|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On January 27 2017 02:01 farvacola wrote:
mustaju isn't ignoring anything, he's illustrating a point that you've clearly missed.
He's not illistrating anything he's trying to tie over an argument from post to post ignoring almost wholesale what legals posting.
The point is that legal is making is that Trump is exactly what Chelsea is asking for except for the left. Lacking any gratitude or loalty to the guy who pulled you out of military prison.
Mustaju is trying to say this isn't true beacuse of an unclear idea about what clesea is clearly stating in her article.
|
while infowars is trash, I don't mind giving them press access. I'm inclined to give out WH press access very freely. I might barely take questions from them of course.
|
On January 27 2017 02:18 zlefin wrote:
while infowars is trash, I don't mind giving them press access. I'm inclined to give out WH press access very freely. I might barely take questions from them of course.
If I was president I would have a lot of those trash news sites allowed, allow them 1-3 questions each day with 100% freedom for my press guy to say "I'm sorry but that's an absurd assumption, I'll make sure we tweet that to public so they know what kind of filth you're trying to fish for, next question."
|
On January 27 2017 02:13 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2017 01:46 Doodsmack wrote:Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s job running the State Department just got considerably more difficult. The entire senior level of management officials resigned Wednesday, part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era.
...
That amounts to a near-complete housecleaning of all the senior officials that deal with managing the State Department, its overseas posts and its people.
“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure of institutional memory that anyone can remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David Wade, who served as State Department chief of staff under Secretary of State John Kerry. “Department expertise in security, management, administrative and consular positions in particular are very difficult to replicate and particularly difficult to find in the private sector.”
...
Ambassador Richard Boucher, who served as State Department spokesman for Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, said that while there’s always a lot of turnover around the time a new administration takes office, traditionally senior officials work with the new team to see who should stay on in their roles and what other jobs might be available. But that’s not what happened this time. Washington Post Sounds like some much-needed housekeeping, without the ugliness that resembles a purge.
It becomes a problem when your senior leadership is filled with rookies who have no idea what their doing and making blunders as they are forced to learn on the job.
You want some people with experience around to stop stupid mistakes from the past being repeated.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 27 2017 02:34 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2017 02:13 LegalLord wrote:On January 27 2017 01:46 Doodsmack wrote:Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s job running the State Department just got considerably more difficult. The entire senior level of management officials resigned Wednesday, part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era.
...
That amounts to a near-complete housecleaning of all the senior officials that deal with managing the State Department, its overseas posts and its people.
“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure of institutional memory that anyone can remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David Wade, who served as State Department chief of staff under Secretary of State John Kerry. “Department expertise in security, management, administrative and consular positions in particular are very difficult to replicate and particularly difficult to find in the private sector.”
...
Ambassador Richard Boucher, who served as State Department spokesman for Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, said that while there’s always a lot of turnover around the time a new administration takes office, traditionally senior officials work with the new team to see who should stay on in their roles and what other jobs might be available. But that’s not what happened this time. Washington Post Sounds like some much-needed housekeeping, without the ugliness that resembles a purge. It becomes a problem when your senior leadership is filled with rookies who have no idea what their doing and making blunders as they are forced to learn on the job. You want some people with experience around to stop stupid mistakes from the past being repeated.
Yes, but at the same time you want people who are going to jump ship the moment they are strongly opposed to a certain policy to fuck off, because regardless of all their experience they would be a net negative if they aren't cooperative.
|
The problem mostly lies In the lost relationships contacts and institutional experience these people are taking with them. If they weren't on board with the new regime the patriotic thing would be helping the nation along and hoping for the best not trying to set up the nation for failure.
|
On January 27 2017 02:40 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2017 02:34 Gorsameth wrote:On January 27 2017 02:13 LegalLord wrote:On January 27 2017 01:46 Doodsmack wrote:Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s job running the State Department just got considerably more difficult. The entire senior level of management officials resigned Wednesday, part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era.
...
That amounts to a near-complete housecleaning of all the senior officials that deal with managing the State Department, its overseas posts and its people.
“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure of institutional memory that anyone can remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David Wade, who served as State Department chief of staff under Secretary of State John Kerry. “Department expertise in security, management, administrative and consular positions in particular are very difficult to replicate and particularly difficult to find in the private sector.”
...
Ambassador Richard Boucher, who served as State Department spokesman for Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, said that while there’s always a lot of turnover around the time a new administration takes office, traditionally senior officials work with the new team to see who should stay on in their roles and what other jobs might be available. But that’s not what happened this time. Washington Post Sounds like some much-needed housekeeping, without the ugliness that resembles a purge. It becomes a problem when your senior leadership is filled with rookies who have no idea what their doing and making blunders as they are forced to learn on the job. You want some people with experience around to stop stupid mistakes from the past being repeated. Yes, but at the same time you want people who are going to jump ship the moment they are strongly opposed to a certain policy to fuck off, because regardless of all their experience they would be a net negative if they aren't cooperative.
Trumps tendencies to lie combined with a gag order sounds like more reason then "a strong opposed opinion".
Replacements when a new President comes in are normal, being senior management they knew that (should have anyway).
I see no reason to believe they would not have been willing to cooperate with a normal transition if Trump didn't put them in front of an ethical wall, forcing them to say "I cannot condone this, I must resign".
You think its a coincidence that agencies are coming out with rogue Twitter accounts while this is happening?
Is that normal to you? Because I don't remember them from when Bush gave way to Obama.
|
Keep in mind that many of these senior staff officials were close friends and co-workers with the ambassadors that Trump treated like shit.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 27 2017 02:46 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2017 02:40 LegalLord wrote:On January 27 2017 02:34 Gorsameth wrote:On January 27 2017 02:13 LegalLord wrote:On January 27 2017 01:46 Doodsmack wrote:Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s job running the State Department just got considerably more difficult. The entire senior level of management officials resigned Wednesday, part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era.
...
That amounts to a near-complete housecleaning of all the senior officials that deal with managing the State Department, its overseas posts and its people.
“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure of institutional memory that anyone can remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David Wade, who served as State Department chief of staff under Secretary of State John Kerry. “Department expertise in security, management, administrative and consular positions in particular are very difficult to replicate and particularly difficult to find in the private sector.”
...
Ambassador Richard Boucher, who served as State Department spokesman for Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, said that while there’s always a lot of turnover around the time a new administration takes office, traditionally senior officials work with the new team to see who should stay on in their roles and what other jobs might be available. But that’s not what happened this time. Washington Post Sounds like some much-needed housekeeping, without the ugliness that resembles a purge. It becomes a problem when your senior leadership is filled with rookies who have no idea what their doing and making blunders as they are forced to learn on the job. You want some people with experience around to stop stupid mistakes from the past being repeated. Yes, but at the same time you want people who are going to jump ship the moment they are strongly opposed to a certain policy to fuck off, because regardless of all their experience they would be a net negative if they aren't cooperative. Trumps tendencies to lie combined with a gag order sounds like more reason then "a strong opposed opinion".
I suppose it simply depends on what you think the reason for the resignation is. I'm quite sure the reason is policy disagreements on NATO, Middle East, TPP, and the like. The article gives no such reasons so we can only speculate.
|
On January 27 2017 01:54 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2017 01:43 xDaunt wrote:On January 27 2017 01:28 Gorsameth wrote:On January 27 2017 01:12 Doodsmack wrote:
Alex Jones claiming he's been offered WH press credentials lol. Let's be clear - Trump believes a decent portion of the stuff he says. Is anyone actually surprised that the 'media' that accepts Trumps blatant lies is given WH press access? Whether Trump agrees with Infowars is besides the point. Trump's goal is to relentlessly antagonize the legacy press and dilute their influence. Giving Infowars press credentials is one means to this end. Others are doing things like breaking 170 years of the tradition of giving the AP the first question at press briefings. I will happily accept your point when Trump gives the far left alternative press access. So long as his "diluting" is limited to those who accept his lies I'm calling it what it is.
Why do you think that the two goals are mutually exclusive? Given Trump's anti-vaxxer comments (among other things), I have little doubt that he agrees quite a bit with Infowars. So I'm sure that he's more than happy to dilute the power of the legacy press by packing the press pool with copacetic outlets. Likewise, I would not expect him to promote far left media outlets because he knows that they will do him no favors. My only point is that the important consequence of Trump's actions is the diminution of the legacy press outlets that are basically all hostile to Trump.
|
Earlier today, Donald Trump threatened to cancel his upcoming meeting with Enrique Peña Nieto if the Mexican president continued to insist he would not be paying for the wall Trump plans to build on the southern border.
Nieto beat him to it.
It says, roughly, that this morning, he let the White House know that the meeting planned for next Tuesday is canceled.
We already knew how the former president felt about the wall and whether or not Mexico will be paying for it, but this is definitely a step above that. For a current president to cancel a meeting when tensions regarding the wall are so high sends a pretty strong message about the severity of the issue.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/breaking-mexican-president-pulls-out-of-meeting-with-trump/
|
On January 27 2017 02:54 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +Earlier today, Donald Trump threatened to cancel his upcoming meeting with Enrique Peña Nieto if the Mexican president continued to insist he would not be paying for the wall Trump plans to build on the southern border. Nieto beat him to it. https://twitter.com/EPN/status/824660333964824576It says, roughly, that this morning, he let the White House know that the meeting planned for next Tuesday is canceled. We already knew how the former president felt about the wall and whether or not Mexico will be paying for it, but this is definitely a step above that. For a current president to cancel a meeting when tensions regarding the wall are so high sends a pretty strong message about the severity of the issue. http://www.mediaite.com/online/breaking-mexican-president-pulls-out-of-meeting-with-trump/
Bad move by Nieto. I don't think that he has properly gauged how much Mexico has to lose from all of this. Nor has he properly measured Trump's resolve and the support that Trump is going to have.
|
Now the White House is saying they fired all of the senior State Department management staff, apparently. Smells like an alternative fact to me, especially since that's like the dumbest move you can make from a business standpoint.
|
On January 27 2017 02:43 Sermokala wrote:
The problem mostly lies In the lost relationships contacts and institutional experience these people are taking with them. If they weren't on board with the new regime the patriotic thing would be helping the nation along and hoping for the best not trying to set up the nation for failure.
true, it would hav ebeen better if they'd done that. but everyone's patience has limits, and sometimes people do less than perfect things.
And it's hard to fault them when Trump isn't doing the patriotic thing either.
|
On January 27 2017 03:01 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2017 02:54 Nevuk wrote:Earlier today, Donald Trump threatened to cancel his upcoming meeting with Enrique Peña Nieto if the Mexican president continued to insist he would not be paying for the wall Trump plans to build on the southern border. Nieto beat him to it. https://twitter.com/EPN/status/824660333964824576It says, roughly, that this morning, he let the White House know that the meeting planned for next Tuesday is canceled. We already knew how the former president felt about the wall and whether or not Mexico will be paying for it, but this is definitely a step above that. For a current president to cancel a meeting when tensions regarding the wall are so high sends a pretty strong message about the severity of the issue. Bad move by Nieto. I don't think that he has properly gauged how much Mexico has to lose from all of this. Nor has he properly measured Trump's resolve and the support that Trump is going to have.
I still disagree.
while mexico will lose money; nieto will gain electoral support for standing up to trump.
and I think he accurately recognizes that Trump's support level isn't that high.
though i'd say mostly the first reason.
|
On January 27 2017 03:01 TheTenthDoc wrote:
Now the White House is saying they fired all of the senior State Department management staff, apparently. Smells like an alternative fact to me, especially since that's like the dumbest move you can make from a business standpoint.
For the next 4 years I think its acceptable to assume any statement made by the White House is false unless confirmed elsewhere. Its hard not to considering Trump's history and the amount of lies that have already been said since day 1.
|
On January 27 2017 03:01 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2017 02:54 Nevuk wrote:Earlier today, Donald Trump threatened to cancel his upcoming meeting with Enrique Peña Nieto if the Mexican president continued to insist he would not be paying for the wall Trump plans to build on the southern border. Nieto beat him to it. https://twitter.com/EPN/status/824660333964824576It says, roughly, that this morning, he let the White House know that the meeting planned for next Tuesday is canceled. We already knew how the former president felt about the wall and whether or not Mexico will be paying for it, but this is definitely a step above that. For a current president to cancel a meeting when tensions regarding the wall are so high sends a pretty strong message about the severity of the issue. Bad move by Nieto. I don't think that he has properly gauged how much Mexico has to lose from all of this. Nor has he properly measured Trump's resolve and the support that Trump is going to have.
I'm very curious to see how it pans out. It is one of those amazingly complex issues that I don't think anyone fully understands, and the status quo could likely be improved.
|
If Canada joins Mexico, I think they'll have a good shot. But I really don't see Trudeau fighting Trump. Especially since Trudeau would LOVE for a Canada-->US pipeline to exist
|
Hopefully someone tells the Donald that devaluing a nation's currency is not a good way to discourage immigration from said nation.
|
Yes this could be bad for Mexico but what is the alternative? Paying for the wall sure is not an option. Even entertaining the idea isn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
