DescentBB

May be the person who delivers us from the orange pestilence known as Donald J. Trump, and even perhaps as a bonus, his evil partner in crime Mike Pence.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/us/p ... ation.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/ ... -to-trump/

But then, the cure might be worse than the disease, because if Trump and Pence both happen to be brought down because of their coziness with our adversarial nation state, Russia, we'd get the next bozo in line, Paul Ryan. Dear God, we are so royally screwed.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-pence-pau ... yptr=yahoo

Tunnelcat wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:26 pm May be the person who delivers us from the orange pestilence known as Donald J. Trump, and even perhaps as a bonus, his evil partner in crime Mike Pence.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/us/p ... ation.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/ ... -to-trump/

But then, the cure might be worse than the disease, because if Trump and Pence both happen to be brought down because of their coziness with our adversarial nation state, Russia, we'd get the next bozo in line, Paul Ryan. Dear God, we are so royally screwed.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-pence-pau ... yptr=yahoo

Tell me TC, has the FBI shown any proof that trumps coziness swung the election in his favor by colluding with the Rooskies?

From your link:
"It is unclear whether McFarland actually believed that Russia had "thrown" the election to Trump, or whether she was being sarcastic"

Certainly not proof of any sort

"Proof" is a relative thing when talking politics.

Well, I guess we need to see what Mueller comes up with in order to get to some semblance of the truth, don't we Spidey? If the FBI can't find out the truth, who can?

The fact that Russia, and it's former satellite, Ukraine, keep popping up in concert with former Trump campaign officials like a bad penny is very telling. Trump had to know what his former campaign underlings were up to during his campaign. He'd have to be a pretty stupid businessman if he didn't. But the fact remains, Trump and his old cronies just can't seem to quit Russia for some reason.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/ ... ped-278786

The only real fact is no evidence has been produced to date.

That's why there's an investigation going on, to find out the truth. I'm even willing to accept what Mueller finds out. But Trump must be afraid of something because he keeps trying to find ways stop the investigation. Why, if he's got nothing to hide? And I'm willing to bet Trump is so unsettled by this that he's going to attempt another Saturday Night Massacre by firing Mueller. We'll see.

Something else. You were incensed at Hillary when the Benghazi debacle occurred, so where was your anger when this little epic military screw-up happened in Niger? A similar number of people were tragically killed and those deaths could've possibly been prevented if the military leadership concerned hadn't had their collective heads stuffed up their asses. Where was the Intel, the eyes in the sky and the backup? Why did it take so long to find one soldier's remains after the massacre? Why did it take so long to find the last body and then lie to the widow of that soldier about what really happened to the body of her dead husband?

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-four- ... -firefight

Special ops are inherently dangerous and the operators who run them know the risks. At least they are trained and armed to defend themselves. Can we say the same about Benghazi? As to the rest of your maundering statement I'll let you answer them yourself.

yes, all who were staffing Benghazi were both aware of the risks and apprised of them beforehand. The Ambassador who was killed acknowledged as much and took the job. Bad choice on your point to say otherwise.

Obfuscate much slick?:

"There are disagreements about whether State acted reasonably, but that it didn't honor requests for additional security is established fact," said Georgetown University adjunct assistant professor Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, who is also a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, which focuses on foreign policy and national security.

The State Department has acknowledged it rejected requests to provide more security personnel in Libya. It also acknowledged rejecting a request to erect guard towers at the Benghazi mission

The State Department’s own Accountability Review Board concluded that the number of diplomatic security staff in Benghazi in the months leading up to the attacks was inadequate "despite repeated requests" from the Benghazi mission and the embassy in Tripoli for additional staffing.

So, while the Amb may have agreed to go, he did so with a total lack of protection. A bit different from trained operators who are armed to the teeth. Even the French embassy had a full contingent of marines protecting it. Why not Benghazi?

A coverup is a coverup woody and the Niger debacle stinks of a massive coverup because there was a operational screwup in planning, logistics, backup and botched body retrieval that the military doesn't want publicly reviled.

truly so, and I haven't beaten on it, because I accept such misjudgements happen. I do take issue with the apparent fact that Cheetolini's policy decision of putting Chad on the banned to enter list led to the immediate loss of our most valuable ally in the region. The Chad forces left 2 days before the Americans were killed. Hmmmmmm, worth a look-see?

Never going to happen as long as the Republicans and Trump hold power. Heaven forbid anyone admits to a mistake, especially Trump.