Thursday, September 8, 2016
The Commander-in-Chief Forum . . . Meh . . .
We haven't yet seen the full spin that will be put on the September 7 CINC Forum held at the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum in New York. (BTW: A great museum to visit when you're in Manhattan.) I am sure every word will be parsed, every gesture analyzed, lots of video contrasting what a candidate said last night with what that candidate said a year or two ago, etc. I am sure we will all wait for that . . .
My quick and dirty impression of the impact of the CINC Forum?
If you were a Trump supporter, you remain one; if you were a Clinton supporter, you remain one.
Neither candidate put it away; neither candidate committed a fatal error. If you're genuinely undecided and not going for Stein or Johnson . . . well, don't know what to tell you except, maybe, it's time to make up your mind or decide to sit it out. I can't imagine the forthcoming debates being much different, except, of course, if one candidate commits an incredible gaffe.
Matt Lauer, the moderator, is not on my Christmas card list; I never liked him as either a journalist or as an entertainer or whatever it is he is on that morning show. That said, however, he did a credible job of pressing the candidates, including, yes, Hillary. He was pretty tough on Hillary re the email scandal although he let slide some obvious lies she told in response. I love the new lie she is now telling: classified material must have a header that says classified and none of her emails had that header. Rubbish. Classification is determined by the content of the information with or without a header and with or without any other classification designator--especially given that at least one email gives instructions to an aide to remove the header and send her the info on her private system. The SecState should know, regardless of "header," whether certain information is suitable for an unclassified system. You would think, at a minimum, that the SecState would know that discussions on drone strikes and a potential Iranian defector, for example, are not appropriate for an unclassified system, especially one she set up herself.
In addition, she has rewritten the whole Libya fiasco and is trying to paint it as some sort of success for her and the West: that somehow her policy averted a "massacre" in Libya and was achieved--cough!--without any Americans being killed (Note: Ambassador Stevens could not be reached for comment.) She did not deal with the Benghazi disaster nor with the chaotic and bloody state of affairs now reigning in Libya, Syria, Iraq, and throughout much of North and sub-Saharan Africa as a result of her policies. She put a lot of emphasis on destroying ISIS. Good, but the key question as always with Hillary is, "While you had the power, what did you do?" Lauer should have asked her whether she agrees with Obama's characterization of ISIS as the JV team, and whether she thinks Obama has handled Russia correctly.
Trump did fine overall. He came off as knowledgable and engaged. I have some criticism, however, when it comes to Putin. I am all for, as I have said before, engaging with Russia and getting Russia to work with us against ISIS and other Islamic terrorists. That doesn't mean implying that Putin is a great man. I know what Trump was trying to do which is to contrast Putin's strong leadership with Obama's weak leadership, but he has to find another way to make that point. He should note that under Obama/Clinton/Kerry the Russians show no respect for or fear of the United States, and that whatever the Obama policy is towards Russia it has not dissuaded Putin from taking Crimea and continuing to threaten Ukraine. He also has to find another way of saying re Iraq that we should have taken the oil. He can talk about how we should have struck deals with those who control the oil--mostly Kurds--and so on, without implying that we invaded Iraq to take the oil.
I am voting for Trump and nothing I saw or heard last night will change my mind. My two cents of advice to Trump, however, is to turn almost every question around and ask, "What has Hillary done about that?" She was SecState and a Senator, so what has she done?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What about the earpiece ? worn by Hillary
ReplyDeletehttp://www.infowars.com/was-hillary-wearing-an-earpiece-during-last-nights-presidential-forum/
"I have some criticism, however, when it comes to Putin. I am all for, as I have said before, engaging with Russia and getting Russia to work with us against ISIS and other Islamic terrorists. That doesn't mean implying that Putin is a great man. I know what Trump was trying to do which is to contrast Putin's strong leadership with Obama's weak leadership, but he has to find another way to make that point. He should note that under Obama/Clinton/Kerry the Russians show no respect for or fear of the United States, and that whatever the Obama policy is towards Russia it has not dissuaded Putin from taking Crimea and continuing to threaten Ukraine. He also has to find another way of saying re Iraq that we should have taken the oil. He can talk about how we should have struck deals with those who control the oil--mostly Kurds--and so on, without implying that we invaded Iraq to take the oil."
ReplyDeleteTrump has consistently spoken of his respect for Putin and his belief that we invaded Iraq for oil. There is no evidence that he actually believes what you are spinning it as. I wish he did but it's wishful thinking to believe otherwise.
I understand voting for him but not spinning for him.
I am not spinning anything. I am just saying that's how I would frame the issues.
DeleteIt's not a problem with "framing issues" for Trump to say Putin is a great man. That's what someone with poor judgment (at best) or a wannabe dictator (at worst) would say.
DeleteAs Trump says it, as with other things, it is not the best way to opine because it opens him up to attacks. He needs to engage brain before mouth. What you can say to senior VPs who know you is not the same as speaking to the unwashed masses as I well know.
DeletePutin is a strong advocate for Russian influence in the world.
ReplyDeleteObama is a strong advocate for American submission in the world.
I'm pretty certain that's what Trump's *trying* to say, in between filler and stammering.
- reader #1482
Or maybe he's saying exactly what he thinks.
DeleteIf you are right, then Trump can't articulate a coherent foreign policy -- a definite drawback for the leader of the free world. If I'm right, Trump sees himself as another world strongman like Putin. America doesn't need a dictator.
... If I'm right...America doesn't need a dictator." DRJ
DeleteSilly ass,
What America "doesn't need" any more of is empty barrels, such as yourself, pretending their anti-Trump noise is anything more than Bloviating BS!
Obviously, 60 days out from the Main Event, most of us citizens are tickled to finally have a counter-puncher on our side of the aisle, one who has the hands and the heart to knock the stuffing out of all comers! And, if by chance the CinC to be, should need any help, I'd bet most Americans will be in his corner till the last round! Now go peddle your gobbledegook to the Democrats!
On Watch~~~
"Let's Roll"
It turns out she was cheating.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.infowars.com/was-hillary-wearing-an-earpiece-during-last-nights-presidential-forum/
Pah, Malcolm got there first.
ReplyDeleteHow about the possibility that she's got Parkinson's?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr1IDQ2V1eM&feature=youtu.be
There is a leaked email out there between Huma and Cheryl Mills with the question "Did you remove all the Headers"?
ReplyDeleteHillary told the Lt. last night that he knows and she knows that classified documents have headers..she is so confident that anything proving her lies has been scrubbed, but she is getting caught.
I keep wishing that someone would ask Hellary what was her thinking behind the U.S. establishing diplomatic relations with Assad's Syria in 2009 ... and what was expected out of the Russian reset? Both these State Dept. initiatives appear to have had less planning and positive results than one of Hellary's campaign donor junkets ... and both ended in egg on our face (but, typically, not on hers). See if she will accept ownership of these blunders ... or blame someone else (rhetorical question).
ReplyDeleteJWP said: "I keep wishing that someone would ask Hellary what was her thinking behind the U.S. establishing diplomatic relations with Assad's Syria ...and what was expected out of the Russian reset? ... (rhetorical question).
ReplyDeleteI think you're getting a rhetorical erection out of Madam HellsBells non-stop public Lying, Spinning, Hacking, Wheezing, and overall goofy performance, and want MORE! Perhaps for the benefit of her mentally incompetent political supporters, the Islamo-Progressive-Democrat machine, AKA anti-America NITWITS! Please tell me I'm way off-base :)
On Watch~~~
"Lets Roll"
Clinton also claimed that she sent and received classified material on a “wholly separate system. What system? A new major lie the media and the Internet have not covered. Certainly not a secured .gov system or we would have heard about it. She is digging the hole ever deeper. She destroyed evidence that was subpoenaed by congressional committees. This becomes more a RICO criminal enterprise every day.
ReplyDeleteSay what you want about Trump, but he hasn't compromised national security and allowed Americans to be killed.
As I have said, his gaffs are venial sins. She is up to her neck in mortal sins ... Voters, play St. Peter!
DeleteAnytime I encounter Hillary supporters, I ask them to name her accomplishments. I remind them she has been Senator from NY and Secretary of State. I have yet to get one single response back. They don't even attempt to show what she's done in office. So why are they voting for her?
ReplyDeleteAh... II think she named a post office. Does that count?
DeleteAh... II think she named a post office. Does that count?
DeleteThere is also the aspect of accountability in this race. Would anyone hold Hillary accountable? Would the Main Stream Media dare to expose her?
ReplyDeleteContrast that with how the press behaves with a Republican. Further, think about all the leaks that appear from the Civil Service, et al., during those administrations.
It seems to me that one argument for Trump is that the Press will hate him.
Green Bear