Bolton doesn't like either side!

TUMe

I.T.S. Legend
Dec 3, 2003
22,724
1,934
113
74
Former national security adviser John Bolton warned in an interview airing Sunday night that President Trump's White House poses a "danger for the republic" -- but cautioned that congressional Democrats were "almost as bad" in their efforts to unseat him from office, which Bolton called a "partisan catfight."

Speaking to ABC News' Martha Raddatz, Bolton further broadened his attacks beyond just the president, accusing the Defense Department of "obstruction" concerning the administration's response to suspected chemical weapons use in Syria.
 

HuffyCane

I.T.S. Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 25, 2004
13,012
5,069
113
Met him a couple of times socially. He’s desperate for anyone to take him seriously as a Presidential candidate. I’m not sure he actually wants to be President, but he wants the cachet of the Colin Powell’s of the world who can stroll around and claim they could have and should have been President. No credibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clong83a

shon46

I.T.S. Position Coach
Sep 16, 2008
2,286
272
83
UK
Met him a couple of times socially. He’s desperate for anyone to take him seriously as a Presidential candidate. I’m not sure he actually wants to be President, but he wants the cachet of the Colin Powell’s of the world who can stroll around and claim they could have and should have been President. No credibility.
Lots of guys get street cred from doing jail time. That’s exactly where he will be living in the near future.
 

TUMe

I.T.S. Legend
Dec 3, 2003
22,724
1,934
113
74
I must say, this isn't something new with me, I have never liked Bolton. I didn't want him picked either time. For some reason he seems "comic opera" to me.
 

Clong83a

I.T.S. Junior
Nov 15, 2014
748
605
93
Former national security adviser John Bolton warned in an interview airing Sunday night that President Trump's White House poses a "danger for the republic" -- but cautioned that congressional Democrats were "almost as bad" in their efforts to unseat him from office, which Bolton called a "partisan catfight."

Speaking to ABC News' Martha Raddatz, Bolton further broadened his attacks beyond just the president, accusing the Defense Department of "obstruction" concerning the administration's response to suspected chemical weapons use in Syria.
Bolton doesn't like either side? That's fine, I think the feeling is mutual. He's an opportunistic gossipmonger whose only fundamental belief appears to be that we should go to war with Iran. No thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TUMe

TUMe

I.T.S. Legend
Dec 3, 2003
22,724
1,934
113
74
Bolton doesn't like either side? That's fine, I think the feeling is mutual. He's an opportunistic gossipmonger whose only fundamental belief appears to be that we should go to war with Iran. No thanks.
I guess that Trump was the only one who didn't see this coming.
 

aTUfan

I.T.S. Head Coach
Apr 18, 2011
6,245
397
83
la la land
neither side has leadership worthy of respect.

can you name 5 people on either side that you would trust.

.
 

noble cane

I.T.S. Head Coach
Feb 25, 2002
7,440
1,444
113
Bolton is the perfect example of someone that doesnt matter until he says something your side likes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TUMe

Gmoney4WW

I.T.S. Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Jul 4, 2007
16,250
4,480
113
If this were anything but a vendetta and attempt to discredit, they would have done it before the book was released. Doubt this is anything but a present tense news blurb, that won't go anywhere.
 

Clong83a

I.T.S. Junior
Nov 15, 2014
748
605
93
If this were anything but a vendetta and attempt to discredit, they would have done it before the book was released. Doubt this is anything but a present tense news blurb, that won't go anywhere.
I agree, and I'll take it one further. The book itself is pretty much nothing more than a vendetta that Bolton has, and if he really had more information that was damning to the president, he would have voluntarily testified during the House impeachment hearings.

Petty childishness all the way around. No shortage of that in this administration or the people it hires.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gmoney4WW

astonmartin708

I.T.S. University President
Apr 17, 2012
12,090
3,479
113
Bolton has been a thorn in the liberals' side for decades now. He's been a warhawk that entire time. That doesn't mean that his criticism of the Republican side isn't at least somewhat valid. I just think the Republican side moved into some very shady territory internationally and he doesn't agree with it. He probably sees the Dems as isolationist / concestionist and the modern Republican leaders as using corruption rather than military might to enforce America's will abroad.
 

aTUfan

I.T.S. Head Coach
Apr 18, 2011
6,245
397
83
la la land
Why is it that our President is probably the most important person in the world, and we can not submit better candidates on either side?

too much politics.
 

Gmoney4WW

I.T.S. Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Jul 4, 2007
16,250
4,480
113
The atmosphere is so corrosive right now, that any candidate would not fare well. That might scare a few of them away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clong83a

shon46

I.T.S. Position Coach
Sep 16, 2008
2,286
272
83
UK
If this were anything but a vendetta and attempt to discredit, they would have done it before the book was released. Doubt this is anything but a present tense news blurb, that won't go anywhere.
Im sure there is some sort of Low level vendetta at play but what’s really ironic is the fact that he personally deemed the information Classified while in office and then knowing full well the consequences for leaking classified information, intentionally released it. The initial judge actually tried to stop the release of the book but it had already been leaked so being the fact that there was nothing further he could do, the judge condemned the book in the strongest language he could. It was just a matter of time before formal charges were filed against him!
 

Clong83a

I.T.S. Junior
Nov 15, 2014
748
605
93
Im sure there is some sort of Low level vendetta at play but what’s really ironic is the fact that he personally deemed the information Classified while in office and then knowing full well the consequences for leaking classified information, intentionally released it. The initial judge actually tried to stop the release of the book but it had already been leaked so being the fact that there was nothing further he could do, the judge condemned the book in the strongest language he could. It was just a matter of time before formal charges were filed against him!
That's not entirely true. Classified information existing in the wild does not mean that it is declassified or acceptable for government officials to acknowledge as being accurate. The official policy is that it is still classified and any government official that talks about it even after it becomes public is still subject to discipline.

If the book indeed has classified information in it (not saying it doesn't), condemning it and pointing that out is actually a further violation. The official policy is to not draw any undue attention to it and try to let it fly under the radar without comment. If the release was intentional, by all means prosecute the perpetrator, but don't jump up and down screaming about it in the meantime.
 

shon46

I.T.S. Position Coach
Sep 16, 2008
2,286
272
83
UK
I believe we are saying the same thing. As an example, in EUCOM any conversations an Ambassador has with any other leader can be classified by the Ambassador who has Original Classification Authority. As the National Security Advisor, Bolton had original classification authority and due to all his conversations or involvement in conversations with foreign leaders relating to National Security, the conversations he wrote about in his book were classified.
 
Last edited:

astonmartin708

I.T.S. University President
Apr 17, 2012
12,090
3,479
113
The over use of the classification system in the federal government seriously concerns me. When you can classify literally any and every communication between our government and another government that's not good for the American public.

We were dealing with these issues dating back to the earliest days of the nation... back then the administration told congress (and the public) what the communications were, they just redacted the names of the parties with which the communications were had.... hence the XYZ affair. X, Y, and Z were the labels for French Ambassadors who demanded bribes before they would enter into negotiations with us.
 

shon46

I.T.S. Position Coach
Sep 16, 2008
2,286
272
83
UK
It definitely makes it hard for gov people to engage in meaningful discussion with non gov people. Speaking for a friend ;)
 

Clong83a

I.T.S. Junior
Nov 15, 2014
748
605
93
I believe we are saying the same thing. As an example, in EUCOM any conversations an Ambassador has with any other leader can be classified by the Ambassador who has Original Classification Authority. As the National Security Advisor, Bolton had original classification authority and due to all his conversations or involvement in conversations with foreign leaders relating to National Security, the conversations he wrote about in his book were classified.
Okay, then we are in agreement. My only point I guess was that there has been a lot of people in government that keep pointing it out, and that in and of itself is actually against policy as well.

The over use of the classification system in the federal government seriously concerns me. When you can classify literally any and every communication between our government and another government that's not good for the American public.

We were dealing with these issues dating back to the earliest days of the nation... back then the administration told congress (and the public) what the communications were, they just redacted the names of the parties with which the communications were had.... hence the XYZ affair. X, Y, and Z were the labels for French Ambassadors who demanded bribes before they would enter into negotiations with us.
I won't totally disagree here, other than to note that intentionally overclassifying things that do not need to be classified is actually a crime same as intentionally releasing things you know are classified. Additionally, classifying something because it is embarrassing to some organization or individuals is explicitly forbidden and can get you in a lot of trouble.

There's a general problem (and I have been guilty of this too) when creating an original document. If you are fairly certain, but not quite 100% certain that something ought to be classified as Secret or Top Secret, or even not at all, then the author/creator sometimes tends to classify it at the highest level to err on the side of safety. Better to get in trouble for accidentally overclassifying things than underclassifying them. But both are against policy. Nobody is going to come after you for having an unconscious bias or making an honest mistake, but you are supposed to try and do your best to sift through the classification guideline literature or seek out higher level derivative classifiers in an attempt to classify it appropriately rather than just slap a "Top Secret" label on it and call it a day. That said, it does sometimes happen. The problem is that understanding all classification guidelines can be a full time job, and people actually trying to get work done are just trying to get work done. Mostly, they just don't want to get into a huge amount of trouble for publishing something Top Secret in open literature by mistake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shon46

Gmoney4WW

I.T.S. Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Jul 4, 2007
16,250
4,480
113
It definitely makes it hard for gov people to engage in meaningful discussion with non gov people. Speaking for a friend ;)
Dropping his job into the convo once again. It might mean something if he didn't bookend it with conspiracy theories every time. That kinda ruins the credibility. It seemed as if he and Clong83 were addressing different issues, so I don't get that there is agreement there, but what do I know.
 

aTUfan

I.T.S. Head Coach
Apr 18, 2011
6,245
397
83
la la land
neither do I but having pelosi and shumer in charge is even worse. They can do much more damage than Biden or Trump, and they will.
 

Latest posts