06-19-2020, 04:53 AM
(06-19-2020, 12:04 AM)Dill Wrote: No one thinks an advisor or other public official should make confidential negotiations public--unless they violated law or public trust. We "read the book" to find that out. If Trump does the things Bolton says he does, then Bolton's motivation is immaterial.
You avoid the question of legality by referring to overly general "things discussed in confidence," as if legal and illegal are equally protected in the case of a Republican president, as they would be in the case of a king or dictator, whose advisors pledge personal loyalty HIM, not some constitution and the people it represents.
Reread what I said in that "long-winded answer" about blaming the messenger. "Making POTUS look bad" in this case, as in myriad others, turns out to be just reporting what he actually says and does.
And that is what you don't "applaud." Transparency.
The final choice you pose implies its absence supports democracy--in the case of president who fires IG's and whistleblowers--while its presence does not; it rather "makes POTUS look bad."
I don't seem to recall the right having many misgivings about embracing Dick Morris when he turned on Bill Clinton. He was one of Bill's closest advisors for a significant part of his political life then did all he could to crap on Bill and His down the road.
