The American Constitution

[BobShaw]

American Presidents listening to our CIA has not boded well for us., 

True, but presidents as far back as Johnson were told they couldn't win the Vietnam war, but generals said the solution was more money, bombs and bodies.
Invading other countries that have not invited them has not worked out well for the US (except Hawaii of course).

[Alan Klein]

Who would have been a better choice.  A fact which at this point is painfully obvious.  Honestly, I can't even figure out what the complaint would be now.  Before it was how you can't trust her - she lies.  Or how her Clinton Foundation was supposedly corrupt. Or OMG her emails.  I mean, Trump has done all of those things and far worse just since assuming office.  And of course his supporters don't care now.  Surprise.  The debt ceiling?  Non issue.  Unauthorized personal electronic device? So what. Trump Foundation?  Actually forced to dissolve under court supervision.  And on and on and on and on.

The hypocrisy is astounding. 

She lost.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

She lost.

The USA lost.

Cheers,
Bart

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

The problem you and others have is that you refuse to accept the *reasons why* SOME IN THE upper level professionals in economics, journalism, international relations etc. are virulently anti-Trump....

This explains why we have a problem with what SOME say. Their "reasons" are exactly why people like Trump.

...But, you say, "I like what he does...

You bet. And would like him to do more of that,  without being sabotaged every step of the way.

.. I think the border is a serious problem...

Of course.

... And for some reason I think he's responsible for the economy even though it's been on the exact same trajectory for 6 years now."...

I think I posted before that we tend to give too much credit to presidents for the state of the economy. So you won't have me subscribed to the above. However, the above contains a fallacy that needs to be addressed: trajectories do not last forever. Given that the doomsday scenario predicted a market crash and deep recession in case he is elected, continuing the trajectory is a success.

...a faction of people *chose* this guy...

A faction!? Just the majority of people in the majority of states.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

The USA lost.

We are doing just fine, thank you.

[Alan Klein]

Trump tax legislation gave a boost to the economy by adding more profits.  Also, less taxes and more spending always boosts the economy.  Of course, deficits and debt have grown and there will be a penalty at some time for our profligacy. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I mean, Trump has done all of those things and far worse just since assuming office...

Here is an idea: perhaps you guys should start an investigation into those horrible crimes. You know, spend a couple of years and millions of dollars, maybe you will find something?

[James Clark]

She lost.

This is like when a 3 year old just plugs their ears and screams that they can't hear you.   That she lost isn't the point.  That Donald Trump is the living embodiment of everything that people claimed to dislike about Hillary, but suddenly that doesn't matter - that's the point.  It's not about Hillary. She's done.  It's about looking inward and deciding what your price is.  For far too many of you, it's disturbingly low.

[James Clark]

Here is an idea: perhaps you guys should start an investigation into those horrible crimes. You know, spend a couple of years and millions of dollars, maybe you will find something?

A sound idea.  I figure we have 4 or 5 more investigations before we hit the level of inanity that we did over Benghazi.  Or the Clinton Foundation.  Then again, Clinton actually testified under oath to a hostile committee.  And the Clinton Foundation continues on to this day.  Meanwhile Trump is scared to testify under oath and his "Foundation" is forcibly shuttered.

But nevertheless, Clinton's still probably guilty and going after Trump is still a witch hunt.   Good Lord.   

[James Clark]

This explains why we have a problem with what SOME say. Their "reasons" are exactly why people like Trump.

They like that he refuses to read intel briefings?  That he consults with the likes of Hannity on policy?  That our allies have zero confidence in the messages that come out of the White House?  Or State, or wherever?  No, I suspect that the things they like are that he's mean to liberals and "talks like they do."  That's sort of pathetic.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Oh, by the way, James, your presidential candidate, AOC, is so much more qualified and suited for the job, right? I mean, in your view, after Trump, even a retard like her can’t be worse, right? 😉

P.S. political teasing aside, I hope we are still friends

[James Clark]

Oh, by the way, James, your presidential candidate, AOC, is so much more qualified and suited for the job, right? I mean, in your view, after Trump, even a retard like her can’t be worse, right? 😉

P.S. political teasing aside, I hope we are still friends

FWIW, I didn't vote for Obama in '12 because I saw his expansion of drone warfare and his embrace of things like the surveillance state and the Patriot Act to not only be directly opposed to his campaign promises, but more importantly because they are directly in opposition to what I believe is both morally right and Constitutionally legal.  So no, I'm not an AOC fan at all.  I think she's a reactionary that plays primarily to an ill-informed base, and lacks a basic understanding of the things she's trying to solve.  Of the current candidates I prefer Buttigieg and Kamala Harris on the left, and on the right would have voted for Weld without reservation had he stuck it out and primaried Trump.

Here's the thing.  As I said (or at least implied) in the opening round of this part of the discussion, my problem isn't with things like lower taxes, border control, or other conservative priorities.  I may not place them as high up on the importance scale as conservatives do, but I don't find them morally or legally problematic in concept.  What I do have a very large problem with is putting my faith in someone who, whether by ignorance or design, plays to a fringe in words and deeds, thinks they already know everything, and is hostage to his or her own ego.  I think that's a recipe for poor decision making, and when you're the President of the USA, your poor decisions could, literally, bring about the end of the world. 

And yeah - of course we're friends. 

[Alan Klein]

This is like when a 3 year old just plugs their ears and screams that they can't hear you.   That she lost isn't the point.  That Donald Trump is the living embodiment of everything that people claimed to dislike about Hillary, but suddenly that doesn't matter - that's the point.  It's not about Hillary. She's done.  It's about looking inward and deciding what your price is.  For far too many of you, it's disturbingly low.

Hillary may have had us at war with Russia by now had she become president.  Trump sees Russia as a natural ally, a bulwark against China who is our real future adversary.  While not yet resolved, the North Koreans have stopped testing ICBM's and nuclear bomb tests.  More than many past presidents have accomplished. Trump has strengthened our military and started to cruise the South China Sea which Obama stopped and China therefore built up those islands as military bases and threatened our allies there.  He's pressed NATO allies to up their defense spending something past presidents have not been able to do although they tried.  He's passed new tax legislation and reduced regulations that's helping make our economy boom.  His tariffs have challenged China's theft of intellectual property and other predatory trade practices.  While not yet resolved, again he's trying to solve something past presidents have avoided.  He's done all these things practically by himself with little Congressional support while being challenged every day by the entrenched political and media classes.   If Hillary had won, and done the things he's doing, she'd be praised as a fearless genius.

[Robert Roaldi]

American Presidents listening to our CIA has not boded well for us.,  May I remind you it was our CIA that overthrew the elected government of Iran and installed the Shah who favored us better.  That led years later to his overthrowing by the Mullahs, their holding American hostages for over a year, the loss of the second presidential term of our Carter because of the hostages,  and our present problems with a clerical Iran.  It was also the CIA who said Saddam has WMD's in Iraq leading to our 2nd war there.  Additionally, the Muslim Brotherhood has avowed to destroy Jews and Israel.  Also, Morsi. a Muslim Brotherhood leader, tried to rough house Egyptian democracy when he and the Muslim Brotherhood took over Egypt. 

You don't seem to be up-to-speed on these issues.  I wouldn't waste my time on an obviously prejudiced podcast.  Frankly, all Presidents should be wary of our own CIA.  If Obama was still president, you would be telling us how bad the American CIA is.  But since Trump is president, anything that opposes Trump is good in your book even if bad. 

Having said all that, I suspect that Israel is secretly working with Saudi Arabia to undermine their common enemy, Iran.  So Trump is listening to Israel when he listens to Saudi's.

What a peculiar reaction. You think it's a good thing for the President to ignore the USA's own intelligence agencies? Maybe he should disband them, save some money. You think it's ok to take advice and direction from other countries? The Saudi royal family are the good guys now, despite the odd dismembered journalist?

This isn't serious discussion. This is drunk bar talk. Your "founding fathers" are probably turning over in their graves.

[Robert Roaldi]

Hillary may have had us at war with Russia by now had she become president.  Trump sees Russia as a natural ally, a bulwark against China who is our real future adversary.  While not yet resolved, the North Koreans have stopped testing ICBM's and nuclear bomb tests.  More than many past presidents have accomplished. Trump has strengthened our military and started to cruise the South China Sea which Obama stopped and China therefore built up those islands as military bases and threatened our allies there.  He's pressed NATO allies to up their defense spending something past presidents have not been able to do although they tried.  He's passed new tax legislation and reduced regulations that's helping make our economy boom.  His tariffs have challenged China's theft of intellectual property and other predatory trade practices.  While not yet resolved, again he's trying to solve something past presidents have avoided.  He's done all these things practically by himself with little Congressional support while being challenged every day by the entrenched political and media classes.   If Hillary had won, and done the things he's doing, she'd be praised as a fearless genius.

I'm sure that he says he's done all that.

Your leading statement is odd. How can Russia be a bulwark against China? Russia's economy is puny, they are not a world player, Trump just thinks it is, probably because they are the only place on earth that is willing to lend him money. No US bank will touch him because he doesn't pay back loans. Oh wait, does that make him smart?

Why is China a future adversary? They are a current major trading partner is what they are.

Why does the US need to increase its military spending when its armed forces are already the size of the next 5 (10?) countries' forces combined? Do you need your military to be the size of the next 20 countries' combined? 30? When will you feel safe?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Why is China a future adversary? They are a current major trading partner is what they are...

This is a kindergarten talk*

*just referencing your “drunk bar talk”

[Alan Klein]

What a peculiar reaction. You think it's a good thing for the President to ignore the USA's own intelligence agencies? Maybe he should disband them, save some money. You think it's ok to take advice and direction from other countries? The Saudi royal family are the good guys now, despite the odd dismembered journalist?

This isn't serious discussion. This is drunk bar talk. Your "founding fathers" are probably turning over in their graves.

Unil Trump, most liberals hated the CIA and complained constantly about how evil they were getting us into dangerous situations like Cuba Bay of Pigs invasion that almost lead to WWIII, or the Shah of Iran fiasco leading to the Mullahs.  Now that Trump takes what they say and do with a grain of salt, these same liberals suddenly are heaping praise on the CIA almost making them infallible.  It's pathetic. 

[Alan Klein]

I'm sure that he says he's done all that.

Your leading statement is odd. How can Russia be a bulwark against China? Russia's economy is puny, they are not a world player, Trump just thinks it is, probably because they are the only place on earth that is willing to lend him money. No US bank will touch him because he doesn't pay back loans. Oh wait, does that make him smart?

Why is China a future adversary? They are a current major trading partner is what they are.

Why does the US need to increase its military spending when its armed forces are already the size of the next 5 (10?) countries' forces combined? Do you need your military to be the size of the next 20 countries' combined? 30? When will you feel safe?

Not because of their economy but due to their military prowess through nuclear arms and other sophisticated weapons.  Also, their long border with China and large army.    Having Russian troops along that border with friendly relations with America will help hold China in check.  But first, we have to turn around our relations with them.  Because of the constant collusion charges against Trump all for political reasons, he has be unable to do that hurting American security interests. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...Do you need your military to be the size of the next 20 countries' combined? 30?

Of course. In the next world war, we might need to fight all 20-30 of them, given the current state of animosity toward the US

[LesPalenik]

Of course. In the next world war, we might need to fight all 20-30 of them, given the current state of animosity toward the US

Regrettably, Trump is not helping to counteract that sentiment.