Take whomever. Fauci, Brennan, any of that group.
If the threats are indeed credible and these people believe them to be credible, let 'em hire their own private security. They have the money.
🧑🤝🧑 / 🏡 The Inauguration of the POTUS.
- Thread starter Krimson
- Start date
If the threats are indeed credible and these people believe them to be credible, let 'em hire their own private security. They have the money.
Sure they can, but Trump had these guys in his admin. He knew what he was getting with Bolton, for instance. And I'm sure they will have private security, which in some ways might be better (other than it being costly). But they are unlikely to get real time info on any credible threats that they would have gotten under the arm of the Secret Service. To me, it isn't much different that Biden's admin balking at the request of Trump's detail team for more help/resources during his campaign. Or Biden's admin slow walking adequate security for the Supreme Court Justices when people were threatening them and protesting outside their homes.
@Brandon Van de Graaff I don't see the two comparable. With SCOTUS, those were active guys in the government. Trump, ex-POTUS with nominee on top.
On the other hand, these others were appointed to their positions At least a large majority were (I'd have to look up all fifty-one, as one example.)
On the other hand, these others were appointed to their positions At least a large majority were (I'd have to look up all fifty-one, as one example.)
Milley spoke with Chinese and said he would let them know what Trump had in mind for them. In other words, a double agent.
51 what?
...those guys saying "Russian disinformation" about the laptop...I know Brennan was one of that group, Clapper another
We are talking about 2 different things. Revoking the security clearance(s) of a bunch of folks was a good (and needed) move, IMO. I'm just specially talking about the personal security protection that was provided to Bolton and Pompeo. The fact that he took Pompeo's away makes me wonder if they think the threat (from Iran) is over, but if so, Trump should have just said that the other night when asked instead of saying what he said.
footballer
Member
If any of those get whacked - by foreign or domestic - it'll be a damn shame.
I would be satisfied with justice.
Going up against your boss shouldn't be a capital offense. Bolton has been a reliable conservative on national security issues.
Maybe, but he apparently was working for the other side for $ome reason.
The Iranians want him dead, hard to think he's working for them or a benefactor. He's roughly on the same side as Trump, just to his right and more conservative, and more principled.
Any idea that someone who has crossed Trump is on "the wrong side", based on the tenets of conservatism, is plain wrong. The certain thing is that Trump lacks the attention to detail and grasp of policy that a wonk like Bolton hews to. Losing patience with a process of working through 1,500 pardons, then punting with a "let's just do them all", knowing that there were some real bad actors in the bunch, is lazy and may come back around.
I'm relieved Trump, and not Harris, is president, but this is going to be a two-edged sword. Many principled conservatives will be holding their noses.
Ok so Bolton is a principled war mongering POS, no different from Liz Cheney.
Association notwithstanding, he's not bought and paid for, and he shouldn't be exposed to foreign assassination for actions taken at the behest of an administration just because they had a later falling out. I can't make this more basic.
Speaking charitably, Trump's motivations are fucking middle school.
Is that not better said, "...many principled neoconservatives will be holding their noses?"
I look at Bolten and see it imitated on screen in *Designated Survivor;" the role of "Harris Cochrane." IE: "Let's bomb the shit out of them and then let God sort them out."
Kudos for the pointing the plural.
Bolton isn't that shallow. He's a conservative, something Trump is not, and he's been equally critical of Obama's actions to erode U.S. sovereignty. His record goes back to the Reagan administration, working under Meese and later Baker. He was a foil at the U.N.
Trump sheds and adds positions and people to suit himself. For those unwilling to research and analyze objectively, perhaps the two easiest topics are those that have favor in the senseless pop culture space - Crypto and Tik Tok.
Trump was against crypto in his first administration. Once he realized that crypto was favored by a valuable voting bloc and those invested in the crypto world contributed to his campaign, surprise: crypto good!
Donald Trump calls Bitcoin 'a scam against the dollar'
The controversial former US president thinks the cryptocurrency is a threat to the US dollar.
www.bbc.com
Trump advocated for a Tik Tok ban late in his first term. Faced with facts, a heavy bipartisan majority took action on Tik Tok. A unanimous Supreme Court (how often do you hear that?) upheld the law. Once again, Trump bent to flattery, pop culture opportunism and money to save Tik Tok.
The SCOTUS does not determine if a law is right or wrong. Their job is to determine if a law or behavior violates the Constitution.Kudos for the pointing the plural.
Bolton isn't that shallow. He's a conservative, something Trump is not, and he's been equally critical of Obama's actions to erode U.S. sovereignty. His record goes back to the Reagan administration, working under Meese and later Baker. He was a foil at the U.N.
Trump sheds and adds positions and people to suit himself. For those unwilling to research and analyze objectively, perhaps the two easiest topics are those that have favor in the senseless pop culture space - Crypto and Tik Tok.
Trump was against crypto in his first administration. Once he realized that crypto was favored by a valuable voting bloc and those invested in the crypto world contributed to his campaign, surprise: crypto good!
Donald Trump calls Bitcoin 'a scam against the dollar'
The controversial former US president thinks the cryptocurrency is a threat to the US dollar.
Trump advocated for a Tik Tok ban late in his first term. Faced with facts, a heavy bipartisan majority took action on Tik Tok. A unanimous Supreme Court (how often do you hear that?) upheld the law. Once again, Trump bent to flattery, pop culture opportunism and money to save Tik Tok.
True. They determined that Congress is within the bounds of the Constitution to require divestiture if the owner is subject to the control or direction of a foreign adversary.
-
Thread '📈 Bracketology 2026 - A quick from the distance: 1/27 (+ current SEC standings.)'
Alabama currently projected as a 4 seed.- TerryP
- Replies: 21
-
2026 Alabama Roster Management Chart and Portal news
The latest on who's in and who's out.- Brandon Van de Graaff
- Replies: 1,596
-
-
-
Thread 'Anybody watched any good new shows or series lately?'
The off-season "blues." What to watch?- Brandon Van de Graaff
- Replies: 143
-
Thread '🏀 2025-26 Bama Basketball Updates: Roberts recuses himself: Judge Daniel Pruet has a decision on his hands'
Bama held their 1st practice 9/22- Brandon Van de Graaff
- Replies: 723
