Showing posts with label James Clapper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Clapper. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 11, 2017

God forbid I would agree with Donald Trump


Thanks to President Bashar al-Assad
If President Bashar al-Assad gassed his people in Syria, there is no doubt that he deserves to be drawn and quartered. IF. Then President Barack Obama in 2013, was in the same position as was Trump recently when he called the strike on the Syrian government. Obama backed off because of intelligence from James Clapper, of his national security team, that indicated the Assad government did not cause the attacks. Trump acted once again on visuals that portrayed the gassing, but did not wait for the follow-up intelligence to corroborate the strikes. The kind of thing that could start war.

The Huffington Post criticizes the general media, particularly CNN for relying on handouts from government sources for confirmations and not digging deeper to uncover sidebars that could change the direction of the investigation. Like the fact that where the gas was released, Khan Sheikhoun, was "...ground zero for the Islamic jihadists who have been at the center of the anti-Assad movement in Syria since 2011." The catch here is...
"Up until February 2017, Khan Sheikhoun was occupied by a pro-ISIS group known as Liwa al-Aqsa that was engaged in an oftentimes-violent struggle with its competitor organization, Al Nusra Front (which later morphed into Tahrir al-Sham, but under any name functioning as Al Qaeda’s arm in Syria) for resources and political influence among the local population."
The question arises, was Donald Trump, in his quick reaction, duped by Al Qaeda? It seems to be Donald John's MO to make his decisions based on visuals, and not always those that can be verified. And the experts are asking why would Assad "...risk everything by using chemical weapons against a target of zero military value, at a time when the strategic balance of power had shifted strongly in his favor." But there have been so many instances of gas attacks in the past, that it is hard for one to determine where to place the blame. Particularly including ISIS, Al Qaeda and all their factions.

The U.S. so far has placed the blame clearly on the Syrian government, along with Russia and Iran. During the Syrian War that has been going for about six years, the Syrian government has used chlorine gas regularly and along with chemical attacks some 1,100 Syrians have been killed. There are reports that ISIS has used mustard gas in the country. So, with so many different political coalitions at work, at the same time, in the same place, is there any way to determine who is responsible? Or is this exactly what Bashar al-Assad wants? The perfect cover.

So, what should be the strategy? Iraq had a dictator and George W. Bush captured him and later he was executed for similar atrocities. Russia was also involved in that country, and the U.S. still proceeded. If anyone could pull off another GWB in Syria, it would be Donald Trump. The big question is, would he do it right? To do that would require getting some sound advice, and to do that would probably mean going outside the current administration advisers. That wouldn't happen, but no problem, DT would just order satellite photos and take it from there.

HP's opinion of general media reportage...
"...outlets like CNN embrace at face value anything they are told by official American sources, including a particularly preposterous insinuation that Russia actually colluded in the chemical weapons attack; the aforementioned presence of Russian officers at Al Shayrat air base has been cited as evidence that Russia had to have known about Syria’s chemical warfare capability, and yet did nothing to prevent the attack."
And where does the final blame lie?...
"The real culprits here are the Trump administration, and President Trump himself. The president’s record of placing more weight on what he sees on television than the intelligence briefings he may or may not be getting, and his lack of intellectual curiosity and unfamiliarity with the nuances and complexities of both foreign and national security policy, created the conditions where the imagery of the Khan Sheikhoun victims that had been disseminated by pro-Al Nusra (i.e., Al Qaeda) outlets could influence critical life-or-death decisions."
Just how far are we from WWIII? 

Thursday, December 15, 2016

40 Electoral College members now unsure of Donald Trump


Donald Trump talking to Electors/How true
40  electors from the Electoral College are demanding an intel briefing on Russia and its roll in the 2016 election from National Intelligence Director James Clapper, 10 this last Monday, Dec. 12, twenty more on Tuesday. This is a bi-partisan effort and according to Politico, the "...first show of public support for efforts questioning the legitimacy of Donald Trump's victory..." They are asking for the information before Dec. 19, when their decisions are due. John Podesta, Clinton's former campaign chairman, talks about the security factors involved in the ruse.

Podesta comments on the Clinton campaign's earlier requests for an investigation on the issue, which apparently fell on deaf ears and adds, the fact that the CIA confirms this Russian interference was for the purpose of getting Donald Trump elected President. Now, of course, this raises the question of just what kind of ties does the President-elect have with Russia. I plan to do a full post on this in the future but for the sake of this one, Jeff Nesbit of Time says he has many, many, many, many ties to Russia. Nesbit reports this all happened in late May.

Here's what the original 10 electors wrote...
“The Electors require to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election, the scope of those investigations, how far those investigations may have reached, and who was involved in those investigations. We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States.”
The first 10 electors include nine democrats and one Republican. The additional electors joining the original 10 were all Democrats. Today is Thursday and with one more business day available what's the likelihood of getting the intel? Law Newz says...
"Legal experts tell LawNewz.com it will be tough for the electors to get what they are seeking. However, there is a way that it could possibly happen, but it involves an often arduous process of receiving an interim security clearance. A process that President Obama could even help expedite, if he wanted to."
The next question is can you delay the electors' decisions? The Huff Post has a solution you can read here.

Donald Trump Says He Will Be Indicted On Tuesday

  THAT'S TODAY... Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has brought the case to this point, now looking at a possible indictment. Trum...