"I don't know Prince Andrew"

[I-5]

Pathological liars lie with what might be called “intent”. They have a clear purpose or aim they hope to achieve through lying. They can be manipulative and cunning and normally care little for the opinions or feelings of others. Pathological liars simply want things their own way.

Compulsive LiarsA compulsive liar is someone who has little or no control over the lies he or she tells. Lying, for them, is habitual and constant. They may lie about anything and in any situation. They lie to avoid the truth, perhaps because they find telling the truth uncomfortable.

So which one is 45? And depending on which one the answer is, how does that play out in every single statement he makes as the leader of the Free World?

[RiverDog]

Pathological liars lie with what might be called “intent”. They have a clear purpose or aim they hope to achieve through lying. They can be manipulative and cunning and normally care little for the opinions or feelings of others. Pathological liars simply want things their own way.

Compulsive LiarsA compulsive liar is someone who has little or no control over the lies he or she tells. Lying, for them, is habitual and constant. They may lie about anything and in any situation. They lie to avoid the truth, perhaps because they find telling the truth uncomfortable.

So which one is 45? And depending on which one the answer is, how does that play out in every single statement he makes as the leader of the Free World?

IMO Trump best fits the definition of a compulsive liar. He's lazy, does not prepare for meetings, news conferences, etc, does not have a good grasp on basic facts. As a result, he'll just "wing it" and make things up and expects people to believe him.

As far as your second question goes, it plays out just like every other duty he has as POTUS: Nothing he says can be believed unless it can be verified by some other source or if it aligns with what we already know to be true.

[I-5]

He very well could simply be a compulsive liar, which is terrible to have in the most powerful man in the world. Remember the stories of him calling a journalist and disguising his voice to sound like a different person praising Trump? That takes planning and energy. Pretty good example of a pathological liar. Could it be he’s both?

I find one thing fairly reliable, though; simply flip his answers around, and usually the exact opposite turns out to be true. He does get daily intelligence briefings, so we know he does hear the truth at least once a day.

[RiverDog]

He very well could simply be a compulsive liar, which is terrible to have in the most powerful man in the world. Remember the stories of him calling a journalist and disguising his voice to sound like a different person praising Trump? That takes planning and energy. Pretty good example of a pathological liar. Could it be he’s both?

I find one thing fairly reliable, though; simply flip his answers around, and usually the exact opposite turns out to be true. He does get daily intelligence briefings, so we know he does hear the truth at least once a day.

I'm more than happy to discuss the traits of our POTUS. If there's one thing we agree on, it's that Trump can't be trusted to tell the truth. But are you going somewhere with this?

Trump doesn't read his daily intelligence briefings. It was one of the complaints early on in his presidency made by members of his staff. That's one of the reasons why we can't trust what he says as being the truth. He's unprepared and uninformed.

[Aseahawkfan]

Pathological liars lie with what might be called “intent”. They have a clear purpose or aim they hope to achieve through lying. They can be manipulative and cunning and normally care little for the opinions or feelings of others. Pathological liars simply want things their own way.

Compulsive LiarsA compulsive liar is someone who has little or no control over the lies he or she tells. Lying, for them, is habitual and constant. They may lie about anything and in any situation. They lie to avoid the truth, perhaps because they find telling the truth uncomfortable.

So which one is 45? And depending on which one the answer is, how does that play out in every single statement he makes as the leader of the Free World?

Like I've said a thousand times, Trump is a salesman and entertainer. He's always selling and entertaining. The truth is what he sells. And like RD said, he doesn't care much about precision and he's not used to having his every word and move tracked like a hawk by the media and his opponents.

Unlike you I don't see him as violent or dangerous in the way you seem to perceive like a Hitler. He's just some guy that likes to run his mouth too much and has far too big a narcissistic ego that somehow won the presidency in a strange time for American politics.

That's why The Narcissist is always concerned about his ratings. If I really thought Trump was dangerous to America in a violent or Hitler-like way, I'd be as up in arms as you and Hawktawk. But I can't get up in arms over a guy that is basically giant dick that runs his mouth too much.

The reality is it is business as usual in America besides the trade war. Even the so called immigration crisis is about what happened in past years other than his sorry rhetoric which he seems to have toned down lately.

I literally don't care what they do with him at this point. America going to do just fine either way other than the embarrassment of a rich clown that talks to much in office. We've had plenty of ups and downs and dirty moments as president. Until Trump starts a war over some BS, then I don't see him as near the most corrupt administration in history, just the most annoying and stupid.

[I-5]

Calm down. I never compared him to Hitler.

Do I think he’d compromise our national security if he could profit from it personally? If you don’t think he’s more than capable of that, don’t call me the naive one.

As far as where I’m going with this Riv, since every statement is a lie, then we already knows about using campaign money for personal gain (illegal), using public funds to bribe a foreign country (high crimes and misdemeanours). Only reason he’ll get off is because most of the GOP senators are willing to follow him off a cliff. ASF, don’t waste your breath on your diatribes. You’re not convincing anyone, least of all myself.

[RiverDog]

Calm down. I never compared him to Hitler.

Do I think he’d compromise our national security if he could profit from it personally? If you don’t think he’s more than capable of that, don’t call me the naive one.

As far as where I’m going with this Riv, since every statement is a lie, then we already knows about using campaign money for personal gain (illegal), using public funds to bribe a foreign country (high crimes and misdemeanours). Only reason he’ll get off is because most of the GOP senators are willing to follow him off a cliff. ASF, don’t waste your breath on your diatribes. You’re not convincing anyone, least of all myself.

I never said that "every statement (Trump said) was a lie". What I said was that you can't trust a single thing that comes out of his mouth as being the truth unless it can be corroborated by some other source or if it aligns with what we already know is the truth.

The only reason he'll get off isn't j/b most of the GOP Senators are willing to follow him off a cliff. It's because impeachment still doesn't have enough support from the public. If there was support, in the 60's percent overall and 25%-30% of R's, then I'm confident that enough GOP Senators would break ranks. As it stands now, impeachment is nearly a 100% partisan issue. It's the same problem they had with Clinton and didn't have with Nixon.

[I-5]

If you look at numbers, more Americans want him impeached and removed than those who don’t, by about 7-8 points last time I checked.

You didn’t say every statement is a lie, that’s true. I’m saying it. What was the last true thing he said of a political nature? Can you think of anything?

[RiverDog]

If you look at numbers, more Americans want him impeached and removed than those who don’t, by about 7-8 points last time I checked.

Last time I checked it was around 48% wanted him impeached and removed from office while 87% of R's didn't think he should be removed. That's simply not going to get it done.

You didn’t say every statement is a lie, that’s true. I’m saying it. What was the last true thing he said of a political nature? Can you think of anything?

That's not really a fair question because I don't pay attention to anything Trump says true or false. In my eyes, he's not a credible source of information. It's only when he says something comically absurd, like the Revolutionary Army storming airports or Andrew Jackson being very upset about the Civil War that I pay attention to what comes out his mouth.

But to answer your question, there actually is quite a number of true statements that he's made:

https://www.politifact.com/personalitie ... ling/true/

[Aseahawkfan]

Last time I checked it was around 48% wanted him impeached and removed from office while 87% of R's didn't think he should be removed. That's simply not going to get it done.

That's not really a fair question because I don't pay attention to anything Trump says true or false. In my eyes, he's not a credible source of information. It's only when he says something comically absurd, like the Revolutionary Army storming airports or Andrew Jackson being very upset about the Civil War that I pay attention to what comes out his mouth.

But to answer your question, there actually is quite a number of true statements that he's made:

https://www.politifact.com/personalitie ... ling/true/

At least you're honest even if Trump and his detractors are not. Trump's a narcissist, lying, shallow jackass, but he's nowhere close to Hitler as I5 implied or even the most corrupt administration in history. Just the least connected and not very good at playing the game. Plenty of presidents have done what Trump has done and worse, but are much better at protecting themselves from any political fallout from their actions. Trump is small potatoes for nefarious activities of a truly corrupt and evil nature. A bunch of lying and attempts at political maneuvering isn't much when you've got questionable wars, arms sales to the Taliban and Iran, fueling international wars, regime change in foreign nations, and other such things Trump looks minor league to me.

Folks like hawktawk just aren't very up on their history or have a real moral disconnect on levels of corruption. Until I see a bunch of murders associated with Trump or questionable wars leading to a bunch of deaths, then Trump just looks like the biggest narcissistic lying loudmouth to over occupy The Oval Office who doesn't seem to understand how to play the game in Washington D.C.

[I-5]

No one said or implied Trump is Hitler, so until he begins genocide, that won't change.

[I-5]

Why is it not a fair question to ask you what was the last thing he said that was true? It should be as easy as looking up a report from today. He issues quotes everyday, regardless if you follow him or not.

That link you posted listed a whopping 14 true statements they've found since 2016. The same site also listed this:

https://www.politifact.com/personalitie ... ing/false/

[RiverDog]

Why is it not a fair question to ask you what was the last thing he said that was true? It should be as easy as looking up a report from today. He issues quotes everyday, regardless if you follow him or not.

That link you posted listed a whopping 14 true statements they've found since 2016. The same site also listed this:

https://www.politifact.com/personalitie ... ing/false/

You did say that "every" statement Trump makes is false, did you not?

I don't know where you're going with this. If you were debating some Trump boot licker, which I obviously am not, then I could understand your line of questioning. What difference does it make how many truthful statements vs. lies he makes? We both agree that he's a lying sack of manure.

[I-5]

The point as stated in the post is what kind of mental illness this president has, and the danger that poses to the office he is responsible for. He has demonstrated no hesitation to any kind of lying to protect or enrich himself, and it’s a wonder anyone anyone doesn’t see the inherent conflict of interest, even to people who openly admit they don’t trust a word he says without verification.

[RiverDog]

The point as stated in the post is what kind of mental illness this president has, and the danger that poses to the office he is responsible for. He has demonstrated no hesitation to any kind of lying to protect or enrich himself, and it’s a wonder anyone anyone doesn’t see the inherent conflict of interest, even to people who openly admit they don’t trust a word he says without verification.

Show me where you stated in the OP, or anywhere else in this thread, that the POTUS has a mental illness. Or is it your position that all compulsive and/or pathological liars are mentally ill? Heck, I didn't even say that he was a compulsive liar. All I did was answer a question you put to me about what kind of liar Trump is and I said is that he best fits that definition vs. the other option you gave. You made no mention of mental illness.

I am not a psychiatrist, and even if I were one, I'd need more information than just public statements or tweets to come to the conclusion that a person is or isn't mentally ill. It's a very subjective diagnosis. All I know is that Trump tells a lot mistruths and yes, in my opinion will lie his arse off to protect or enrich himself. He's not alone. Didn't Bill Clinton lie to protect himself? Where do you draw the line between a common liar and mental illness? One lie? Ten? And is every untruth a lie? How do you know that a false statement made by Trump isn't just a case of his having his head up his arse? IMO a lot of Trump's misstatements are due to his being lazy and/or stupid, not willing to do what it takes get himself up to speed on a subject, and as a result, is woefully uninformed and unprepared. It's very possible that he thinks he's telling the truth, in which case it's not a lie.

A lot of people lie, and do so frequently. Ever heard the joke about how you can tell when a lawyer is lying? Their lips move.

I was wondering where you were leading me in this odd line of questioning. Now I know.

[Hawktawk]

Trump's a narcissist, lying, shallow jackass, but he's nowhere close to Hitler as I5 implied or even the most corrupt administration in history. Just the least connected and not very good at playing the game. Plenty of presidents have done what Trump has done and worse, but are much better at protecting themselves from any political fallout from their actions. Trump is small potatoes for nefarious activities of a truly corrupt and evil nature. A bunch of lying and attempts at political maneuvering isn't much when you've got questionable wars, arms sales to the Taliban and Iran, fueling international wars, regime change in foreign nations, and other such things Trump looks minor league to me.

Folks like hawktawk just aren't very up on their history or have a real moral disconnect on levels of corruption. Until I see a bunch of murders associated with Trump or questionable wars leading to a bunch of deaths, then Trump just looks like the biggest narcissistic lying loudmouth to over occupy The Oval Office who doesn't seem to understand how to play the game in Washington D.C.

Listen Asea you dont have to agree with me but its tiresome and insulting to be constantly told I'm not up on my history or have a moral disconnect on corruption OK?

Im a 60 year old guy who grew up with watergate which I noticed you recently omitted from your list of scandals. So maybe its you whose knowledge of history is skewed as it is the closest example of what's going on now except the base doesnt give a F#K and the Rs in the house and senate have no integrity or true love of country.I have followed politics and political scandals, wars etc for 45 years and i dont need a lecture about my knowledge of history from you.

I say history and where specific persons and events fit on a scale of worst to first is purely subjective depending on whose moral compass is where on what's worse. I say if you think some misguided foreign adventure militarily or ill fated covert operation done for the right reason to help american interests is worse than a president who has abused his office in a treasonous and absolutely self serving way enlisting foreign governments
to win election to the office and line his pockets ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS its your moral compass that's totally screwed up. This is the most corrupt administration in terms of graft and political self dealing in my lifetime, not close.

If he slips this noose and he likely will our separation of powers and integrity of our presidential elections is in the toilet. That matters to me as a patriotic american who is willing to put my country over my lifelong party.

If you think a remorseless pathological liar destroying our military alliances one tweet at a time, coddling dictators, investigating and intimidating our FBI, bullying the justice department abandoning the Kurds while coddling our enemies is not very dangerous you're just ignorant of reality. His loudmouthed prickness is the least of what makes him the worst most dangerous destructive president in the history of the country IMO.

[RiverDog]

Listen Asea you dont have to agree with me but its tiresome and insulting to be constantly told I'm not up on my history or have a moral disconnect on corruption OK?

Im a 60 year old guy who grew up with watergate which I noticed you recently omitted from your list of scandals.

Although I'm not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with ASF's comments, but I think the reason why he left Watergate out of his list of scandals is that it didn't result in any undeclared wars or deaths of others. Watergate was exclusively a political scandal, much like Trump's Ukraine scandal.

Barring joining some sort of revolution, there isn't much you, me, or Joe 6 pack can do about Donald Trump, so there's no sense getting as up in arms as you and many others seem to be over him. It's not a matter of me not having a moral compass or not giving a rip as you often describe others that don't share the same passion in what more times than not are similar appraisals as you have, it's a matter of recognizing a reality and having the peace of mind to live with it. The prayer "God grant me the Courage to change the things that I can, the Serenity to accept the things I cannot change, and the Wisdom to know the difference between the two" is my favorite and highly appropriate in this situation as we debate the issues before us.

It's this excessive passion, on both sides of the political spectrum, that concerns me most about where our country is at this time.

[I-5]

Riv, everyone lies, including you, me, politicians, and presidents. Lying by itself wasn't my point. However, I've not seen a president since this one who willing to give up or compromise national security to benefit PERSONALLY. If you can document other presidents doing it, I welcome it.

[RiverDog]

Riv, everyone lies, including you, me, politicians, and presidents. Lying by itself wasn't my point. However, I've not seen a president since this one who willing to give up or compromise national security to benefit PERSONALLY. If you can document other presidents doing it, I welcome it.

That wasn't how I interpreted what you were driving at regarding untruthfulness. It seemed to me like you were trying to lead me down a path where the unescapable conclusion was that Trump suffers from some sort of mental illness.

As far as how much Trump has compromised national security for his own personal benefit, I'm not sure that I agree. Yes, Trump was trying to shake down the President of Ukraine for his own personal benefit and IMO represents a significant abuse of power, but I don't see how his actions compromises national security.

And so long as we're talking about actions that compromises national security, it can be argued that the impeachment process poses a significant threat to our security if our adversaries are convinced that the authority of our commander-in-chief is compromised. Such was the case during Watergate.

[c_hawkbob]

As far as how much Trump has compromised national security for his own personal benefit, I'm not sure that I agree. Yes, Trump was trying to shake down the President of Ukraine for his own personal benefit and IMO represents a significant abuse of power, but I don't see how his actions compromises national security.

As reasonable as you usually seem this is where you sure seem to be viewing Trump though capitol R goggles ... I just don't see how you can continue to view him and the way he handles virtually everything as a zero sum proposition.

[RiverDog]

As far as how much Trump has compromised national security for his own personal benefit, I'm not sure that I agree. Yes, Trump was trying to shake down the President of Ukraine for his own personal benefit and IMO represents a significant abuse of power, but I don't see how his actions compromises national security.

As reasonable as you usually seem this is where you sure seem to be viewing Trump though capitol R goggles ... I just don't see how you can continue to view him and the way he handles virtually everything as a zero sum proposition.

Then spell it out for me: Exactly where and how has this Ukrainian scandal jeopardized national security?

[Hawktawk]

As reasonable as you usually seem this is where you sure seem to be viewing Trump though capitol R goggles ... I just don't see how you can continue to view him and the way he handles virtually everything as a zero sum proposition.

Then spell it out for me: Exactly where and how has this Ukrainian scandal jeopardized national security?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... s-me-sick/

This is one of the many ways it jeopardizes out national security.

Most military and intelligence people along with at least until very recently the R congress saw Ukraine as the tip of the spear against Russian aggression. The acts of Trump left Ukrainian citizen and military warriors without critical weapons for 2 months after the aid had already been approved by the congress and also cleared for immediate release by the pentagon following a review of Ukraines corruption fighting efforts. This lays waste to the bobble head Rs in congress claiming this was about fighting corruption. This was encouraging corruption.

The Ukraine invasion by Russia has swallowed up a large swath of their territory and cost 14 thousand Ukrainians their lives.The presidents acts have weakened this young Ukrainian patriot considered the most promising man of integrity to come along in quite a while.The Ukrainian leader Zelenski, a brave wise young man who resisted these political overtures has still not been granted a WH visit even though Sergei Lavrov, Russian foreign minister was just yesterday treated to his second oval office meeting.The WH issued a statement saying Trump had warned Russia about interference in 2020. Lavrov respond it "had not come up". I wonder what the transcript of the meeting really looks like The president's statements such as saying he doesn't give a F#K about Ukraine, just the investigations of the Bidens along with his many pacifying actions sends a clear message to Putin he's still in his pocket.He even forbade Pence from attending Zelinskis inauguration.

Its really just a continuation of the modus operandi from day one of this campaign. How any red blooded American, especially a Republican doesn't see this as a mortal threat to our existence will always mystify me. I know Reagan is rolling over in his grave.

[RiverDog]

Then spell it out for me: Exactly where and how has this Ukrainian scandal jeopardized national security?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/04/republicans-have-become-party-russia-this-makes-me-sick/

This is one of the many ways it jeopardizes out national security.

Most military and intelligence people along with at least until very recently the R congress saw Ukraine as the tip of the spear against Russian aggression. The acts of Trump left Ukrainian citizen and military warriors without critical weapons for 2 months after the aid had already been approved by the congress and also cleared for immediate release by the pentagon following a review of Ukraines corruption fighting efforts. This lays waste to the bobble head Rs in congress claiming this was about fighting corruption. This was encouraging corruption.

The Ukraine invasion by Russia has swallowed up a large swath of their territory and cost 14 thousand Ukrainians their lives.The presidents acts have weakened this young Ukrainian patriot considered the most promising man of integrity to come along in quite a while.The Ukrainian leader Zelenski, a brave wise young man who resisted these political overtures has still not been granted a WH visit even though Sergei Lavrov, Russian foreign minister was just yesterday treated to his second oval office meeting.The WH issued a statement saying Trump had warned Russia about interference in 2020. Lavrov respond it "had not come up". I wonder what the transcript of the meeting really looks like The president's statements such as saying he doesn't give a F#K about Ukraine, just the investigations of the Bidens along with his many pacifying actions sends a clear message to Putin he's still in his pocket.He even forbade Pence from attending Zelinskis inauguration.

Its really just a continuation of the modus operandi from day one of this campaign. How any red blooded American, especially a Republican doesn't see this as a mortal threat to our existence will always mystify me. I know Reagan is rolling over in his grave.

First off, referencing an op-ed out of the Washington Post is akin to quoting Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh.

Secondly, you're talking international politics of which the consequences to our security are highly debatable just like the scores of other conflicts that have occurred over the past 70 years. Unless you want to return to arguing the domino theory as was the philosophy back in the 50's and 60's, not a lot of what occurs in Ukraine or Syria is what I would consider a direct threat to our national security.

[I-5]

Riv, are you suggesting that national security is limited to our borders? I think we learned this lesson 80 years ago.

"During and after World War II, US leaders expanded the concept of national security and used its terminology for the first time to explain America’s relationship to the world. For most of US history, the physical security of the continental United States had not been in jeopardy. But by 1945, this invulnerability was rapidly diminishing with the advent of long-range bombers, atom bombs, and ballistic missiles. A general perception grew that the future would not allow time to mobilize, that preparation would have to become constant. For the first time, American leaders would have to deal with the essential paradox of national security faced by the Roman Empire and subsequent great powers: Si vis pacem, para bellum — If you want peace, prepare for war."

(David Jablonsky)

[RiverDog]

Riv, are you suggesting that national security is limited to our borders? I think we learned this lesson 80 years ago.

No, of course not. What I am suggesting is that not every 3rd world country's problems, ie Vietnam, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Syria, Ukraine, at al, represents a direct threat to our national security. I'm not arguing that we completely ignore those problem areas, but I don't see it as demanding a bunch of our resources.

[I-5]

For a very thoughtful person which I think of you (despite any disagreements we may have), I notice you throw terms around that are less than accurate. Ukraine has never been defined as one of the third world countries (yes, the other countries you named are third world). They are solidly part of the second tier of developed nations, and DEFINTELY a strategic ally of the west when it comes to Russia. I know you know that.

[c_hawkbob]

An the withholding of military aid to Ukraine, who are in an active military conflict with Russia (still arguably the greatest threat to our way of life), played to the benefit of Russia. The dots very easily connect to the withholding of aid being done to personally benefit Trump impacting our national security.

[RiverDog]

For a very thoughtful person which I think of you (despite any disagreements we may have), I notice you throw terms around that are less than accurate. Ukraine has never been defined as one of the third world countries (yes, the other countries you named are third world). They are solidly part of the second tier of developed nations, and DEFINTELY a strategic ally of the west when it comes to Russia. I know you know that.

OK, I'll grant you that Ukraine should not have been grouped in with the aforementioned countries regarding the 3rd world, and yes, they are a strategic ally with regard to Russia. But I stand my contention that they are not a direct threat to our security.

[Aseahawkfan]

OK, I'll grant you that Ukraine should not have been grouped in with the aforementioned countries regarding the 3rd world, and yes, they are a strategic ally with regard to Russia. But I stand my contention that they are not a direct threat to our security.

The only reason we even think about Ukraine is because of Russia's connection to them and their location bordering Russia as a pipeline to European trade. Europe should be dealing with Russia themselves, but those clowns care less about doing the "right"thing than we do. Yet no one says anything about that fact of European foreign policy. That they don't stand up to Russia and don't care about the Ukraine.

Now I5 is telling you that Ukraine is a concern of ours? Why? Russia is thousands of miles away. No immediate threat to us. We mostly involve ourselves with Ukraine because Europe is no longer capable of taking care of their backyard. So we're footing the bill in money and manpower. Something clueless Americans don't want to admit while they go, "I want to be like Europe or Canada." A bunch of nations no one fears or cares about on a national scale that Russia and China would back down from any conflict easily and has no real respect for.

I keep wondering why Germany is still buying so much oil from Russia while they pretend they care what they're doing in Ukraine. I don't hear a damn thing from so called educated posters like I5 and Hawktawk talking about Germany and European trade with Russia and their total lack of concern about the Ukraine other than token statements disagreeing. Yet America's concerned about Russian election interference? What a bunch of lying BS.

Why aren't more Americans educated on what's really happening rather than the media driven lies we tell Americans that keep them believing this BS.

[I-5]

No matter How much ASF tries to speak for me - from Hitler to owning other countries - he doesnt speak for me at all. Keep wasting your breath.

[I-5]

Speaking of national security, the White House is further limiting the number of people who will listen in on the President's calls.

"Now, when the President speaks on the phone with world leaders, he's joined on the call by just a handful of others appointed by Trump to the highest level of the administration, multiple White House officials say. The list is signed off on by national security adviser Robert O'Brien, who will often join the call himself along with a rotating roster of officials including his deputy Matt Pottinger, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and his deputy Rob Blair."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/white-house-further-limits-officials-on-trumps-foreign-leader-calls/ar-AAK6mUk

Are you ok with this, Riv? Do you trust O'Brien is the sole line of nat'l security against an unhinged president who's willing to say/do anything that he sees fit if it somehow benefits him personally? Do you trust Pompeo, Mulvaney and Blair as caring more about country than what their boss says?

[RiverDog]

Speaking of national security, the White House is further limiting the number of people who will listen in on the President's calls.

"Now, when the President speaks on the phone with world leaders, he's joined on the call by just a handful of others appointed by Trump to the highest level of the administration, multiple White House officials say. The list is signed off on by national security adviser Robert O'Brien, who will often join the call himself along with a rotating roster of officials including his deputy Matt Pottinger, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and his deputy Rob Blair."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/white-house-further-limits-officials-on-trumps-foreign-leader-calls/ar-AAK6mUk

Are you ok with this, Riv? Do you trust O'Brien is the sole line of nat'l security against an unhinged president who's willing to say/do anything that he sees fit if it somehow benefits him personally? Do you trust Pompeo, Mulvaney and Blair as caring more about country than what their boss says?

Well, I don't trust Trump, period, as there's no telling what he might say to another foreign leader, but I guess it's his prerogative to have who ever he wants listening in on his phone calls. I'm not worried that he's going to say or do something that's going to lead to a war or cause our economy to collapse.

[I-5]

I find that extremely difficult to believe. So you’d be comfortable with Trump having a zero access call or meeting (which he did in Finland) with the leader of our biggest adversary with no witnesses? Its possible if not likely that Putin holds some type if leverage on our dear leader, and that gives you no pause if they meet alone? I’m wondering where you would draw the line at Presidential behavior and lack of transparency. Since only congress has the official capacity to declare war, is there even any danger a president can get us into, now that we see how this one has started trade wars, insulted allies, embraced dictators, labelled the press the enemy of the people, lied about his affairs, violated the emollients rule, attempted to bribe a foreign gov’t with public funds, obstructed investigations against him...what would he need to do to Cross a line?

[RiverDog]

I find that extremely difficult to believe. So you’d be comfortable with Trump having a zero access call or meeting (which he did in Finland) with the leader of our biggest adversary with no witnesses? Its possible if not likely that Putin holds some type if leverage on our dear leader, and that gives you no pause if they meet alone?

I never said I was comfortable. All I said was that I doubt that he'd say something that would get us into a war or cause the economy to collapse.

I'll harken back to my favorite prayer: "God grant me the Courage to change the things that I can, the Serenity to accept the things that I can't change, and the Wisdom to tell the difference between the two."

What you are asking is clearly something that I can't change so there's no sense in my losing sleep over it. But to say that I'm comfortable with anything Trump says or does is completely inaccurate.

[I-5]

If we restrict ourselves to commenting on things we have control over, we'd have a very short conversation. That's a pretty high bar for damage, anything short of war or economic collapse, you don't have a problem with a private 1-on-1 conversation he has with our adversary?

[RiverDog]

If we restrict ourselves to commenting on things we have control over, we'd have a very short conversation. That's a pretty high bar for damage, anything short of war or economic collapse, you don't have a problem with a private 1-on-1 conversation he has with our adversary?

Who said anything about not commenting? It's fine to comment and I'm anxious to hear your take, but it seems that by your repeated summations of my comments by saying things like "so you're comfortable with" or "you don't have a problem", terminology that I did not use and that are not an accurate description of my sentiments, that you're trying to convince me that your POV is the correct version and that I should immediately adapt to your way of thinking. What I've been trying to tell you, that you don't seem to want to accept, is that my anxiety level over DJT is apparently not as high as yours is and certainly not as high as it is with my good friend Hawktalk. So be it.

Once again, here's my take: I did not vote for, and will never vote for, DJT. I have major issues with both his personal characteristics as well as several of his policies (mostly immigration and trade). I do not feel that he is a good leader nor a good representative of our interests as a nation. However, I do not feel that he is going to inflict irreparable harm on our country, that we're much stronger and more resilient than some people give us credit for, that we've weathered worse situations before and came out just fine.

If you feel otherwise, then that's fine with me, you're entitled to your opinion. But please, try telling me how you feel and why rather than summarizing my comments and adding terms that are not of my choosing.

[I-5]

However, I do not feel that he is going to inflict irreparable harm on our country, that we're much stronger and more resilient than some people give us credit for, that we've weathered worse situations before and came out just fine.

This is the only part where we disagree, and I didn’t mean to belittle your opinions, so my apologies if it seemed that way. I’m just a bit incredulous in the ability to see no lasting damage. We’ll find out with the next WH what kind of damage we’ll be left. I think it seems clear and obvious that this president has ignored and violated so many standards of which I’ve listed many, that I don’t think it’s possible to ever go backwards again. Can you imagine another president labelling the press the enemy of the people? That’s pure Lenin, and it’s now part of our history. For all of our sakes, I hope you are right and I am wrong on this.

[RiverDog]

This is the only part where we disagree, and I didn’t mean to belittle your opinions, so my apologies if it seemed that way. I’m just a bit incredulous in the ability to see no lasting damage. We’ll find out with the next WH what kind of damage we’ll be left. I think it seems clear and obvious that this president has ignored and violated so many standards of which I’ve listed many, that I don’t think it’s possible to ever go backwards again. Can you imagine another president labelling the press the enemy of the people? That’s pure Lenin, and it’s now part of our history. For all of our sakes, I hope you are right and I am wrong on this.

No need to apologize, but it is appreciated. You're one of the more well mannered posters in the forum and I enjoy debating you. I was just getting frustrated with having my opinion mischaracterized. To say that I'm comfortable with anything Donald Trump does is to say that I'm comfortable with my hemorrhoids. I've just learned to live with it.

One thing that I think we all can agree on is that after nearly 3 years of the Trump presidency that we have yet to see any long term damage to any of our institutions. Granted, it may take some time for that damage, if it exists, to show itself, but as it stands now, there is no conclusive evidence that he's screwed something up so badly that we can't recover from it. We still have peace and prosperity.

Boy, it will sure be nice to get rid of that sack of manure. I'm crossing my fingers that the Dems will advance someone that can knock him off. He's a complete embarrassment, and that's coming from a guy that prior to 2018 had never voted for a Dem for national office since I started voting in 1972.