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

[*bfine32*]

(06-18-2020, 11:22 PM)Dill Wrote: Let's read the book first and see what Bolton says Trump said.

If Trump abused his power, in part by disarming mechanisms of accountability, then no, I don't have a problem with a former NSA explaining how that occurred. Especially if that is the only way the public can learn of the abuse.

If Trump was committing high crimes, then "in confidence" is no defense. Nor is blaming the messenger.

Do you have a problem with elected officials' abuse of power or not?

If you DO have a problem with it, is it your position that the abuse should be addressed in public or behind closed doors? What sort of accountability can be secret? None. If you think it should be addressed in public, then stop the endless deflection of public accountability for Trump.

If you DO NOT have a problem with presidential abuse of power, then you are not really in favor of liberal democracy. King's and dictators make the state's business their private business. No concern of the public. The messenger is the criminal.  Our system was designed to make governing transparent, so Presidents cannot convert state business to private. 

You must finally choose which form of government you support.

Of course you'd have a point if Bolton's desire was to testify before congress instead of trying to turn a profit. And yes; I'd still have a problem with a former NSA making public things that were "discussed" in confidence.  

I'll take your long-winded answer as "no" you don't have a problem with it. 

"Reading the book" has not stopped folks in here from applauding the comments so far, but when I suggest it should not be applauded it's met with "let's read the book".

You must finally choose if your desire is to make POTUS look bad or support our democracy.