Here is a list of Politics Blogs ordered by Newest, posted by members. A Blog is a journal you may enter about your life, thoughts, interesting experiences, or lessons you've learned. Post an opinion, impart words of wisdom, or talk about something interesting in your day. Update your blog on a regular basis, or just whenever you have something to say. Creating a blog is a good way to share something of yourself with others. Reading blogs is a good way to learn more about others. Click here to post a blog.
Leadership
If We Had a Real Leader --Imagining Covid under a normal president.
By David Brooks Opinion Columnist
The conversation left me wondering what America’s experience of the pandemic would be like if we had a real leader in the White House.
If we had a real leader, he would have realized that tragedies like 100,000 Covid-19 deaths touch something deeper than politics: They touch our shared vulnerability and our profound and natural sympathy for one another.
In such moments, a real leader steps outside of his political role and reveals himself uncloaked and humbled, as someone who can draw on his own pains and simply be present with others as one sufferer among a common sea of sufferers.
If we had a real leader, she would speak of the dead not as a faceless mass but as individual persons, each seen in unique dignity. Such a leader would draw on the common sources of our civilization, the stores of wisdom that bring collective strength in hard times.
Lincoln went back to the old biblical cadences to comfort a nation. After the church shooting in Charleston, Barack Obama went to “Amazing Grace,” the old abolitionist anthem that has wafted down through the long history of African-American suffering and redemption.
In his impromptu remarks right after the assassination of Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy recalled the slaying of his own brother and quoted Aeschylus: “In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God.”
If we had a real leader, he would be bracingly honest about how bad things are, like Churchill after the fall of Europe. He would have stored in his upbringing the understanding that hard times are the making of character, a revelation of character and a test of character. He would offer up the reality that to be an American is both a gift and a task. Every generation faces its own apocalypse, and, of course, we will live up to our moment just as our ancestors did theirs.
If we had a real leader, she would remind us of our common covenants and our common purposes. America is a diverse country joined more by a common future than by common pasts. In times of hardships real leaders re-articulate the purpose of America, why we endure these hardships and what good we will make out of them.
After the Challenger explosion, Reagan reminded us that we are a nation of explorers and that the explorations at the frontiers of science would go on, thanks in part to those who “slipped the surly bonds of earth to touch the face of God.”
At Gettysburg, Lincoln crisply described why the fallen had sacrificed their lives — to show that a nation “dedicated to the proposition that all men are equal” can long endure and also to bring about “a new birth of freedom” for all the world.
Of course, right now we don’t have a real leader. We have Donald Trump, a man who can’t fathom empathy or express empathy, who can’t laugh or cry, love or be loved — a damaged narcissist who is unable to see the true existence of other human beings except insofar as they are good or bad for himself.
But it’s too easy to offload all blame on Trump. Trump’s problem is not only that he’s emotionally damaged; it is that he is unlettered. He has no literary, spiritual or historical resources to draw upon in a crisis.
All the leaders I have quoted above were educated under a curriculum that put character formation at the absolute center of education. They were trained by people who assumed that life would throw up hard and unexpected tests, and it was the job of a school, as one headmaster put it, to produce young people who would be “acceptable at a dance, invaluable in a shipwreck.”
continued on next page
By David Brooks Opinion Columnist
The conversation left me wondering what America’s experience of the pandemic would be like if we had a real leader in the White House.
If we had a real leader, he would have realized that tragedies like 100,000 Covid-19 deaths touch something deeper than politics: They touch our shared vulnerability and our profound and natural sympathy for one another.
In such moments, a real leader steps outside of his political role and reveals himself uncloaked and humbled, as someone who can draw on his own pains and simply be present with others as one sufferer among a common sea of sufferers.
If we had a real leader, she would speak of the dead not as a faceless mass but as individual persons, each seen in unique dignity. Such a leader would draw on the common sources of our civilization, the stores of wisdom that bring collective strength in hard times.
Lincoln went back to the old biblical cadences to comfort a nation. After the church shooting in Charleston, Barack Obama went to “Amazing Grace,” the old abolitionist anthem that has wafted down through the long history of African-American suffering and redemption.
In his impromptu remarks right after the assassination of Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy recalled the slaying of his own brother and quoted Aeschylus: “In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God.”
If we had a real leader, he would be bracingly honest about how bad things are, like Churchill after the fall of Europe. He would have stored in his upbringing the understanding that hard times are the making of character, a revelation of character and a test of character. He would offer up the reality that to be an American is both a gift and a task. Every generation faces its own apocalypse, and, of course, we will live up to our moment just as our ancestors did theirs.
If we had a real leader, she would remind us of our common covenants and our common purposes. America is a diverse country joined more by a common future than by common pasts. In times of hardships real leaders re-articulate the purpose of America, why we endure these hardships and what good we will make out of them.
After the Challenger explosion, Reagan reminded us that we are a nation of explorers and that the explorations at the frontiers of science would go on, thanks in part to those who “slipped the surly bonds of earth to touch the face of God.”
At Gettysburg, Lincoln crisply described why the fallen had sacrificed their lives — to show that a nation “dedicated to the proposition that all men are equal” can long endure and also to bring about “a new birth of freedom” for all the world.
Of course, right now we don’t have a real leader. We have Donald Trump, a man who can’t fathom empathy or express empathy, who can’t laugh or cry, love or be loved — a damaged narcissist who is unable to see the true existence of other human beings except insofar as they are good or bad for himself.
But it’s too easy to offload all blame on Trump. Trump’s problem is not only that he’s emotionally damaged; it is that he is unlettered. He has no literary, spiritual or historical resources to draw upon in a crisis.
All the leaders I have quoted above were educated under a curriculum that put character formation at the absolute center of education. They were trained by people who assumed that life would throw up hard and unexpected tests, and it was the job of a school, as one headmaster put it, to produce young people who would be “acceptable at a dance, invaluable in a shipwreck.”
continued on next page
No hope for an honest, good POTUS
I vote for the lesser of two evils. Haven't voted for anyone I really liked in decades. We the people are the sheep led to slaughter. The powers that be pick the people they feel comfortable with, make the deals with them and offer them up to be elected. They hate Trump because he bought his own way and doesn't kiss their hiney. Now they offer Obama 2.0..Creepy Joe.
Do we ever get a president who doesn't turn out in a decade as a crook, molester, lier, embezzler or just a plain imbecile?
I said get the incumbents out of office. And got what instead? Children with no concept of the real world, living in fantasy land.
Read books...the lies, the mistakes, the games. Read the ones that predicted things that actually came to pass. And watch the sheeples embrace them.
I don't think anything of any president since Ike. And then found out he had an affair with his secretary for years.
Are there any politicians out there that don't have feet of clay? Any intelligent ones except on how to cheat?
Any that read the constitution? And believe in it. Or their so called good books?
But, watch the news and guess the people get what they deserve. The rest of us just hang on til death, voting for the lesser evil.
Do we ever get a president who doesn't turn out in a decade as a crook, molester, lier, embezzler or just a plain imbecile?
I said get the incumbents out of office. And got what instead? Children with no concept of the real world, living in fantasy land.
Read books...the lies, the mistakes, the games. Read the ones that predicted things that actually came to pass. And watch the sheeples embrace them.
I don't think anything of any president since Ike. And then found out he had an affair with his secretary for years.
Are there any politicians out there that don't have feet of clay? Any intelligent ones except on how to cheat?
Any that read the constitution? And believe in it. Or their so called good books?
But, watch the news and guess the people get what they deserve. The rest of us just hang on til death, voting for the lesser evil.
Older voters turning their backs on Trump
In response to:
There are different “gaps” in American politics, but one that has consistently shown up in recent presidential elections is the age gap. That is, younger voters tend to vote more Democratic and older voters tend to vote more Republican.
In 2016, for instance, President Trump performed best among voters 65 years and older. He also won among those between the ages of 45 and 64. So looking ahead to November, you might expect Trump to once again do well with older voters. However, recent public polls — and the president’s own private polling — suggest that Trump may be doing worse among older voters against former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee.
In national head-to-head polls conducted since April 1, Trump is barely breaking even with most older Americans — and in some age groups, he’s even trailing Biden by as much as 1.4 points (see 45- to 64-year-olds). (Pollsters don’t all use the same age brackets, so there is some overlap in the different age categories.)
The most startling shift, though, is among voters age 65 and older. Four years ago, Trump bested Hillary Clinton by 13 points, 55 percent to 42 percent, according to the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, a survey of more than 60,000 voters organized by Harvard University and administered by YouGov. But now Biden narrowly leads Trump 48 percent to 47 percent, based on an average of 48 national polls that included that age group.1 If those figures hold until November, they would represent a seismic shift in the voting behavior of America’s oldest voters.
The last Democratic nominee who won voters 65 and older was Al Gore in 2000, according to national exit poll data. But at the time, that was the trend. Older Americans — those who came of age during the Great Depression and New Deal era, a period in which the Democratic Party was dominant — were disproportionately Democratic-leaning in the late 1990s and early 2000s. And political science has found evidence that party loyalties developed at a young age can persist over the course of a person’s life.
But it’s not just among voters 65 and older where Trump is slipping. He’s also fallen almost as far among voters 55 and older. Trump is essentially tied with Biden among that age group, even after winning these voters by 10 points in 2016, 53 percent to 43 percent, according to the CCES. Trump’s numbers have also fallen with 45- to 64-year-olds, as well as 50- to 64-year-olds (an alternate category employed by many pollsters), but the last Democrat to win 45- to 64-year-olds was Barack Obama in 2008 — albeit barely, 50 percent to 49 percent.
We don’t have as much state-level polling to work with, but there’s evidence that Biden is also doing better with older voters in some key swing states. Take two recent surveys from Florida, a state with one of the oldest populations in the country. A Fox News poll from mid-April found Biden with a slim 3-point lead over Trump and running even among voters 45 and older, while a Quinnipiac University survey from the same period found Biden up 4 points overall in Florida and leading Trump 52 percent to 42 percent among voters 65 and older. If this holds, this would represent a big swing from 2016, when Trump won Florida voters 45 and older by 13 points, and those 65 and older by 22 points, according to the CCES.
There are different “gaps” in American politics, but one that has consistently shown up in recent presidential elections is the age gap. That is, younger voters tend to vote more Democratic and older voters tend to vote more Republican.
In 2016, for instance, President Trump performed best among voters 65 years and older. He also won among those between the ages of 45 and 64. So looking ahead to November, you might expect Trump to once again do well with older voters. However, recent public polls — and the president’s own private polling — suggest that Trump may be doing worse among older voters against former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee.
In national head-to-head polls conducted since April 1, Trump is barely breaking even with most older Americans — and in some age groups, he’s even trailing Biden by as much as 1.4 points (see 45- to 64-year-olds). (Pollsters don’t all use the same age brackets, so there is some overlap in the different age categories.)
The most startling shift, though, is among voters age 65 and older. Four years ago, Trump bested Hillary Clinton by 13 points, 55 percent to 42 percent, according to the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, a survey of more than 60,000 voters organized by Harvard University and administered by YouGov. But now Biden narrowly leads Trump 48 percent to 47 percent, based on an average of 48 national polls that included that age group.1 If those figures hold until November, they would represent a seismic shift in the voting behavior of America’s oldest voters.
The last Democratic nominee who won voters 65 and older was Al Gore in 2000, according to national exit poll data. But at the time, that was the trend. Older Americans — those who came of age during the Great Depression and New Deal era, a period in which the Democratic Party was dominant — were disproportionately Democratic-leaning in the late 1990s and early 2000s. And political science has found evidence that party loyalties developed at a young age can persist over the course of a person’s life.
But it’s not just among voters 65 and older where Trump is slipping. He’s also fallen almost as far among voters 55 and older. Trump is essentially tied with Biden among that age group, even after winning these voters by 10 points in 2016, 53 percent to 43 percent, according to the CCES. Trump’s numbers have also fallen with 45- to 64-year-olds, as well as 50- to 64-year-olds (an alternate category employed by many pollsters), but the last Democrat to win 45- to 64-year-olds was Barack Obama in 2008 — albeit barely, 50 percent to 49 percent.
We don’t have as much state-level polling to work with, but there’s evidence that Biden is also doing better with older voters in some key swing states. Take two recent surveys from Florida, a state with one of the oldest populations in the country. A Fox News poll from mid-April found Biden with a slim 3-point lead over Trump and running even among voters 45 and older, while a Quinnipiac University survey from the same period found Biden up 4 points overall in Florida and leading Trump 52 percent to 42 percent among voters 65 and older. If this holds, this would represent a big swing from 2016, when Trump won Florida voters 45 and older by 13 points, and those 65 and older by 22 points, according to the CCES.
(continued in my first comment below)
online today!
Quid Pro Joe leaked phone conversations
Seems to be legit. Phone conversations between VP Biden and former Ukrainian president Poroshenko
Operation Warp Speed...
Operation Warp Speed...
I'm listening to a live stream dated May 15,2020 from USA TODAY and getting whiplash. It's 36 minutes and I'm replaying parts so I can fill in the blanks because something isn't fitting in the timeline.
4:02 minutes into the update: "Scientists from NIH began to developing the first vaccine candidate on January 11th, think of that... within hours, the viruses genetic code being posted online, so January 11, most people never even heard what was going on January 11th and we were out there trying to develop a vaccine, not even knowing what were up against..."
Lots of tidbits:
"We don't have the formula for a vaccine, but we're gearing up!"
"Our military is completely rebuilt."
"Vaccine or no vaccine, we're back."
Trump speaks for about 16 minutes and passes the podium to Dr. Moncef Slaoui who removes his mask and talks 6 inches from the same microphone as Trump. He steps back and General Gustave Perna with no mask steps up to the podium and speaks for 2 minutes. A secretary approaches the podium without a mask gives some accolades to the team and says "We started working on each of these areas in January and Congress has provided nearly ten billion dollars explicitly for this kind of research..."
January was mentioned several times they appeared to make a point this started in January.
I'm listening to a live stream dated May 15,2020 from USA TODAY and getting whiplash. It's 36 minutes and I'm replaying parts so I can fill in the blanks because something isn't fitting in the timeline.
4:02 minutes into the update: "Scientists from NIH began to developing the first vaccine candidate on January 11th, think of that... within hours, the viruses genetic code being posted online, so January 11, most people never even heard what was going on January 11th and we were out there trying to develop a vaccine, not even knowing what were up against..."
Lots of tidbits:
"We don't have the formula for a vaccine, but we're gearing up!"
"Our military is completely rebuilt."
"Vaccine or no vaccine, we're back."
Trump speaks for about 16 minutes and passes the podium to Dr. Moncef Slaoui who removes his mask and talks 6 inches from the same microphone as Trump. He steps back and General Gustave Perna with no mask steps up to the podium and speaks for 2 minutes. A secretary approaches the podium without a mask gives some accolades to the team and says "We started working on each of these areas in January and Congress has provided nearly ten billion dollars explicitly for this kind of research..."
January was mentioned several times they appeared to make a point this started in January.
McConnell finally admits he was wrong. The Obama administration did leave detailed pandemic guide.
Last night (7 hours ago) from CNN;
Hear it from Moscow Mitch's own mouth;
In response to:
McConnell admits he was wrong to say Obama administration failed to leave a pandemic playbook
By Paul LeBlanc, CNN
Updated 9:05 PM ET, Thu May 14, 202
(CNN)Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell conceded Thursday night that he was wrong to claim that the Obama administration had not left behind a plan to deal with a pandemic in the US.
"I was wrong. They did leave behind a plan, so I clearly made a mistake in that regard," McConnell said during an interview with Fox News' Bret Baier.
The concession comes days after he falsely accused the Obama administration of failing to leave the Trump administration "any kind of game plan" for something like the coronavirus pandemic during a Trump campaign online chat with Lara Trump, the President's daughter-in-law.
"They claim pandemics only happen once every hundred years but what if that's no longer true? We want to be early, ready for the next one, because clearly the Obama administration did not leave to this administration any kind of game plan for something like this," McConnell had said Monday.
In reality, former President Barrack Obama's White House National Security Council left the Trump administration a detailed document on how to respond to a pandemic.
The document, whose existence was publicly revealed by Politico in March, is called the Playbook for Early Response to High-Consequence Emerging Infectious Disease Threats and Biological Incidents.
The playbook contains step-by-step advice on questions to ask, decisions to make and which federal agencies are responsible for what. It includes sample documents that officials could use for inter-agency meetings. And it explicitly lists novel coronaviruses as one of the kinds of pathogens that could require a major response.
Additionally, outgoing senior Obama officials also led an in-person pandemic response exercise for senior incoming Trump officials in January 2017 -- as required by a new law on improving presidential transitions that Obama signed in 2016.
Last week, Obama described the Trump administration's coronavirus response as "an absolute chaotic disaster" during a private call with people who worked for him in the White House.
Still, McConnell added Thursday that "as to whether or not the plan was followed and who's the critic and all the rest, I don't have any observation about that because I don't know enough about the details of that to comment on it in any detail."
CNN's Daniel Dale contributed to this report.
McConnell admits he was wrong to say Obama administration failed to leave a pandemic playbook
By Paul LeBlanc, CNN
Updated 9:05 PM ET, Thu May 14, 202
(CNN)Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell conceded Thursday night that he was wrong to claim that the Obama administration had not left behind a plan to deal with a pandemic in the US.
"I was wrong. They did leave behind a plan, so I clearly made a mistake in that regard," McConnell said during an interview with Fox News' Bret Baier.
The concession comes days after he falsely accused the Obama administration of failing to leave the Trump administration "any kind of game plan" for something like the coronavirus pandemic during a Trump campaign online chat with Lara Trump, the President's daughter-in-law.
"They claim pandemics only happen once every hundred years but what if that's no longer true? We want to be early, ready for the next one, because clearly the Obama administration did not leave to this administration any kind of game plan for something like this," McConnell had said Monday.
In reality, former President Barrack Obama's White House National Security Council left the Trump administration a detailed document on how to respond to a pandemic.
The document, whose existence was publicly revealed by Politico in March, is called the Playbook for Early Response to High-Consequence Emerging Infectious Disease Threats and Biological Incidents.
The playbook contains step-by-step advice on questions to ask, decisions to make and which federal agencies are responsible for what. It includes sample documents that officials could use for inter-agency meetings. And it explicitly lists novel coronaviruses as one of the kinds of pathogens that could require a major response.
Additionally, outgoing senior Obama officials also led an in-person pandemic response exercise for senior incoming Trump officials in January 2017 -- as required by a new law on improving presidential transitions that Obama signed in 2016.
Last week, Obama described the Trump administration's coronavirus response as "an absolute chaotic disaster" during a private call with people who worked for him in the White House.
Still, McConnell added Thursday that "as to whether or not the plan was followed and who's the critic and all the rest, I don't have any observation about that because I don't know enough about the details of that to comment on it in any detail."
CNN's Daniel Dale contributed to this report.
Hear it from Moscow Mitch's own mouth;
online today!
Fresno [ eYe exam.
Tag: A re] statement in physics (dnA optics.
Radio. ) . Infrared...) . visible..
..Uviolet...
....x . Ray.....G amma... r a y..
...
..tag.2....heavens on fire / the radio dept.
part II...and then came shitray...( policy.
O5. hand me down world / guess who
...3....the who sell out / who
002..Psalm 2 / blur......7861. s-ray / to de-Scribe policy
.................154. (2) mighty : Arm. [ army
........ 7707. S p r e a d e r. of. L i g h t.
( ..strong radio net.) aka Concordance.
...why do the nation's rage, and the people plot a vain thing...?...Psalm 2:1.
Once More // Rome....
...from the Top...} Color code of pop....epitaph / crimson king....
Gold / interference..)...sword of g'd / red crayola..... clockwork Orange...*Yello journalism
.. how green was my valley [?./ Llewellyn.....)..)...0ut of the blue / system F....
..... Synthesis.} ..any colour you like / pink Floyd
*.one defective verse ruins the entire poem..- M Ezra, 1924
PS.) pink surprise...."and every day the paper boy brings more......
.
Radio. ) . Infrared...) . visible..
..Uviolet.......x . Ray.....G amma... r a y..
.....tag.2....heavens on fire / the radio dept.
part II...and then came shitray...( policy.
O5. hand me down world / guess who
...3....the who sell out / who
002..Psalm 2 / blur......7861. s-ray / to de-Scribe policy
.................154. (2) mighty : Arm. [ army
........ 7707. S p r e a d e r. of. L i g h t.
( ..strong radio net.) aka Concordance.
...why do the nation's rage, and the people plot a vain thing...?...Psalm 2:1.
Once More // Rome....
...from the Top...} Color code of pop....epitaph / crimson king....
Gold / interference..)...sword of g'd / red crayola..... clockwork Orange...*Yello journalism
.. how green was my valley [?./ Llewellyn.....)..)...0ut of the blue / system F....
..... Synthesis.} ..any colour you like / pink Floyd
*.one defective verse ruins the entire poem..- M Ezra, 1924
PS.) pink surprise...."and every day the paper boy brings more......
.
Oval Office Meeting Attended By Obama and Biden Was Key To the Anti-Trump Plot
This will come up at the first Trump Biden debate. It will be 'must see' TV.
On January 5, 2017, a meeting was held in the Obama White House in the Oval Office. Both President Obama and Vice President Biden attended. This meeting, it turns out, was critical to the anti-Trump operation by the Obama administration, reports Mollie Hemingway at The Federalist. “It was at this meeting that Obama gave guidance to key officials who would be tasked with protecting his administration’s utilization of secretly funded Clinton campaign research, which alleged Trump was involved in a treasonous plot to collude with Russia, from being discovered or stopped by the incoming administration,” she wrote.
Also in attendance at this meeting was then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, then-national security adviser Susan Rice, then-FBI Director James Comey, then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and other members of the national security council.
It was at this meeting that Barack Obama spoke with Yates and Comey about wiretapped conversations of Trump’s incoming National Security Adviser Gen. Michael Flynn with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the Trump transition, indicating that President Obama was directly knowledgeable of the efforts to surveil the Trump campaign and undermine the incoming administration.
Susan Rice wrote herself a now-infamous email documenting the meeting, writing “President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”
After this meeting took place, “high-level operatives began intensely leaking selective information supporting a supposed Russia-Trump conspiracy theory, the incoming National Security Advisor was ambushed, and the incoming Attorney General [Jeff Sessions] was forced to recuse himself from oversight of investigations of President Trump.”
Top Obama officials have since testified that they never had any empirical evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
As Hemingway notes, “explosive media leaks were a key strategy in the operation to take down Trump.” Per Obama’s direction, information on Russia was “not fully shared with the incoming Trump team” and “the leaks and ambushes made the transition chaotic, scared quality individuals away from working in the administration, made effective governance almost impossible, and materially damaged national security.”
President Trump has indicated that more damning evidence against Obama and Biden will see the light of day.
“There’s more to come, from what I understand. and they’re gonna be far greater than what you’ve seen so far—and what you’ve seen so far has been incredible—especially as it relates to President Obama because if anyone thinks that he and sleepy Joe Biden didn’t know what was going on, they have another thing coming.”
“It is clear that understanding what happened in that January 5 Oval Office meeting is essential to understanding the full scope and breadth of the corrupt operation against the Trump administration,” explained Hemingway.
It’s time to get some answers, especially from Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
On January 5, 2017, a meeting was held in the Obama White House in the Oval Office. Both President Obama and Vice President Biden attended. This meeting, it turns out, was critical to the anti-Trump operation by the Obama administration, reports Mollie Hemingway at The Federalist. “It was at this meeting that Obama gave guidance to key officials who would be tasked with protecting his administration’s utilization of secretly funded Clinton campaign research, which alleged Trump was involved in a treasonous plot to collude with Russia, from being discovered or stopped by the incoming administration,” she wrote.
Also in attendance at this meeting was then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, then-national security adviser Susan Rice, then-FBI Director James Comey, then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and other members of the national security council.
It was at this meeting that Barack Obama spoke with Yates and Comey about wiretapped conversations of Trump’s incoming National Security Adviser Gen. Michael Flynn with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the Trump transition, indicating that President Obama was directly knowledgeable of the efforts to surveil the Trump campaign and undermine the incoming administration.
Susan Rice wrote herself a now-infamous email documenting the meeting, writing “President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”
After this meeting took place, “high-level operatives began intensely leaking selective information supporting a supposed Russia-Trump conspiracy theory, the incoming National Security Advisor was ambushed, and the incoming Attorney General [Jeff Sessions] was forced to recuse himself from oversight of investigations of President Trump.”
Top Obama officials have since testified that they never had any empirical evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
As Hemingway notes, “explosive media leaks were a key strategy in the operation to take down Trump.” Per Obama’s direction, information on Russia was “not fully shared with the incoming Trump team” and “the leaks and ambushes made the transition chaotic, scared quality individuals away from working in the administration, made effective governance almost impossible, and materially damaged national security.”
President Trump has indicated that more damning evidence against Obama and Biden will see the light of day.
“There’s more to come, from what I understand. and they’re gonna be far greater than what you’ve seen so far—and what you’ve seen so far has been incredible—especially as it relates to President Obama because if anyone thinks that he and sleepy Joe Biden didn’t know what was going on, they have another thing coming.”
“It is clear that understanding what happened in that January 5 Oval Office meeting is essential to understanding the full scope and breadth of the corrupt operation against the Trump administration,” explained Hemingway.
It’s time to get some answers, especially from Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
online today!
'Crats Reduce Bernie & His Bros To Irrelevance. Again!
I Know A Bro IRL. Bern's Is The Only Campaign To Which He's Contributed. The Don May Now get his vote (he went Green Jill Stein in '16 & would NEVER go with Senile Joe in '20) as well as financial contributions & "boots on the ground" campaigning.
'Crats are dragging a divided Party into a Prez Election. AGAIN.
'Crat Political Strategists react to this recent development -
'Publican Political Strategists were unavailable for comment.
This footage was leaked from RNC Headquarters -
Dunning Kruger Effect: Why Some People Believe They Know More Than The Experts
People come to believe things that serve them in one way or another, and often disregard contradictory information because it doesn't reinforce the ideas that make them less anxious and feel more empowered. Below is a good explanation of an effect of which one only becomes aware as their education reaches college levels of understanding and above. I'd noticed it in myself: the way my perceptions of the world shifted with more and more perspective and knowledge, but I'd never put it into words except to say, "I know that I do not know what I do not know. Being mindful of this, I know a little better." Some people regard a shatter illusion a "bad thing". Not me. Bring them on. If I've an illusion, let it be shattered. This is not the attitude of people who still support trump. THEIR behavior is more typical of schizoid people with tight delusional systems that make them hateful towards anyone who, no matter how kindly, tries to show them facts that do not mesh well with their delusions.
Regarding the virus, obviously trump has his ideas about how to respond to the virus, and he is motivated by a variety of factors, many of which are inappropriate and displacing the energy he puts into what should be his number 1 concern: Reducing fatalities by supporting medical personnel and the folks who are keeping food, utility and supplies available to weather this biological storm. But his followers are ignoring the medical experts, infectious disease experts, etc and what follows is an explanation for why they are prone to doing this. Basically, it's a lack of perspective in which to judge the competence of their own perceptions/ideas created by a lack of knowledge/data. Just like we can't know how deadly the 2019 Corona virus is until we test a huge random sample for antibodies, these people lack the data set that would give them insight. Couple that with an unwillingness to entertain data contrary to their own theories/delusions and you get a MAGA and/or KAGA. Without further delay, the Dunning Kruger Effect:
Copied from Quora where David Blackstone wrote:
"There’s a psychological phenomenon called the Dunning Kruger effect, which explains why the ignorant believe themselves to be smarter than they actually are.
Knowledgeable people, or experts who know more about a subject than anyone else, are more likely to be aware of what they don’t know. They know the extent of the knowledge that can be learned on a subject and consequently are more likely to know how much they know relative to how much there IS to know.
Ignorant people are the opposite. They don’t know how much there is to know because they don’t know much to begin with. So they assume that their knowledge is on par with or better than an experts, purely because they don’t understand how much there truly is to learn.
Because of this phenomenon, knowledgeable people are more likely to underestimate their knowledge while less knowledgeable people are more likely to overestimate their knowledge.
In sum, smart people know how much they don’t know. Ignorant people are unaware of how much they don’t know, so they think they know more than they do."
____________________________________________________________________
As to where this will lead us, I'm put in mind of what my Dad would shrug and say in such a situation: "Them that cannot hear have to feel".
Regarding the virus, obviously trump has his ideas about how to respond to the virus, and he is motivated by a variety of factors, many of which are inappropriate and displacing the energy he puts into what should be his number 1 concern: Reducing fatalities by supporting medical personnel and the folks who are keeping food, utility and supplies available to weather this biological storm. But his followers are ignoring the medical experts, infectious disease experts, etc and what follows is an explanation for why they are prone to doing this. Basically, it's a lack of perspective in which to judge the competence of their own perceptions/ideas created by a lack of knowledge/data. Just like we can't know how deadly the 2019 Corona virus is until we test a huge random sample for antibodies, these people lack the data set that would give them insight. Couple that with an unwillingness to entertain data contrary to their own theories/delusions and you get a MAGA and/or KAGA. Without further delay, the Dunning Kruger Effect:
Copied from Quora where David Blackstone wrote:
"There’s a psychological phenomenon called the Dunning Kruger effect, which explains why the ignorant believe themselves to be smarter than they actually are.
Knowledgeable people, or experts who know more about a subject than anyone else, are more likely to be aware of what they don’t know. They know the extent of the knowledge that can be learned on a subject and consequently are more likely to know how much they know relative to how much there IS to know.
Ignorant people are the opposite. They don’t know how much there is to know because they don’t know much to begin with. So they assume that their knowledge is on par with or better than an experts, purely because they don’t understand how much there truly is to learn.
Because of this phenomenon, knowledgeable people are more likely to underestimate their knowledge while less knowledgeable people are more likely to overestimate their knowledge.
In sum, smart people know how much they don’t know. Ignorant people are unaware of how much they don’t know, so they think they know more than they do."
____________________________________________________________________
As to where this will lead us, I'm put in mind of what my Dad would shrug and say in such a situation: "Them that cannot hear have to feel".
A Blog is a journal you may enter about your life, your thoughts, interesting experiences, or lessons you have learned. It's your own page on Connecting Singles that you can update on a regular basis, or just whenever you have something to say. You can write about an opinion, impart words of wisdom, or talk about something interesting in your day. Creating a blog is a good way to share something of yourself with Connecting Singles members. Reading blogs is a good way to learn more about members you have met here. Please be sure to read the blog rules before posting.
Would YOU like to post a blog on Connecting Singles? Have you written blogs that you'd like to share with other members? Posting your blogs shows your skill and creativity and helps members get to know you better. Your blog will appear on the Connecting Singles Blogs page and also in a link on your profile page. Click here to post a blog »