It's hard not to see the Bannon move in the broader context of Trump's first 75 days in office, which have been, to put it mildly, chaotic....
While Trump -- like all politicians -- is loathe to admit a change of direction is needed or that mistakes have been made, it's hard to look at his current position and conclude anything else....
[T]he diminution of [Bannon's] power -- and in such a public way -- is a clear sign that a shakeup in the Trump power structure is under way....
April 5, 2017
"What Steve Bannon's demotion tells us about the Trump White House."
According to Chris Cillizza.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
222 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 222 of 222He assigned Bannon, who has a lot of training in this area, to deweaponize the NSC and redirect it to it's originally intended purpose. Bannon was read on to the necessary programs and CI the NSC dealt with.
After that was accomplished and someone else was put in place who could and wanted to take it from there: McMasters. Bannon's job was done. He was read off. He will now be put on another task.
LOL! And he did it all in 9 weeks! Without firing anybody! And with no national security advisor in place for one of those weeks! Without one national story on the massive "deprogramming" of the NSA that was occurring during that time.
You don't by any chance believe the stories that General McMaster wanted his own team, and that Bannon was so upset by his removal, that he threatened to quit?
Well, obviously this is bad, bad, bad news for President Trump. If he is reassigning a staff member, it must mean that Trump himself is in over his head and is about to resign.
Blogger Big Mike said...
. . .
Obama might have had at least a modestly successful presidency if he'd done likewise, instead of being the worst president since Buchanan.
. . .
Obama had a tendency to pack hard core partisans into sensitive positions. Look at Susan Rice's bio. She is an academic who has always held political appointee positions, first for Clinton, then for Obama. McMasters is a West Point graduate and a career officer. He actually implemented foreign policy by shooting people. McMaster had not had any overt political involvement before Trump piked him as NSA, though I suppose he voted R. But maybe not. Soldiers are funny.
The congressfool who claimed that Trump's people were going to jail over intelligence matters (w/o ever mentioning any names or any crimes) was Joaquin Castro, the brother of Julian Castro, Obama's HUD secretary. Julian Castro was rumored to be on the shortlist for Hillary's VP pick. The Castro brothers' mother was one of the founding figures in La Raza, but the Castro brothers are faux Hispanics. They learned to speak Spanish in high school, like I did.
I once heard Julian Castro interviewed on NPR. The topic was new HUD rules that said that landlords could not discriminate against tenants on the basis of felony convictions. The interview consisted of some NPR newsdrone reading the Q part of a HUD Faq, and Castro giving the A part.
Me? I loathe those who are loath to showcase their undeniable genius by knowing the difference between loathe and loath and letting everyone know if layers and layers of fact checkers muckety muck muck muck it up.
SHADOWFAX, SHOW US THE MEANING OF HASTE (now).
I take comfort Chuck is out there, laughing out loud.
Chuck doesn't quietly chuckle to himself at your stupid folly or follies: no no.
Chuck laughs Loudly Out. LLO.
Warms my heart. Keep it up chumps, Chuck ain't done loudly laughing at you just yet after all.
Gospace are you a multi multi billionaire corporation? If not, you can't question the Google and why the ways of the Google are as such.
Sorry.
I wonder if it was Inga I saw at Menards with two of their 11% discount shopping bags filled to the top with neatly stacked cans of catfood. She was indignantly argueing with the checkout girl that she should be allowed to have two bags-one per customer as she had a lot of cats.
Of course I started laughing and suggested, unasked, that maybe she could make two trips.
" I'm not going waste good money driving back and forth to Menards, asshole."
To which I laughed even harder.
'Whatever lady, but you want want to step it up. The rest of us have work to do."
"Fuck you!"
Now everybody was laughing and you could her accusations of, "cat hoarder".
was that you , Inga?
Foreign policy is an area where presidents are not likely to disagree all that much--even if their campaigns suggest otherwise. Same country, same overall strategic situation, usually not much change in public opinion. The U.S. has entered a period when it wants to use its huge military and intelligence organizations, built in the Cold War, to spread democracy to countries that are not necessarily easy to find on a map. Obama was determined to do something smarter or better than Bush's invasion of Iraq, so he led from behind in Libya, and did whatever he did in Syria. Towards the end he was backing the Saudis in a horrible war in Yemen. Relatively speaking, Iraq is a success (14 years later).
Trump seemed to promise a retreat on at least some fronts in order to put Americans first. Now he may be going along with briefings by military and intelligence experts--yes, the deep state. Those folks can put on an impressive show, and make civilians afraid not to act. I sometimes think the last president who could actually call BS on them was Eisenhower--who knew them all, and their files, extremely well. To say the least, they don't mind if their preferred military escalations are backed up with sentimental stories about babies in incubators. Under Trump there may be some escalation of little wars that are not so little, just as there was under Obama.
Putin and Russia certainly come into some of these calculations. Maybe the hardest question for all NATO countries is: how much will we do for Ukraine? Latvia?
Ach,
Hey, I'm w/ you. I say lock them up.
FYI, based on your personal expertise re clearances and the facts here, who is on you list of BHO administration folks who should be locked up?
Names, please.
@ PB&J
We will lock up boring, repetitive blog commenters later. People who demand others do homework will be processed much earlier.
I suspect that Trump is trusting McMaster, and letting him set the NSC up the way he wants. Which is a sign of a good leader - trust your subordinates to do the job you've given them. Then if they show that they can't do it, get rid of them.
They came for the boring, repetitive blog commenters, and I said nothing, because my posts were always insightful, witty, and original.
Inga is a cat lady. Is anyone else not surprised by that revelation?
Also, when di Inga come out of the "unknown" closet? What did I miss?
Inga in truth doesn't own even one cat. I don't especially like cat hair.
I remember when Bannon was Obviously The Real Power In The White House, controlling Trump and Being a Giant Nazi because shut up.
That lasted, what, two months?
Does "Inga" enjoy talking about itself(?) in third person? Why all the dishonesty? Makes it VERY difficult to take the artificial schtick seriously, if that is even possible.
Chuck said...
LOL! And he did it all in 9 weeks! Without firing anybody! And with no national security advisor in place for one of those weeks! Without one national story on the massive "deprogramming" of the NSA that was occurring during that time.
9 weeks is a long time to people who actually get shit done. Lawyers wouldn't understand.
You don't by any chance believe the stories that General McMaster wanted his own team, and that Bannon was so upset by his removal, that he threatened to quit?
Yes McMaster wanted his own team. This was expected. No, he didn't threaten to quit over this. He never went to the meetings that involved the Trump side of the NSC. His job was to redirect the agency.
I would not be surprised though if Bannon would threaten to quit if the Cohn faction gains too much power.
Dave D, what is your problem? I was being facetious in referring to myself in third person. I also referred to myself in first person, which you ignored. Why is it worth your time to contemplate if I enjoy talking about myself? What dishonesty are you talking about? The joking? What do you expect? For me to divulge things about my offline life to commenters here? If you haven't noticed there are some truly creepy nasty stalkerish types that comment here and you're beginning to sound just like one.
BTW, You're not supposed to take the "schtick" seriously. Often I'm poking fun at commenters who get too personal, nasty and intrusive.
And if you don't believe Inga, she has a daughter who will support Inga's position. And sockpuppets.
See what I mean Dave D? Observe Birkel and one other person who will probably be along shortly. They are the objects of my "schtick". Obsessive and creepy people, don't be one too Dave.
I miss #55UnknownInga.
Sorry "Inga". The unknown bullshit removes all credibility. And fun. That's not the purpose here, IMO and Dr. A. is being gracious in letting that baloney go on. I sense no "fun" in most of your schitcks.....
My opinion, of course.
Post a Comment