Sean Spicer Finally! There is finally a reasonable explanation for why Michael Flynn was able to be a LITERAL FUCKING FOR REAL OMG FOREIGN AGENT for a big long time, and still was deemed A-OK for Trump to name him national security adviser. It was Barack Obama's fault, THANKS OBAMA! Spicer explained this in his Thursday press conference, and it all makes sense now. You see, Team Trump didn't need to vet Flynn, because he got his latest security clearance when Obama was still president, so they just assumed everything was fine, and if it wasn't, that means Obama dropped the ball, probably because he was distracted doing "wire tapps" to Trump's down theres.
"Sean Spicer Wishes Obama Hadn’t Forced Michael Flynn To Be A Russian Spy Foreign Agent!"Oh brother! One would have to be a contortionist pretzel with their head up their as lacking oxygen to the brain to buy that.Oh wait...they're called Trump followers.
He didn't even get into U.Penn--he went to Fordham for two years, then transferred to U. Penn and I'm not even sure he graduated.
Yes, I have the same thoughts about his undiagnosed learning disabilities--apparently he started acting out in 3rd grade, which is about where the shit hits the fan if you can't read or process properly. Even with the ignorance about learning issues then, there were still programs and teachers and therapists, and enlightened parents sought some kind of help for their kids. There was certainly awareness of dyslexia, for example.
But his wicked, cruel, awful parents instead packed a troubled, learning-disabled nine-year-old child off to a punitive military school. This certainly would explain all the emotional and mental problems he has and I'd almost feel sorry for him, except he's such, such, SUCH a dick and causes so much pain to so many people.
Except he's really not very good at it. Neither of them are really, and you'd think Trump would be considering he's been bullshitting so much for so long, but Spicer is just horrible at it. The most inept, clumsy, oafish, blundering, floundering, ham-handed bullshitter I've ever witnessed. He actually implicated Flynn by admitting "that the person who has been issued it [security clearance] has a legal obligation to update the issuing agency any variances in what they supplied." And Flynn didn't fulfill that obligation. Spicer does have the same sort of audacity as Trump, although that's because he's speaking for him, essentially a badly trained parrot, but he doesn't have the confidence and conviction in his bullshit that Trump does. No, I think Trump is still the reigning King of Bullshit.
Yeah, being a member of the press pool is EXACTLY the same as being privy to THE most sensitive intelligence information about the US and foreign governments, and have the capacity to affect policy, military actions and intelligence gathering and operations. And why would you need to ensure that Flynn's thoroughly and currently vetted when he already had the limited security clearance allowed some retired generals not serving in government from the previous administration he was fired from that Trump had complete and total faith in? That's just silly! The fact that Obama fired him was more than sufficient vetting for Trump. If Obama had lost confidence in him, he must be a winner, the most trustworthy, most tremendous general and security adviser in history.
I think of the folks that voted for Mr. Trump because he was a "good businessman". Never mind the bankruptcies. I should imagine that his father set up a slew of lawyers so "The Donald" couldn't blow every dime of the Trump real estate empire.
Is Mr. Extreme Vetting going to blame Obama for him not vetting his business partner who US officials say have ties to Iranian Republican Guard money laundering too? Under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, any American doing business with anyone outside the US, must by law do due diligence to vet them, particularly in countries that are notoriously corrupt - like Azerbaijan. This is what Trump said under oath (in a deposition involving another shady business deal with Russians) about his due diligence on this prospective and eventual partner, the son of a foreign minister in Azerbaijan: “We heard good things about him from a couple of different people. That’s true with the president of the United States. You get references and sometimes it’s good and sometimes it’s not so good.” According to Trump, hearing "good things from a couple different people" (aka "people are saying") is not only adequate vetting for the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (it's not), but for a president hiring say, a national security adviser. This statement tends to belie the narrative Trump and Spicee are trying to peddle. Trump thinks vetting is a couple guys saying another guy is a good guy. As it is so often with Trump, he rails on about things that he himself does not do, even on the most basic level, let alone that which he demands from others and for the country. How can anyone listen to someone who has shown a total disregard for things he says are fundamental? The very least you should be able to expect is for a president to not do the exact opposite of almost everything they claim to believe in. http://www.pbs.org/newshour...
We absolutely need mandatory extreme vetting for our presidential candidates since it's apparent at least 27% of voters can't be depended on to use critical thinking and judicious decision making skills, and don't understand their duty as voters. A single president can potentially create a de facto autocracy, be a puppet for a hostile foreign power or blow up the world. Presidents are a far bigger risk than immigrants. It should include at least a decade of personal and corporate tax returns (to discover conflicts of interest, debts and the potential for corruption), an independent physical and psych exam, and a high school civics exam so that we can ensure they actually know how government works on the most basic levels. I also think a thorough background and security check by the FBI, the same sort done on anyone else who has never worked in government and is coming to work in the White House, is an excellent idea. Why shouldn't a would-be president have the same vetting as anyone else who'll be handling highly sensitive classified information? White House staff don't get a nuclear football, but we check them out, seems like common sense to do the same with the person who does get one.
I agree, but I was referring to the need for vetting future presidential candidates, and making the point that a tyrannical president is capable of doing far more damage to our democratic republic and the entire world than the few immigrants/refugees who might be terrorists, that slip through the very stringent vetting process, ever could. To either repair or preserve whatever's left of our democracy when Trump's through, we need more thorough vetting of future presidential candidates, or it could either remain an in whatever state Trump leaves it in, or get worse if another populist dictator wannabe comes along and decided to further erode whatever's left of democracy, emboldened by Trump's actions.
And why would they trust any vetting by Obama's administration anyway? It's not like Trump had complete, unwavering faith in him or his administration in general, or their vetting skills specifically, which is precisely why Trump wants to have more stringent vetting for immigrants. So they trusted the Obama administration's vetting of Flynn for the limited security clearance given to retired generals (they don't get the full clearance at the highest levels of say, a national security adviser), but not for immigrants and refugees? Yeah, that's totally logical.
I agree with the point you're making, but I have to ask: who's going to the vetting? Look at the "vetting" HRC got from Gowdy. The bias, from either side, would be overwhelming. And there is no such thing as "independent". Deep down everyone has firmly held political ideologies and loyalties.
a very reasoned business practice don't you think (I don't need to add a sarcasm notation do I?)
"Sean Spicer Wishes Obama Hadn’t Forced Michael Flynn To Be A Russian Spy Foreign Agent!"Oh brother! One would have to be a contortionist pretzel with their head up their as lacking oxygen to the brain to buy that.Oh wait...they're called Trump followers.
Ask the ground-breaking comedian of his generation, Jesse Watters. He seems to be in the know about Ivanka's microphone-fellating capabilities.
Oh, wait, he's "on vacation."
Rats! Just when he could have used Lori's income boost.
He didn't even get into U.Penn--he went to Fordham for two years, then transferred to U. Penn and I'm not even sure he graduated.
Yes, I have the same thoughts about his undiagnosed learning disabilities--apparently he started acting out in 3rd grade, which is about where the shit hits the fan if you can't read or process properly. Even with the ignorance about learning issues then, there were still programs and teachers and therapists, and enlightened parents sought some kind of help for their kids. There was certainly awareness of dyslexia, for example.
But his wicked, cruel, awful parents instead packed a troubled, learning-disabled nine-year-old child off to a punitive military school. This certainly would explain all the emotional and mental problems he has and I'd almost feel sorry for him, except he's such, such, SUCH a dick and causes so much pain to so many people.
Thug-o-licious?
that is the clearest assessment of the trump era i have read to date.
Except he's really not very good at it. Neither of them are really, and you'd think Trump would be considering he's been bullshitting so much for so long, but Spicer is just horrible at it. The most inept, clumsy, oafish, blundering, floundering, ham-handed bullshitter I've ever witnessed. He actually implicated Flynn by admitting "that the person who has been issued it [security clearance] has a legal obligation to update the issuing agency any variances in what they supplied." And Flynn didn't fulfill that obligation. Spicer does have the same sort of audacity as Trump, although that's because he's speaking for him, essentially a badly trained parrot, but he doesn't have the confidence and conviction in his bullshit that Trump does. No, I think Trump is still the reigning King of Bullshit.
Yeah, being a member of the press pool is EXACTLY the same as being privy to THE most sensitive intelligence information about the US and foreign governments, and have the capacity to affect policy, military actions and intelligence gathering and operations. And why would you need to ensure that Flynn's thoroughly and currently vetted when he already had the limited security clearance allowed some retired generals not serving in government from the previous administration he was fired from that Trump had complete and total faith in? That's just silly! The fact that Obama fired him was more than sufficient vetting for Trump. If Obama had lost confidence in him, he must be a winner, the most trustworthy, most tremendous general and security adviser in history.
Beautifully said!!!!
I think of the folks that voted for Mr. Trump because he was a "good businessman". Never mind the bankruptcies. I should imagine that his father set up a slew of lawyers so "The Donald" couldn't blow every dime of the Trump real estate empire.
Is Mr. Extreme Vetting going to blame Obama for him not vetting his business partner who US officials say have ties to Iranian Republican Guard money laundering too? Under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, any American doing business with anyone outside the US, must by law do due diligence to vet them, particularly in countries that are notoriously corrupt - like Azerbaijan. This is what Trump said under oath (in a deposition involving another shady business deal with Russians) about his due diligence on this prospective and eventual partner, the son of a foreign minister in Azerbaijan: “We heard good things about him from a couple of different people. That’s true with the president of the United States. You get references and sometimes it’s good and sometimes it’s not so good.” According to Trump, hearing "good things from a couple different people" (aka "people are saying") is not only adequate vetting for the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (it's not), but for a president hiring say, a national security adviser. This statement tends to belie the narrative Trump and Spicee are trying to peddle. Trump thinks vetting is a couple guys saying another guy is a good guy. As it is so often with Trump, he rails on about things that he himself does not do, even on the most basic level, let alone that which he demands from others and for the country. How can anyone listen to someone who has shown a total disregard for things he says are fundamental? The very least you should be able to expect is for a president to not do the exact opposite of almost everything they claim to believe in. http://www.pbs.org/newshour...
We absolutely need mandatory extreme vetting for our presidential candidates since it's apparent at least 27% of voters can't be depended on to use critical thinking and judicious decision making skills, and don't understand their duty as voters. A single president can potentially create a de facto autocracy, be a puppet for a hostile foreign power or blow up the world. Presidents are a far bigger risk than immigrants. It should include at least a decade of personal and corporate tax returns (to discover conflicts of interest, debts and the potential for corruption), an independent physical and psych exam, and a high school civics exam so that we can ensure they actually know how government works on the most basic levels. I also think a thorough background and security check by the FBI, the same sort done on anyone else who has never worked in government and is coming to work in the White House, is an excellent idea. Why shouldn't a would-be president have the same vetting as anyone else who'll be handling highly sensitive classified information? White House staff don't get a nuclear football, but we check them out, seems like common sense to do the same with the person who does get one.
"A single president can potentially create a de facto autocracy,..."
Can potentially? It's happening at the present moment.
I hear Lori's selling Amway, now. Or was it Mary Kay?
I agree, but I was referring to the need for vetting future presidential candidates, and making the point that a tyrannical president is capable of doing far more damage to our democratic republic and the entire world than the few immigrants/refugees who might be terrorists, that slip through the very stringent vetting process, ever could. To either repair or preserve whatever's left of our democracy when Trump's through, we need more thorough vetting of future presidential candidates, or it could either remain an in whatever state Trump leaves it in, or get worse if another populist dictator wannabe comes along and decided to further erode whatever's left of democracy, emboldened by Trump's actions.
And why would they trust any vetting by Obama's administration anyway? It's not like Trump had complete, unwavering faith in him or his administration in general, or their vetting skills specifically, which is precisely why Trump wants to have more stringent vetting for immigrants. So they trusted the Obama administration's vetting of Flynn for the limited security clearance given to retired generals (they don't get the full clearance at the highest levels of say, a national security adviser), but not for immigrants and refugees? Yeah, that's totally logical.
I agree with the point you're making, but I have to ask: who's going to the vetting? Look at the "vetting" HRC got from Gowdy. The bias, from either side, would be overwhelming. And there is no such thing as "independent". Deep down everyone has firmly held political ideologies and loyalties.