Monday, December 2, 2019
Ritaruby
What do you think about the person who went to the NY Times and told a writer that they and others are working inside the administration - I believe it's National Security - to keep Trump's worst impulses under control? Did this person do us a service? Was it a cry for help making the public aware? Was it a signal to invoke the 25th amendment - or, as Obama and others (and myself actually) think - was an act of cowardice? Shouldn't this person have quit and staged a massive walk out and made everything public? And if you want to continue to do this, why make it public now? During Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing and all the other "new news?"

Any guesses as to who it may be? in an article I read today it says Trump has "narrowed it down to 4 or 5 people" "none of whom I (he) respect or like anyway."

Per Rachel Maddow much of the wording contained phrases frequently used by Mike Pence...but he's not in National Security....and I don't think can be fired..but what a way to become the new President...he was seen having long conversations with Senate Democrats recently.

Mattis is said to be leaving.....I am out of guesses, how about you? And what do you think of this? I feel the article is true, the NY Times is pretty reliable and accurate.

I am concerned that this just fired Trump up so much more he may hit the nuke button quicker though....
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
Yes, people are saying the courageous thing for the person to do would have been to say all he said and resign at the same time.  But the person's reasoning might have been that if he/she resigned the replacement would be somebody would would carry out Trump's reckless directives rather than resist them.  Trump has already shown a pattern of hiring sycophants who flatter him rather than objectively qualified people. So the mystery person wanted to stay in place, continuing to resist Trump's dangerous impulses, rather than expose himself/herself at this time.  Suppose I am right about this?  Might the mysterious person have had parallel additional motives?  Maybe so, maybe not.  But suppose the motive was not as complex as all the pundits are suggesting?  Suppose it was an insider with substantive authority over some part of the executive branch, maybe a cabinet member, who acted because he/she simply thought it was patriotic duty, i.e. due to love of country, to inform Americans just how unstable Trump really is?
 
Quote 0 0
Trump-hater
If Congress wasn’t full of Republican traitors who refuse to do what’s right for our country, this wouldn’t be happening - Trump would have already been impeached.  This person knows that coming forward and invoking 25th amendment won’t go anywhere.  Every Repugnant has to be voted out now.
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
Just read an article listing all the suspects.  It included Jon Huntsman, current Ambassador to Russia as one who might be extremely concerned about US posture and policy relative to Putin and the Russians.  It said Huntsman issued a denial but a weak one.  This is an interesting possibility.  Given what we know about Trump's treasonous and disgusting comments after the Helsinki conference with Putin, it would not be surprising if a high-level diplomat like Huntsman got freaked out about a cave-in to Putin.
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
This is interesting Ballhawk. I did not even know of this person or his title and you are right, it does make sense. But - just from reading mystery novels in the past - it can often be someone whom you least suspect. Since Rand Paul is now suggesting that all "suspects" take a lie detector test, we may know soon - that way or another. (I can not stand Rand Paul-he went on his own on Trump's behalf to Moscow - separate from the visits from other current serving GOP members - and I feel like he always causes trouble..kind of like Devin Nunes and the "new" Lindsay Graham. Thanks for this info. and please keep us posted. Sometimes we all may see different avenues of news stories and articles.
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
Welcome to the forum Trump-hater. I agree completely with your post. As Obama put it in his recent speech on Trump "Trump is a symptom, not a cause" and he spoke also on the reluctance of the currently serving GOP to hold him to the founding fathers' checks and balances. I hate Trump too, by the way, with a passion.
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
Ballhawk on your theory of the NY Times person mentioned in the article, the high ranking official, I have thought of this same premise as a possibility - one of many - as you did. But this is the case, then why not continue your "undercover help" work inside without telling a NY Times Reporter? That is puzzling to me. Your thoughts on this? 
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
I admire Obama and thought he gave a great speech at Univ. of Illinois the other day.  But when it said the Trump phenomenon is only a symptom "not the cause" it made me cringe.  Of course his point was that we have had right wing extremists and bigotry long before Trump came into the presidency.  But I see Trump as both a symptom and a cause.  Trump personally is clearly the cause of much of our national angst due to his behavior and toxic attitudes, so I would never have said "not the cause" in reference to Donald Trump.  Yes, certain viewpoints were already out there in the public but Trump personally gave them justification, legitimacy in their feeble minds, to come forth with pro-Nazi and bigoted acts.  Frankly I was surprised that Obama phrased it the way he did. 
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
Interesting question you raise Ritaruby, that being why couldn't the op-ed writer just continue to resist Trump internally but without publishing in the NY Times?  I will suggest this:  The unknown high-level official might have two reasons for going to the Times, one that he/she felt the public is not currently being fully informed about all the problems with Trump, even with all the press coverage of them, two that the mystery person controls parts of US government activity that are intricate and complex where Trump's harm to our national viability is running far deeper than anyone realizes.  It might be somebody who feels strongly that Trump has been compromised by the Russians and is controlled to a considerable extent by Putin (who has something on Trump) without the American public being fully aware of the extent of Trump's treason.  This is why I originally suspected Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats (and still think he is a possibility) and why I think Ambassador to Russia Jon Huntsman is also a strong possibility. 
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
Very interesting Ballhawk. I can see any one of these scenarios being the one. I feel very certain that the official who went to the NY Times writer IS VERY concerned about Trump's relationships-notice I mention it in the plural here because I think though it's mainly Putin it's more than one relationship). I think this person is also seeing Trump's lack of impulse control and observing the currently serving GOP doing absolutely nothing...but also "kissing butt" (excuse me here - could not think of any other words) to Putin, Moscow, Russians (not the population of people but those who "run Russia". If the person is in fact in the national security area with a clearance which I am sure the serving ones all do now it stands to reason that they would hit a panic button. This person also alluded to the fact that he or she is not the only one-that there is a group inside. I strongly suspect Coats-he has the character, access and background to do this. I have also thought of John Kelley (isn't he in National Security?) because we have read his dissatisfaction with Trump and Trump with him...not sure about Sessions and I do think Chris Wray is possible though I feel as both he and Rod Rosenstein feel a duty to "stick it out" at least until the Mueller report comes out. This person, I agree, wanted to "warn" the public or perhaps help calm some fears that Trump would hit the nuke button during a temper tantrum or something similar. I'm surprised Devin Nunes, Lindsay Graham and the Freedom Caucus members-among others-aren't wanting to launch their own investigation...I think this person sees that in the serving GOP many members are actually trying to help Trump and Russia and do not care about this country. Has to be someone with a good moral character, which in my opinion rules out people like Steve Mnuchin (sp?). I will look up more on Jon Huntsman. I do believe that this person controls intricate and complex activity and that Trump has and is harming our national viability.
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
I had the exact same reaction that you did to Obama's speech, Ballhawk. I do feel that, though many harmful people and circumstances existed before Trump got on the campaign trail then Putin got him elected- that Trump IS both the cause and the symptom. He has divided the country and the list of harm he has done is endless. John Kaisch (sp?) was on the news the other day and he seems to have swung towards Trump too now....he suggested that it is the American people's problem to make things different and be active within their own neighborhoods, treat each other right, etc. I thought highly of him and now do not. We CAN do a lot - especially get out and vote them out - but the American people should not be responsible for "righting Trump's wrongs" - that is Congress's job and they are doing a lousy job at it. Trump "kicked everything into high gear" - there is a book out which I have not read which is called "Everything Trump Touches Dies"- the writer is often on Ari Melber. Trump brought his debt and his crime boss mentality/dictator mentality and similar connections to the USA and threw them out in plain sight when he saw the Republicans never push back.
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
Ritaruby I share your newfound skepticism on Kasich.  If he is tossing the problem back to ordinary Americans rather than recognizing the failure of Republicans in Congress to act, then he can no longer be considered "one of the reasonable Republicans."  At times it appeared that Senator Graham had some common sense, but then he made those ridiculous comments on Fox News.  Such people cannot be trusted to hold a realistic view of the Trump problem.  Reasonable Republicans are an extinct species, as McCain, Corker, and Flake will no longer be in the Senate and I cannot think of a single reasonable GOP member of the House.  They have all sold their souls.  Today's GOP is a gutless bunch of apologists for Trumpism.
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
Yet again, Ballhawk, we are thinking the exact same thing. I am nervously counting the days until the mid term!
Quote 0 0