Ambassadorial Leaks

[James Clark]

On the OP subject, I think that The Economist magazine sums it up pretty well:

The irony being that it's applicable no matter which side of The Atlantic you happen to be on.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

The irony being that it's applicable no matter which side of The Atlantic you happen to be on.

They are Brits... masters of irony. I am pretty sure the images and the title were not selected randomly.

[Peter McLennan]

Of course Biden didn't lie about his voting record or Warren about her ethnic background. What's the expression? How do you know when a politician is lying? His lips are moving.

An astoundingly large and red-channel-saturated herring and poor attempt at mis-direction.  When EW's singular mis-step in any way correlates with Trump's thousands of easily-disproved malign statements, I'll pay attention.

How do you know when a politician is lying? His lips are moving.

And this is acceptable to you?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... EW's singular mis-step ...

Singular!? She built a career on it, for years.

[Alan Klein]

An astoundingly large and red-channel-saturated herring and poor attempt at mis-direction.  When EW's singular mis-step in any way correlates with Trump's thousands of easily-disproved malign statements, I'll pay attention.
And this is acceptable to you?

Of course I don't like the lying.  I was just pointing out that all politicians do it.  So one must take everything they say with a grain of salt. 

Having said that, Trump is actually more visible about how he feels and what he wants to do than a lot of politicians.  Others take both sides of most issues so they can adjust to how the wind blows later.  Trump usually takes one side and often sticks his foot into it because of that.  But at least he's willing to take risky positions and stand by them more than most politicians.  Most of the promises he made on the campaign trail, whether you like them or not,  he's kept or tried to keep.  That's refreshing in a politician. 

[Frans Waterlander]

... kill two birds with one stone.

Totally un-PC, according to the lefties. You should say "Feed two birds with one scone."

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Totally un-PC, according to the lefties. You should say "Feed two birds with one scone."

 

Yes, certainly, there is more than one way to skin a cat.

[LesPalenik]

Yes, certainly, there is more than one way to skin a cat.

But only one way to skin a beaver.
https://www.wideopenspaces.com/skin-beaver-steve-rinella/

[Rob C]

Not that big of a mystery, I'd have thought - who could possibly benefit from replacing an experienced ambassador with someone potentially more conducive to business deals?
What is the significance of these leaks being reported by Isabel Oakeshot, well-known associate of Brexit-bankroller Arron Banks?

Makes sense, but unless he gets a party into government, I don't see Farage pulling it off, and if he did, would he blow the opportunity of the top job for an ambassadorship, where he could be fired more easily?

[Robert Roaldi]

I just read that the ambassador in question has resigned. This is a bit odd, isn't it? It's his job to report what he sees/thinks to his government, and presumably that's what he did. Unless the leak was his fault, I don't see that he did anything wrong. Quite the contrary, it's his job to report what he sees and thinks.

This article sums up his current position though https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/british-ambassador-u-s-resigns-after-leaked-memos-showed-he-n1028116. I can see that it would be difficult for him to carry on at this point. I presume that the top brass in London UK are looking into the origins of this leak big time. If I were him, I'd be demanding a generous exit package, and I bet his colleagues will be watching closely to see that he gets one. Imagine being in a position like that and not being free to speak your mind to your prime minister, who would ever take the job unless you're just there for the parties?

I enjoy the irony though. Trump has said equally insulting things about others in his own tweets.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... If I were him, I'd be demanding a generous exit package..

When you are about to be fired or resign... not the best time to impose your terms. Exit packages are best negotiated at the beginning of the contract, when they want you, not at the (abrupt) end, when nobody does.

[faberryman]

If I were him, I'd be demanding a generous exit package...

I don't think you get a golden parachute when you work for the government.

[Alan Klein]

I just read that the ambassador in question has resigned. This is a bit odd, isn't it? It's his job to report what he sees/thinks to his government, and presumably that's what he did. Unless the leak was his fault, I don't see that he did anything wrong. Quite the contrary, it's his job to report what he sees and thinks.

This article sums up his current position though https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/british-ambassador-u-s-resigns-after-leaked-memos-showed-he-n1028116. I can see that it would be difficult for him to carry on at this point. I presume that the top brass in London UK are looking into the origins of this leak big time. If I were him, I'd be demanding a generous exit package, and I bet his colleagues will be watching closely to see that he gets one. Imagine being in a position like that and not being free to speak your mind to your prime minister, who would ever take the job unless you're just there for the parties?

I enjoy the irony though. Trump has said equally insulting things about others in his own tweets.

American government officials have been fired when administration opponents have leaked confidential information here about things they've done.  Administration officials go on a hunt to track done the leakers to no avail.  It's part of politics in Britain apparently as well. 

[Rob C]

When you are about to be fired or resign... not the best time to impose your terms. Exit packages are best negotiated at the beginning of the contract, when they want you, not at the (abrupt) end, when nobody does.

I don't believe they can fire him unless they can pin security failure upon him; I would be more interested in looking into the Mail's motivation, than anything else. Were I he, then I think I would offer to resign in order to save the government's face, and do it in exchange for a good, golden egg. Clearly, his value in America has been terminated by treachery.

As for the person or persons who did leak this, as I would with Julian Assange, I'd off with their heads in true patriot manner. Oh, wait; I don't think we can do that anymore. You see how weak and silly those PC people can make your country look?

What makes interesting news in the public sphere is not the same thing as it always being in the public interest that it be published. In my view, it was either a deliberate attempt to disrupt the government for some political purpose or an attempt to proffer an alternative candidate more suited to Mr Trump's desires.

[RSL]

It's really unfortunate. You expect your ambassador to tell you exactly what he thinks about the country and the situation he's in. Anything less makes him ineffective. I don't happen to agree with the guy, but I'd rather see him telling it the way he sees it instead of pussyfooting around the situation in order to avoid this kind of retribution because if his reporting.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... You expect your ambassador to tell you exactly what he thinks about the country and the situation he's in. Anything less makes him ineffective....

Yes, providing his insight is original. Otherwise, the Foreign Office could have saved a lot of money by sacking the ambassador and simply reading the American MSM instead.

[faberryman]

Yes, providing his insight is original. Otherwise, the Foreign Office could have saved a lot of money by sacking the ambassador and simply reading the American MSM instead.

I pretty sure the UK would prefer to have their own guy on the ground corroborating the reporting. Otherwise, how would they know whether to believe Fox News or CNN?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I pretty sure the UK would prefer to have their own guy on the ground corroborating the reporting. Otherwise, how would they know whether to believe Fox News or CNN?

Apparently, the ambassador watched CNN and MSNBC only.

[Alan Klein]

This was an inside job for British political reasons.  What reasons could there be?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

This was an inside job for British political reasons.  What reasons could there be?

Boris Johnson, the new prime minister, wouldn't want an anti-American ambassador.