking in record pace and whatnot... still he is always hovering around 40%. No matter who shits on him also. Many Conservatives did, many GOP strategists or former party members did, Flake did, Corker did, Amash did... the list goes on....but the classical Trump suppporter can block this away by assuming those are all disgruntled people or deep staters or whatever. As soon as it's not the party as a whole that rebukes him (which absolutely should be the case, but since it didn't happen already, I doubt it ever will), these effects seem to leave little impact.

[Belsnickel]

(06-18-2020, 09:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No one here has a problem with a former National SECURITY Advisor trying to turn a profit by telling things that he and a sitting President "talked" about?

Man, this thread has been on overdrive since this post. I, personally, have a problem with anyone writing a book like this. Doesn't matter the administration, doesn't matter whether it's good or bad for the administration. Maybe it's the bureaucrat in me, but there are things that are just kept in-house and that when shared often don't contain the context necessary for someone not involved in it to understand. This isn't even getting into the potential security concerns. If someone has information about an administration like what is supposedly in Bolton's book, Congress is their place to take it. Maybe an IG if there is one they fall under the purview of.

I think things are important for the public to know because we are a democratic society and an informed populous is a requirement of such. However, there is a process in place for it and the continual skirting of that process in favor of self-promotion is also a degrading factor of our democracy. The issue at hand, though, is that I see our system as broken and dysfunctional. I think we have decades of shameless self-promotion that can be held as partly to blame for this, as well.

[*Nately120*]

The thing that bugs me is that Bolton isn't fat enough to be called a walrus. His mustache makes him more like John Oates' grandpa, or something.

[hollodero]

(06-19-2020, 05:53 PM)Nately120 Wrote: The thing that bugs me is that Bolton isn't fat enough to be called a walrus. His mustache makes him more like John Oates' grandpa, or something.

He is walrus faced though. Much like McConnell is turtle faced, so he is called a turtle even though he has no shell on his back. Appreciate the focusing on the real important stuff :)

[fredtoast]

(06-19-2020, 05:45 PM)Belsnickel Wrote:  If someone has information about an administration like what is supposedly in Bolton's book, Congress is their place to take it.

There is absolutely nothing congress could do with this type of information.  You can't impeach a President for being stupid.

[*bfine32*]

(06-19-2020, 06:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is absolutely nothing congress could do with this type of information.  You can't impeach a President for being stupid.

Can you impeach for seeking foreign aid to enhance your re-election chances?

[fredtoast]

(06-19-2020, 06:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Can you impeach for seeking foreign aid to enhance your re-election chances?

And here we have exhibit one as to why Bolton did not take this info to congress.  


The Republicans in the Senate won't remove Trump no matter what he does so Bolton took this info straight to the voters. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-19-2020, 04:29 PM)hollodero Wrote: No, but that's where the snake bites its tail a bit. For it also is not an information the public needs to know. And it sets a precedent you might not really want to be set.

It opens the door for basically everyone to publish a book about conversations with the US president, who will lose the possibility to share his thoughts in confidence. Which is a bad development. You don't want to put your president in a situation where he constantly has to wonder if his counterpart will share the conversation with the public.

Which is why I can really understand what bfine is saying here. Presidential advisors should be bound to discretion. Except when actual laws are broken, in which case they should not choose a book deal to tell about it.

This isn’t even the first tell all from this administration. It’s not like Bolton is producing recordings from inside the Situation Room proving he is telling the truth after others within this administration accuse him of lying like Omarosa did.

Things are pretty bad when Omarosa has more credibility than the Commander in Chief.

[hollodero]

(06-19-2020, 06:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Can you impeach for seeking foreign aid to enhance your re-election chances?

According to republican senators, you can not. 

I think you absolutely should be able to though, and so I have to agree with Bels, this information had to go to Congress during the impeachment process. Even if the end result would just have been additional shame to the acquitting GOP senators.

(06-19-2020, 06:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The Republicans in the Senate won't remove Trump no matter what he does so Bolton took this info straight to the voters. 

But if he had taken the info to Congress the voters would have been informed as well.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-19-2020, 04:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Details have been given throughout this thread. I think you've even commented on a couple of them. But as I've said: to me it does not matter if he asked what the moon was composed of.

I have specifically stated that a former NSA should not be making public (especially for profit) anything discussed between he and a sitting POTUS.

The rest of your post is typical and uncalled for.

Let’s check something . . .

(06-18-2020, 09:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No one here has a problem with a former National SECURITY Advisor trying to turn a profit by telling things that he and a sitting President "talked" about?

You’re the one who based your outrage on “National SECURITY” and yet can’t name a single damn thing that relates to national security that has you upset.

My panties wouldn’t be in a bunch if Bolton writes a book disclosing Trump asked what the moon is made of because it is inconsequential to “National SECURITY.” Proving your fake moral outrage has nothing to do with “National SECURITY.” In typical Skip Bayless fashion, you’re arguing just for the sake of argument which is uncalled for, but typical of you.

[fredtoast]

(06-19-2020, 06:20 PM)hollodero Wrote: According to republican senators, you can not. 

I think you absolutely should be able to though, and so I have to agree with Bels, this information had to go to Congress during the impeachment process. Even if the end result would just have been additional shame to the acquitting GOP senators.



But if he had taken the info to Congress the voters would have been informed as well.

I don't know if any of the info in Bolton's book had anything to do with the grounds for impeachment.  Congress can't do anything with a report that the president is stupid.

Trump always makes a big deal out of publically trashing all of these guys when they leave the administration.  It is ridiculous to say that these guys can't defend themselves or respond in public because they owe some sort of duty to the President.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-19-2020, 05:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is some ridiculous logic.

If nothing will change anything then why are Trumps poll numbers dropping?

Got to keep the pressure on.  Got to keep new stories working through the news cycle to keep Trumps incompetence on the front burner.  Just as the talk about Mattis trashing Trump starts to die down we get Bolton's book.  In a couple of weeks when the dust starts to settle from this I hope there will be another member of his own party shitting on him.  All the better when it is people Trump himself has fawned over when he first appointed them.

His poll numbers are dropping due to his reactions to current events. Not because we suddenly learned Trump isn’t smarter than a 5th grader due to Bolton’s revelations.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-19-2020, 05:45 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Man, this thread has been on overdrive since this post. I, personally, have a problem with anyone writing a book like this. Doesn't matter the administration, doesn't matter whether it's good or bad for the administration. Maybe it's the bureaucrat in me, but there are things that are just kept in-house and that when shared often don't contain the context necessary for someone not involved in it to understand. This isn't even getting into the potential security concerns. If someone has information about an administration like what is supposedly in Bolton's book, Congress is their place to take it. Maybe an IG if there is one they fall under the purview of.

I think things are important for the public to know because we are a democratic society and an informed populous is a requirement of such. However, there is a process in place for it and the continual skirting of that process in favor of self-promotion is also a degrading factor of our democracy. The issue at hand, though, is that I see our system as broken and dysfunctional. I think we have decades of shameless self-promotion that can be held as partly to blame for this, as well.

Trump has singlehandedly rendered the IG oversight process completely useless.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-19-2020, 06:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Can you impeach for seeking foreign aid to enhance your re-election chances?

Yes.

[hollodero]

(06-19-2020, 06:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't know if any of the info in Bolton's book had anything to do with the grounds for impeachment.  Congress can't do anything with a report that the president is stupid.

Oh I think there was information that had a lot to do with impeachment. Impeachment was, putting obstruction of Congress aside, about abuse of power, in the form that Trump tried to extort Ukraine to get dirt (an announcement of an investigation) on Biden. Eg. to increase his reelection chances. If he tried a similar thing with China, this is totally relevant to the impeachment.

(06-19-2020, 06:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Trump always makes a big deal out of publically trashing all of these guys when they leave the administration.  It is ridiculous to say that these guys can't defend themselves or respond in public because they owe some sort of duty to the President.

They can respond... just carefully. I'd have no issue with Bolton tweeting back that Trump is a moron and a disaster and an incapable leader.
Admittedly, since Trump shatters all norms it might be understandable to fight him by shattering norms as well (like revealing conversations Bolton had with the president while advising him). I do think that in this case, the result is not worth the shattering.

[Belsnickel]

(06-19-2020, 06:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is absolutely nothing congress could do with this type of information.  You can't impeach a President for being stupid.

Well, actually, you can. But impeachment is not the only oversight tool in the Congressional toolbox. Impeachment is the tool of last resort, or it's supposed to be.

(06-19-2020, 06:52 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Trump has singlehandedly rendered the IG oversight process completely useless.

Eh, not entirely. He has done his best to damage it, I will agree. But the IG process is still in place and there are still policies that require IG reporting to Congress.