Why do liberals always see things in black and white when it comes to pushing an agenda, but then insist everything is "gray" when it comes to morals, truth, human behaviors, etc? Pulling a page from George W. Bush, the NYT asks this morning if the American people are with Trump or with the U.S. intelligence community. That's right, we don't HAVE to be with either, but in this case, I will side with Trump if I have to choose.
We don't know (but only suspect) that Trump--a lifelong Democrat, Clinton pal, NYC billionaire, eminent domain champion, casino-pushing liberal--may not have had a great conservative awakening after practicing acting for a few years, and immediately before running for POTUS. We KNOW the U.S. intel community has been lying steadily at least since Iraq War I under papa George when he told his ambassador to Baghdad (April Glaspie) to tell Saddam Hussein he didn't care if he invaded Kuwait. We know they lied about the "yellow cake" used to justify Gulf War II. We know darned well they have been lying about 911 since the day two aluminum planes brought down the forty-seven massive 4' x 4' massive heat-treated and insulated center core I-Beams in the center of both the Twin Towers, sending the towers straight down as neat as controlled demolition right into their own footprints. We know they aren't telling the truth about many of the "mass shooting" psyops--especially the Sandy Hoax, the Boston (smoke) bombing, and Parkland, FL.
So, if given another Hillary/Donald type choice, transmogrified into CIA/Donald...most of us will hold our nose and pick Donald. But we don't HAVE to, George W. and New York Times. We don't HAVE to be with ANY terrorists, not to be with you people. You really need to read this ludicrous Oped:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/16/opinion/trump-and-putin-vs-america.html
Let me just highlight a couple more of the worst nonsense from "the only news worth reading" today.
Take this excerpt:
"There is overwhelming evidence that our president, for the first time in our history, is deliberately or through gross negligence or because of his own twisted personality engaged in treasonous behavior — behavior that violates his oath of office to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
How, exactly, New York Times, does disagreeing with KNOWN LIARS at the CIA/FBI/NSA, etc. (you know, the people who have made it their career protecting the deep state) treasonous? How is it "not protecting and defending the United States" when you disagree with known liars-- agencies we KNOW rig foreign elections, assassinate foreign leaders (even democratically elected ones) set people up and plant evidence, bomb weddings overseas, etc., etc. Collateral damage of the type that these "intel leaders" (and the now dead Barbara "beautiful mind" Bush) seem to accept on a routine basis, is not necessarily acceptable to decent people outside of the deep state. What exactly did Trump say to Putin that was so "treasonous" anyway? Give us details, not just snide insinuations, New York Times.
How about this one:
"In the past few years what has Putin done to deserve an American president sucking up to him for an “extraordinary” relationship? Putin has seized Crimea, covertly invaded Ukraine, provided the missiles that shot down a civilian Malaysian airliner over Ukraine, bombed tens of thousands of refugees out of Syria into Europe, destabilizing Europe, been involved in the death of a British woman who accidentally handled a Russian nerve agent deployed to kill ex-Russian agents in England and deployed misinformation to help tip the vote in Britain toward exiting and fracturing the European Union."
The Crimea has been Russian territory for hundreds of years, NYT. Ever heard of the Crimean War? The CIA was turning Ukraine into a deep state beach head, that is clear. How would any American President have reacted if the Soviets had invaded northern Mexico..or the Gadsden Purchase, let's say? The Nazis from Euromaidan who broke up Ukraine and the snipers you used to shoot civilians in the streets of Kiev are responsible for much of what subsequently happened in the Donbass, CIA. You know that, but many Americans might not (until now.) Providing missiles is not shooting down, though it is clear you are trying to conflate the two. Does the U.S. ever "provide missiles" or other military hardware to people outside our borders...(ahem...) Prove the Russians have ever bombed refugees in Syria...Wow! the hubris and conceit! Where is the proof the Russians deployed nerve agents in Britain. That was just admitted as unproven in your own pages last week! And, this idea that Russia is now responsible for the Brexit vote??...I can't even contest that load of horse hockey...it's just too funny given your ongoing push of the "Trump/Russian Collusion" narrative.
There is SO Much more idiocy in this one OpEd, that I could literally spend all day just countering the blatherings of the New York Times, but alas, I do have other things to do with my life than reply to childish morons.
Trump is far from perfect. But he is BETTER THAN HILLARY. HE is BETTER THAN JOHN BRENNAN. The American people know he is no saint, and should never be a religious leader, but he's the choice YOU in the deep state gave us, and we'll take his rhetoric (at least ) over your personal ass-saving "convictions" any day and twice on Sundays.