Re: US Election 2016
 

So are you are suggesting that Trump alienates and demoralises the security services? And that this approach is politically logical because of their previous mistakes?

Re: US Election 2016
 

I thought it was those who were making the Allegations needed to show the Proof and none has been shown that appears legit. Also just to put it out there, he won't be at odds with the new security chief. Clapper will not be Intelligence chief much longer. Dan Coats fills that role once his nomination is Confirmed by the Senate.

Re: US Election 2016
 

And the security services have said "they don't know for sure".
"I do not believe" is a "I don't know for sure".

Re: US Election 2016
 

And Trump says (verbatim)

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/u...ript.html?_r=0

So if Trump says 'maybe' or 'who knows', he gets a free pass and people should believe that the IC did leak the story, but if the`Head of the IC says 'I do not believe', they shouldn't believe him...

Re: US Election 2016
 

Agreed. Just to clarify, it's Trump who's making the suggestions against the security services, not the other way around. And he's not come up with anything that supports his suggestions. And to further clarify: the security services are not saying the allegations are correct, they're just sharing them with him. Though I doubt they would share every single allegation they receive with him.

---------- Post added at 19:29 ---------- Previous post was at 19:20 ----------

Some hopeful news

Donald Trump's defence secretary says Putin trying to break Nato and world order 'under biggest attack since WWII

Donald Trump’s incoming defense secretary said world order was "under the biggest attack since World War II" and has declared the US must uphold the "impefect" nuclear arms deal with Iran.

"I think right now the most important thing is that we recognise the reality of what we deal with Mr Putin, and we recognise that he is trying to break the Northern Atlantic alliance, and that we take the steps, the integrated steps, diplomatic, economic military, and the alliance steps, working with our allies, to defend ourselves where we must," General Mattis said at his senate confirmation hearing.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7524256.html

Re: US Election 2016
 

It's Trump making the allegations against the security services ,he accused them of deliberately leaking the files ,so yes Trump should show some evidence if only to clear his own name .
Trump has alienated the IC and swapping the chief for one of his own is not going to bring them back on side ,he needs their intelligence to fulfill his election promise to take down ISIS .

Re: US Election 2016
 

One of the fastest ways to get egg on your face normally is to accept the US intelligence community at face value and given the adversarial nature of US intelligence between themselves it's a brave man who stands up and gives a definitive denial on something which is why there has been no definitive denial. Trump can end a lot of this rubbish by being open and honest about his business dealings and personally the second he entered the presidential process he should have been open about his business dealings.

Trump also needs to start being realistic about Russia as right now he thinks he has an ally perhaps even a friend in putin and he doesn't. If trump isn't careful he will plunge the whole world into a dark and miserable period, he not only has to stand upto putin publically he needs to understand how their intelligence services will work against him on one hand and appear to support him on the other something i think we are seeing right now.

I hate to be as pessimistic as MrK at the minute but we will soon have two arrogant and egotistical men in control of the worlds two largest nuclear arsenals and although there are safeguards in the US to prevent trump going off the deep end there are none in Russia.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Good article on Trump's potential conflicts of interest. Makes the point that he's not disclosed his interests so no one in his team can state accurately if conflicts of interest do occur. https://qz.com/884120/elizabeth-warr...s-of-interest/

Re: US Election 2016
 

Isn't he supposed to and didn't he promise to put his businesses in a blind trust anyway?

Re: US Election 2016
 

Once he becomes president isn't he subject to freedom of information requests not sure how that system works in the US though i can see a consistent stream occuring once he takes office. How he handles the next couple of weeks is going to determine the view of him and right now with the exception of mick and his small groups of die hard supporters general view is he's not looking that impressive.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Is Mick a fan then, I thought he said he only supported him because he didn't like Mrs Clinton, she's no longer relevant so no need to stick up for the donald anymore :shrug:

Re: US Election 2016
 

He's not put them in a blind trust, he's transferring them to his children, and promised never to discuss business with his sons, or watch any news about the businesses, so he wouldn't be influenced by them....

Re: US Election 2016
 

That's what I said Hugh, that he isn't putting them in a blind trust and that he said he would frequently during the campaign

https://ourfuture.org/20161116/today...se-blind-trust

Re: US Election 2016
 

well if we can't trust the president of the USA who can be trusted

Re: US Election 2016
 

No rule or law says he has to put them in a blind trust and if I had a Billion Dollar empire, I would not just skip my kids and neither would a lot of other people.

Also, you missed the bit where a Business Ethics Committee person is to be appointed on to the Trump Staff team who will ensure no Conflict of Interest occurs.

:wavey: I am Still here. It is not about being a fan of Trump, it's about not following such a ridiculous anti-bias press, which throws up silly stories about him, just because it's him. The absolute favoritism of the US Media, for Hillary Clinton, during the campaigns was ridiculous, given her poor track record as Secretary of State and other 'bent' traits here and there.

It's also about people who jump on the hate bandwagon, far too easily just because they see a negative Trump headline and then jump to the conclusion, that he is going to be crap, guess what? Barack Obama is considered a crap President, that's why Trump essentially won, because they (Americans) did not want another four years of Obama, and this was highly likely with Hillary Clinton.

So other Presidents who were considered crap.... George W. Bush was a Seriously Crap President, Bill Clinton, not that impressive, George Bush Snr, served only one term so that speaks for itself and need I mention Nixon here?

So if Trump is going to be a crap President, he will be joining quite a list.

But all these Presidents before him said what they wanted to do before they went in to office, only to do some of what they said or the opposite or take us in to illegal wars or completely shake up the entire Middle East and cause mass migration, not seen since World War II.