monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Their 'Gun Free Zone' approach does not work, and they continue to focus on the wrong thing. It's not the thought or the method, it's the people. There are a growing number of death cult individuals that have been emboldened by weak leadership... you have the human right to defend yourself against those that follow a death cult. Give up that right at your own peril.

Czech government tells its citizens how to fight terrorists: Shoot them yourselves

The recent announcement of the "findings" of the Intelligence Community in the DNC hacking matter is clear enough on their judgment that the Russians were behind the source of the Wikileaks leaked material. It's also true that, based on the assessments of others, the weak security provisions on both the DNC server and Hillary's e mail server made hacking rather easy for a large number of others as well.

The IC folks were, understandably, very guarded about their sources in this announcement. That leaves us all wondering just what they know and don't know, and, very importantly, wondering about the veracity of the intelligence officials who had backed up the President's earlier statements that the Hillary server caused no leaks of natinal security information - i.e. no one, including the Russians had hacked it. Very hard to accept the truth of both rather contradictory propositions.

We're also left wondering about Trump's expressed attitudes towards the Intelligence Community
.
Before we get into that, it's worth noting that it is now clear that Obama ignored IC estimates for the duration of his tenure, starting with the abrupt bug out from Iraq. Huge efforts had been made ( during the so called "surge") to stabilize the position of Iraqi Sunnis vis a vis the Iran backed Shia government of Iraq, but a continued U.S. presence was needed to sustain it, push out the Iranians, and restore equilibrium. Obama ignored all that, plus the earnest objections of his former SECDEF (Gates), and ISIS was the direct result (he even caled it "the junior varsity" when it arose.) All this is a matter of public record.

Later Obama ignored the IC and the repeated recommendations of our embassy staff in Libya about the unravelling situation there (and after he declined to take or lead any international action to ensure the emergence of a stable government there.)

Months later, as the revolt against the Assad regime in Syria broke out, Obama chose to take no action of any kind, ignoring the obvious fact that Syria had been the pawn of the Soviet/Russian regines for at least four decades and was their highly valued foothold in both the Middle east and the Mediterranean. Despite his vacuous threat of a red line if Assad used chemical weapons on his people, such use quickly followed, and we did nothing. The ghastly results & slaughter that continue there are the result.

It's very hard for me (or, I think, any knowledgable, intelligent observer) to believe that all this was based on information and recommendations provided by our intelligence community.

How can this happen? Was Obama knowing lying throughout all this? I don't know the answer but I think it likely that he saw all this through a very different lens than the one left available to us now. Obama's awareness of the long conflicting national interests of Russia appeared on the scene only very late in the day and then only when his own vanity and legacy were threatened. I suspect all this was facilitated by a circle of sympathetic sycophants surrounding President Obama who merely refelected back what he wanted to hear. Those who did not. and raised uncomfortable objections or contradictions, were simply forced out, retired or dismissed - and there were many such folks. Grneral Flynn was but one of many. (This is a very common failing of weak leaders, as history amply confirms)

This raises analogous questions for President-elect Trump. His dismissive statements and tweets regarding the Intelligence Community are indeed disturbing. What do they mean? I'll address this in a later post.

Don't know where ya get em but they are right on the mark and ******* hilarious.

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-really-so-easy-to-hack-into-someones-email-account

I think the purpose of our right to bear arms is widely misunderstood. It's not as much about SELF defense as it is about our right to defend against a tyrannical government.

Self defense is there, but it's more "there are a lot of American's who have guns, even if you forcefully take us over there will be an American with a gun around every corner, waiting for opportunity". It's just a better smarter move not to try to do that.

While it COULD be argued that your pistol or rifle could never stand up to a tank or plane, but if we DID have something like Trump or Obama trying to go three terms, there would be some issues.

I concluded a previous post with;
This raises analogous questions for President-elect Trump. His dismissive statements and tweets regarding the Intelligence Community are indeed disturbing. What do they mean? I'll address this in a later post. Here goes;

In an announcement released today we are told that President-elect Trump accepts the recently provided evaluation of the Intelligence Community regarding the Russian sourcing of the hacked e mails from the DNC server.
This contradicts some of Trump's earlier tweets & statements, and we can only conclude he was persuaded by what he recently heard from senior members of the IC. Though he might have been provided additional detail not widely released, he, like most of us, appears tro accept the IC's evaluation of the situation, even though we (and they) may not fully know Putin's real motivations.

I believe that is both a reversal of his previous position , and an encouraging indicator of Trump's likely future behavior in office.

My experience has been that strong leaders tend to surround themselves with strong, independent advisors; encourage and deal productively with disagreement; rethink and revise strategy when appropriate; and do not hesitate to change positions when presented with facts that confound old ones. Too early to say, but Trump's actions and behavior so far increasingly suggest he may be such a strong leader . Time will tell, and events will test that and his wisdom further.

By contrast, weak leaders tend to surround themselves with known loyal and sympathetic advisors, committed to the leader's preconceptions and to be highly dependent on him. Such sycophants rarely defy the leader's preferences and help him interpret everything through the lens of his initial biases and perceptions, without regard to unfolding facts that defy them. Those who do not conform are quickly removed. The record of the past eight years amply confirm that Obama has been such a weak leader.

Going forward I hope Trump will modify his behavior, confining his tweets to things he (or any president) would otherwise say in a press conference, and avoiding more than that. This would enable him to continue his, very beneficial to the public, bypassing of a media establishment that appears to believe that it alone has the right to act as the intermediary between our people and our government. This is a self-serving monopolistic idea that has long outlived its useful life.

So far Trump appeards to have facilitated a quite remarkable unification of the Republican delegation in the Congress. This will certainly be tested in the legislative program ahead and we shall see how well it endures. However the progress so far is quite remarkable.

In a like manner, Trump's selection of advisors and prospective cabinet officers reveals obvious patters of prior independent achievement, talent and experience on their parts and, taken together, a coherently structured group reflective of the issues on which he campaigned.

In the coming legislative program I hope he concentrates first on regulatory reform (lots of cancellations of Obama's nonsense); enforcement of existing immigration law, and the foundations of tax reform and infrastructure development. I would like to see him vamp a bit and defer Obamacare repeal/reform, giving the extant ill-conceived structure of that 2,000 page law no one read, time to collapse on its own, or at least make its coming collapse evident to all. I believe that will occur before the Fall of 2017, as the few remaining insurers drop out of the system and prices continue to rise.

Plus he's such a classy guy.

I think he is a little vulgar, but I happily associate with a wide and diverse circle of friends many of whom have worse qualities than that, but all of whom enrich my life. They also accept themselves, and each other, enjoying what they can and ignoring the rest. I thnk that's wise.

I think you are the one misunderstanding our right to bear arms.

It's as much about the individuals right to self defense as it is a collective right of defense against a tyrannical government. The right to defend oneself is especially important when your 0bama government is creating & enabling civil disobedience & terrorists attacks in our country, thus overwhelming law enforcement.

Congress Releases Final Report, Shows Obama Took $2.6B From Vets To Give To Syrian Refugees

Practically every radio station in rural America is conservative and the majority of them in the cities.

Classy, indeed! Grabs women by the crotch, a textbook racial bigot, a liar, and scammer of many.
When you're a star like Trump, you can do anything. Even shoot somebody in the middle of Manhattan, and nobody would care. He won't lose any voters.

Trump tells the truth 4% of the time.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/politics/donald-trump-shoot-somebody-support/index.html

Thats what I thought.

OK its official. You are just another lying troll.

Of coarse AC never lies to himself. It's easy to factcheck Donald Trump's honesty. He tells the truth 4% of the time.
Do I have to remind anyone that he's a GOP/Republican?
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

Following are the people who have been hoodwinked by the scam master Trump.

Frug is correct. Remember, back in the day there were no police. You were responsible for your own safety and that of your neighbors. It was about self defence and self reliance.

People will say then, why do we need it today...We have police.

The Supreme Court has said that while the police can be held accountable for protection of the population as a whole they may not be held accountable for the protection of any one individual.

0bama's response to democrat caused crime...

You make such sweeping statements, no wonder you're not taken seriously. And which is it...Are the conservative stations in rural America or the cities? Pick one so maybe people will be able to decipher what the heck you think you are talking about...If you know.