Rex says thank God!
 

Finally I'm out of this crazy place.

This is not good. Tillerson was the one person in trumps clown car who knew how to drive and read a road map. Dark days ahead... however I could be and usually am wrong.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Looks like he got fired by Tweet - didn't even have a one on one with
the Pres. Propbably as a result of Rex's Anti-Russian tweet - this is what concerns me most about Trump - if there is real influence on DJT by Pooti

Spite fire - like with Comey.

Personally I want to thank the Dems and the Republicans for putting forward the worst effing possible candidates. When I think of how bad this is it is at least tempered by it could have been Hillary or Bernie.

Well, this is not true; Haley is doing a very good job, McMasters is OK (though probably on way out) and Chaos might be the best Damn SecDef in Forever - and certainly at least since Bob Gates

^^^^ This
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Would have felt much better with Rex sitting down solo or beside DJT with little rocket man, now you only have the bad cop.

Ahead of meeting with NK (assuming it ever happens and wasn’t just djt having impulsive verbal diarrhea, which is what it seems) without tillerson, or even N ambassador to SK... what could go wrong....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

At this point I don't see how else you explain away his inability to be critical of Russia.

Would have been real nice if the previous admin had done anything about it - like calling the 80s to redistribute their foreign policy.

So we have TWO back to back administrations that are completely mismanaging the greatest (arguably) Geopolitical / foreign policy threat.

(my list: Russia & China,Russia, China, 20TB and growing debt, Norks, Syria, failure of liberal western democracies)

Well, Obama may have underestimated what it would take to influence Russia but Trump looks like an active co-conspirator. Two very different things.

What does it "look like" they are conspiring to do?

I think Trump kisses Putin's golden ring a bit more than Putin does, but there is definitely a love fest there; not sure if there is a deep state conspiracy there. Even as of a week or so ago, DJT still was passing around the belief that the hacking could have been many others other than Russia.

At a minimum conspiring to cover up or minimize the fallout from Russia's efforts to disrupt the election in favor for Trump. They might have different motivations but the behavior is quite telling.

If there is a love affair between them, it certainly hasn't gone farther than some hints, and is, so far as we know, unrequited, and doesn't have any indications of leading to a marriage. Even been a few spats. Maybe a passing fancy? Maybe a trick?

The Donald does have a tendency to fire people who he has praised.

Obama habitually effed up and underestimate foreign powers and the Great Game. Jury is still out if DJT can surpass BO on FP complete and utter stupidity as the amount is great, but the race is on.

From listening to talking heads and reading between the lines somewhat, it sounds like Tillerson was operating the State Dept as he liked and ignoring the (moron in the) WH.

Please do tell us what the behavior tells.

What would Putin want?
1. Destroy or invalidate US intelligence assets
2. Destroy or weaken NATO
3. Destroy or weaken Economic alliances of his opposition
4. Destabilize democracies, encourage authoritarian regimes
5. Remove the USA as a world leader for democracy
6. Remove or lessen sanctions placed on him or his followers
What does Trump's behavior tell you?

He's under Putin's thumb.

Ding ding ding !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Success of his business interests in Russia rely on Putin's support. His behavior toward Russia is embarrassing. Only a trumpite wouldn't see that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If only 1 firing/quit today, Trump is doing wel!

You think bush was better? Foreign policy is a tough neighborhood. You call it stupidity on Obama part, but I would be interested to hear you back that up with specific facts. Probably point to as many failures of the great comedian with his contras and support of Afghanistan that lead to Al qaida and nuclear Pakistan. Trump's damage was going to be limited by surrounding himself with good people. That is going great!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not to mention that Obama inherited one of the biggest foreign policy blunders in US history. Sure, let's invade a strategic nation in an unstable region and give it to Iran...great job W.

Yes, with the exception of Iraq - Big Exception - Bush was better.

The reason that I don't see what anti-trumpers want me to see is that they present innuendo, conjecture, and contradiction without hard evidence of conspiracy and then claim there is something to see.

For instance, Pete F. posts a 6 point list of things Putin supposedly wants:
What would Putin want?
1. Destroy or invalidate US intelligence assets
2. Destroy or weaken NATO
3. Destroy or weaken Economic alliances of his opposition
4. Destabilize democracies, encourage authoritarian regimes
5. Remove the USA as a world leader for democracy
6. Remove or lessen sanctions placed on him or his followers

and implies that Trump wants to do those 6 things. Most of which would harm his "business interests," which are what you imply are what he wants to protect by gaining Putin's support.

He didn't imply any such thing. The implication was why Trump's behavior doesn't push back against those same things given the consensus among government agencies as to Russia's intent.

Hell, Sanders yesterday wouldn't even play with implicating Russia in the UK assassination even though one of our most trusted allies and even our own Secretary of State (oops) have spoken otherwise.

Well if Pete didn't imply that Trump wanted what Putin wanted, then what was the connection between the two statements that sandwiched the 6 items: "What would Putin want? [the six items] "What does Trump's behavior tell you?" I assumed that what Pete referred to as Trump's unspecified behavior re those six items was connected to what Putin would want--that Trump's supposed behavior supported Putin's desires.


The implication was why Trump's behavior doesn't push back against those same things given the consensus among government agencies as to Russia's intent.

So your saying that his implication was only to ask a question for which he has no inferred answer, that his question was not rhetorical, it was just wondering what did I think--then he wasn 't actually saying anything about Trump's unspecified behavior, and I can't answer a vague question regarding unspecified behavior. Nor do I wish to even try.

Hell, Sanders yesterday wouldn't even play with implicating Russia in the UK assassination even though one of our most trusted allies and even our own Secretary of State (oops) have spoken otherwise.[/QUOTE]

And what is that supposed to tell us about Trump's intentions? What does your assertion that Trump is under Putin's thumb supposed to imply about Trump's behavior?

if his 1st picks are all gone who's better?? or is going to surround himself with just members from his fan club ?

America 1st or Trump 1st starting to think its the other way around

going to west to look at wall samples and another rally(base love fest to boost his ego ) he's a micro manager for sure

I wonder if it had anything to do with Tillerson calling Trump a moron
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device