Cont: The Trump Presidency Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
BobTheCoward said:
I propose a better skeptical position.

Do not speculate with so little.
Click to expand...

the_animus' speculation is both reasonable, and based on sufficient evidence that, if I was an investigator, would cause me to begin an investigation into the matter. To put it mildly, the facts as known do not pass the "smell test" and warrant further investigation.
 
Border Reiver said:
the_animus' speculation is both reasonable, and based on sufficient evidence that, if I was an investigator, would cause me to begin an investigation into the matter. To put it mildly, the facts as known do not pass the "smell test" and warrant further investigation.
Click to expand...

I didn't ask if there was evidence sufficient for someone to investigate. I asked for evidence of a claim. At no point did I dismiss people pursuing evidence for whatever interest they have. And none of that necessitates public speculation (especially if not able to conduct an investigation).
 
dudalb said:
"Let the name of Obama be struck from every monument..."
Click to expand...


"Because of it's historical significance, it has been decided that Barack Obama's Presidential portrait will be displayed in a special location...at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'beware of the leopard'."
 
Stacko said:

So much for the buck stops here.
Click to expand...

It pains me to defend The Orange Mussolini, but he might not have Personally approved the Niger mission. It might well have been a routine intelligence gathering patrol ,part of the standing mission orders for Niger,that went bad.
No president personally approved every action the US military takes;only the very risky ones.
But that does not make Trump evasing responsibility any less reprehensible.
 
dudalb said:
It pains me to defend The Orange Mussolini, but he might not have Personally approved the Niger mission. It might well have been a routine intelligence gathering patrol ,part of the standing mission orders for Niger,that went bad.
No president personally approved every action the US military takes;only the very risky ones.
But that does not make Trump evasing responsibility any less reprehensible.
Click to expand...

And for the commander in chief to not find out and know first is either troubling or disgraceful.
 
dudalb said:
It pains me to defend The Orange Mussolini, but he might not have Personally approved the Niger mission. It might well have been a routine intelligence gathering patrol ,part of the standing mission orders for Niger,that went bad.
No president personally approved every action the US military takes;only the very risky ones.
But that does not make Trump evasing responsibility any less reprehensible.
Click to expand...

I believe that's almost certainly the case. The problem is with his actions -- or lack of them -- afterwards.
 
Trebuchet said:
I believe that's almost certainly the case. The problem is with his actions -- or lack of them -- afterwards.
Click to expand...

I 1000% agree it would hard to see any President handling this worse then Trump did.
That is why I said it pains me to defend Dear Leader. But I think the implication that Trump personally approved this operation to be almost certainly false.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
I 1000% agree it would hard to see any President handling this worse then Trump did.
That is why I said it pains me to defend Dear Leader. But I think the implication that Trump personally approved this operation to be almost certainly false.
Click to expand...

It's this part that's the problem, "I’ve been seeing it just like you’ve been seeing it." He's the president that shouldn't be true. It's disturbing to think that if Fox doesn't cover something, he probably won't know about it.
 
BobTheCoward said:
If the argument for speculation is that it is more fun to speculate then I am 100% supportive of that.
Click to expand...

For decision-making under uncertainty, do you have a definition for the point at which partial information may be considered actionable? If not, on what basis do you characterize an analysis as speculative? Without this definition, you would need, say, to prove someone guilty prior to initiating an investigation in order for it not to be unwarranted. Neat trick, in tune with today's GOP-Trumpian "say what?" total impunity parade.

IOW, what is probable cause? Looks like a reasonable judgment call is the standard, not certainty.
 
Hlafordlaes said:
For decision-making under uncertainty, do you have a definition for the point at which partial information may be considered actionable? If not, on what basis do you characterize an analysis as speculative? Without this definition, you would need, say, to prove someone guilty prior to initiating an investigation in order for it not to be unwarranted. Neat trick, in tune with today's GOP-Trumpian "say what?" total impunity parade.

IOW, what is probable cause? Looks like a reasonable judgment call is the standard, not certainty.
Click to expand...

In situations that do not warrant skepticism I do not apply skepticism.
 
dudalb said:
... But I think the implication that Trump personally approved this operation to be almost certainly false.
Click to expand...


I don't think that's been proposed by more than one or two, and certainly not pushed. That's not an issue (the travel ban effects are seperate and speculative at the moment).



dudalb said:
It pains me to defend The Orange Mussolini, but he might not have Personally approved the Niger mission. It might well have been a routine intelligence gathering patrol ,part of the standing mission orders for Niger,that went bad.
No president personally approved every action the US military takes;only the very risky ones.
But that does not make Trump evasing responsibility any less reprehensible.
Click to expand...


Here's the problem... him saying he's learning about it as we go (the post you responded to here).

The least that should have happened, the very least, is that the second thing that happened the next morning, after a PDB confirming no related and ongoing threat, is a full briefing with a comprehensive report prepared overnight, with representatives of the appropriate military and intelligence agencies.

There are details and findings coming out that he's learning as the investigation continues... but there's not an iota of data that he shouldn't be aware of... long before we the public hear about it.

There's no "loop" here he should be outside of.
And this is not an instance to play at being "one of the people". :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Stacko said:
It's this part that's the problem, "I’ve been seeing it just like you’ve been seeing it." He's the president that shouldn't be true. It's disturbing to think that if Fox doesn't cover something, he probably won't know about it.
Click to expand...
Telling isn't it. If true it means Trump is getting no PDBs or they are meaningless PDBs.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Telling isn't it. If true it means Trump is getting no PDBs or they are meaningless PDBs.
Click to expand...


They fired the people who put together his regular morning ego-stroking picture book.

That was probably as close to a daily briefing as he ever got.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the White House staff and all of the reporting agencies are afraid to tell him too much about what is happening in the world, because he might decide he wants to do something about it.
 
quadraginta said:
They fired the people who put together his regular morning ego-stroking picture book.

That was probably as close to a daily briefing as he ever got.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the White House staff and all of the reporting agencies are afraid to tell him too much about what is happening in the world, because he might decide he wants to do something about it.
Click to expand...

I'm sure he got and continues to get serious briefings. The problem is the picture book is the only one he pays much attention to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom