https://www.thedailybeast.com/white-house-official-floated-withdrawing-us-forces-to-please-putin
A member of Trump’s National Security Council staff had a radical notion: to pare back American troops in Europe as a way to curry favor with the Kremlin.
SPENCER ACKERMAN
01.09.18 7:00 PM ET
A senior National Security Council official proposed withdrawing some U.S. military forces from Eastern Europe as an overture to Vladimir Putin during the early days of the Trump presidency, according to two former administration officials.
While the proposal was ultimately not adopted, it is the first known case of senior aides to Donald Trump seeking to reposition U.S. military forces to please Putin—something that smelled, to a colleague, like a return on Russia’s election-time investment in President Trump. The White House did not immediately respond to The Daily Beast’s request for comment.
The official who offered the proposal, a deputy assistant to Trump for strategic planning, mused in February 2017 about withdrawing U.S. troops close to Russian borders as part of a strategy proposal to “refram[e] our interests within the context of a new relationship with Russia,” the former official told The Daily Beast, who heard this directly from the official, Kevin Harrington.
Harrington is the NSC’s senior official for strategic planning. He had neither military experience nor significant government experience before joining the White House. But he had an influential credential: As a managing director for the Thiel Macro hedge fund, he was close to Trump patron and ally Peter Thiel. Trump’s first national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, announced Harrington’s arrival in early February as part of a “talented group” ready to bring “fresh ideas to the table.”
==============================================================================================
Collusion? What collusion? Blackmail? What blackmail? Why was the Trump NSC looking at ways to please Putin as soon as they moved in?
https://www.thedailybeast.com/white-house-official-floated-withdrawing-us-forces-to-please-putin
A member of Trump’s National Security Council staff had a radical notion: to pare back American troops in Europe as a way to curry favor with the Kremlin.
SPENCER ACKERMAN
01.09.18 7:00 PM ET
A senior National Security Council official proposed withdrawing some U.S. military forces from Eastern Europe as an overture to Vladimir Putin during the early days of the Trump presidency, according to two former administration officials.
While the proposal was ultimately not adopted, it is the first known case of senior aides to Donald Trump seeking to reposition U.S. military forces to please Putin—something that smelled, to a colleague, like a return on Russia’s election-time investment in President Trump. The White House did not immediately respond to The Daily Beast’s request for comment.
The official who offered the proposal, a deputy assistant to Trump for strategic planning, mused in February 2017 about withdrawing U.S. troops close to Russian borders as part of a strategy proposal to “refram[e] our interests within the context of a new relationship with Russia,” the former official told The Daily Beast, who heard this directly from the official, Kevin Harrington.
Harrington is the NSC’s senior official for strategic planning. He had neither military experience nor significant government experience before joining the White House. But he had an influential credential: As a managing director for the Thiel Macro hedge fund, he was close to Trump patron and ally Peter Thiel. Trump’s first national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, announced Harrington’s arrival in early February as part of a “talented group” ready to bring “fresh ideas to the table.”
==============================================================================================
Collusion? What collusion? Blackmail? What blackmail? Why was the Trump NSC looking at ways to please Putin as soon as they moved in?
A very extensive, informative (and truly frightening) article. I hope someone sics Mueller on this Harrison guy.
Few problems.
1: Assuming there is truth to this: Someone proposes something which is dismissed by pretty much everyone and this feeds into your fear somehow? Why?
2: Just un-named sources...again. Nothing to back up what those "sources" said. I have no problem with un-named sources....so long as those un-named sources bring proof with them. You know, like what happened with Nixon?
3: It's the Daily Beast. They're about as dependable as CNN or Fox. Which is to say...they're not dependable at all.
The Trump Fanboyz predictably refuse to accept the report.
I accept it.
Putin owns Trump.
Understanding that 42% of the women who voted voted Trump.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/white-house-official-floated-withdrawing-us-forces-to-please-putin
A member of Trump’s National Security Council staff had a radical notion: to pare back American troops in Europe as a way to curry favor with the Kremlin.
SPENCER ACKERMAN
01.09.18 7:00 PM ET
A senior National Security Council official proposed withdrawing some U.S. military forces from Eastern Europe as an overture to Vladimir Putin during the early days of the Trump presidency, according to two former administration officials.
While the proposal was ultimately not adopted, it is the first known case of senior aides to Donald Trump seeking to reposition U.S. military forces to please Putin—something that smelled, to a colleague, like a return on Russia’s election-time investment in President Trump. The White House did not immediately respond to The Daily Beast’s request for comment.
The official who offered the proposal, a deputy assistant to Trump for strategic planning, mused in February 2017 about withdrawing U.S. troops close to Russian borders as part of a strategy proposal to “refram[e] our interests within the context of a new relationship with Russia,” the former official told The Daily Beast, who heard this directly from the official, Kevin Harrington.
Harrington is the NSC’s senior official for strategic planning. He had neither military experience nor significant government experience before joining the White House. But he had an influential credential: As a managing director for the Thiel Macro hedge fund, he was close to Trump patron and ally Peter Thiel. Trump’s first national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, announced Harrington’s arrival in early February as part of a “talented group” ready to bring “fresh ideas to the table.”
==============================================================================================
Collusion? What collusion? Blackmail? What blackmail? Why was the Trump NSC looking at ways to please Putin as soon as they moved in?
Few problems.
1: Assuming there is truth to this: Someone proposes something which is dismissed by pretty much everyone and this feeds into your fear somehow? Why?
2: Just un-named sources...again. Nothing to back up what those "sources" said. I have no problem with un-named sources....so long as those un-named sources bring proof with them. You know, like what happened with Nixon?
3: It's the Daily Beast. They're about as dependable as CNN or Fox. Which is to say...they're not dependable at all.
I think we are all pretty much done with the whole abuse of un-named sources at this point.
I know I am.
A very extensive, informative (and truly frightening) article. I hope someone sics Mueller on this Harrison guy.
A very extensive, informative (and truly frightening) article. I hope someone sics Mueller on this Harrison guy.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/white-house-official-floated-withdrawing-us-forces-to-please-putin
A member of Trump’s National Security Council staff had a radical notion: to pare back American troops in Europe as a way to curry favor with the Kremlin.
SPENCER ACKERMAN
01.09.18 7:00 PM ET
A senior National Security Council official proposed withdrawing some U.S. military forces from Eastern Europe as an overture to Vladimir Putin during the early days of the Trump presidency, according to two former administration officials.
While the proposal was ultimately not adopted, it is the first known case of senior aides to Donald Trump seeking to reposition U.S. military forces to please Putin—something that smelled, to a colleague, like a return on Russia’s election-time investment in President Trump. The White House did not immediately respond to The Daily Beast’s request for comment.
The official who offered the proposal, a deputy assistant to Trump for strategic planning, mused in February 2017 about withdrawing U.S. troops close to Russian borders as part of a strategy proposal to “refram[e] our interests within the context of a new relationship with Russia,” the former official told The Daily Beast, who heard this directly from the official, Kevin Harrington.
Harrington is the NSC’s senior official for strategic planning. He had neither military experience nor significant government experience before joining the White House. But he had an influential credential: As a managing director for the Thiel Macro hedge fund, he was close to Trump patron and ally Peter Thiel. Trump’s first national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, announced Harrington’s arrival in early February as part of a “talented group” ready to bring “fresh ideas to the table.”
==============================================================================================
Collusion? What collusion? Blackmail? What blackmail? Why was the Trump NSC looking at ways to please Putin as soon as they moved in?
The Trump Fanboyz predictably refuse to accept the report.
I accept it.
Putin owns Trump.
So let me ask this.
What is so wrong with trying to curry favor with one of the worlds largest nuclear powers?
Russia needs to be doing that now with the United States instead of attacking our elections while Putin mucks up his neighbor Ukraine and menaces Nato.
American Conservatives have for many years wanted the USA to be more like Putin's Russia than the other way around. Trump is your Deliverance. Courtesy of Putin.
Seeing as you haven't supplied any evidence for any of this and your post are actually never meant to be taken seriously. I find very little reason for actually responding in general. Because, if you haven't noticed?
America started becoming more of a fascist system, under democratic rule.
Four fragments = A fragmented post thx.
Donald Trump and his base of voters and supporters are nationalists first and foremost. They oppose the liberal international network of nation states. Their nationalism is thereby extreme. The extreme is destructive.
Trump's social views and the cultural views of the Trump base are conservative. At their extreme -- as in MAGA -- they are reactionary. This is further explained and understood by the reality the USA and its liberal democracy are already great and that Trump and his base are degrading it.
Nationalism in the extreme does welcome a strongman leader, hence the natural bond between Trump and Putin. This is to the exclusion of all other factors that might otherwise apply. The single overriding bond includes of course the supporters of each strongman. Which also helps to state and comprehend how American Conservatives have for years wanted the USA to be more like Putin's Russia than the other way around.
In contrast, fascism arises from any system and form of government, to include monarchy, theocracy, republicanism, autocracy, oligarchy and same or similar forms of rule. Fascism in Europe rose from the post WW I ashes of the monarchies destroyed by the war. It also manifested in fledging illiberal democracies in the various war ravaged and unstable countries.
The rise of fascism since its modern ideological origins post 1850 runs counter to republican liberal democracy. The two are not complementary and one does not necessarily give rise to the other. Further, it is yet to be proved that fascism can derive or arise in, or from, liberal democracy. This applies to liberal democracy as it is known in virtually all constitutional systems (monarchy, republican etc). Anyone trying to argue to the contrary would need to produce a pattern; any such pattern would need to be conclusive. Youse over there cannot accomplish this goal or purpose. It is impossible or prohibitively unlikely fascism could occur in the USA. To cite but one prohibitive factor, the institutions of the USA are too strong, deeply rooted, respected; broadly, deeply, comprehensively.
Four fragments = A fragmented post thx.
Donald Trump and his base of voters and supporters are nationalists first and foremost. They oppose the liberal international network of nation states. Their nationalism is thereby extreme. The extreme is destructive.
Trump's social views and the cultural views of the Trump base are conservative. At their extreme -- as in MAGA -- they are reactionary. This is further explained and understood by the reality the USA and its liberal democracy are already great and that Trump and his base are degrading it.
Nationalism in the extreme does welcome a strongman leader, hence the natural bond between Trump and Putin. This is to the exclusion of all other factors that might otherwise apply. The single overriding bond includes of course the supporters of each strongman. Which also helps to state and comprehend how American Conservatives have for years wanted the USA to be more like Putin's Russia than the other way around.
In contrast, fascism arises from any system and form of government, to include monarchy, theocracy, republicanism, autocracy, oligarchy and same or similar forms of rule. Fascism in Europe rose from the post WW I ashes of the monarchies destroyed by the war. It also manifested in fledging illiberal democracies in the various war ravaged and unstable countries.
The rise of fascism since its modern ideological origins post 1850 runs counter to republican liberal democracy. The two are not complementary and one does not necessarily give rise to the other. Further, it is yet to be proved that fascism can derive or arise in, or from, liberal democracy. This applies to liberal democracy as it is known in virtually all constitutional systems (monarchy, republican etc). Anyone trying to argue to the contrary would need to produce a pattern; any such pattern would need to be conclusive. Youse over there cannot accomplish this goal or purpose. It is impossible or prohibitively unlikely fascism could occur in the USA. To cite but one prohibitive factor, the institutions of the USA are too strong, deeply rooted, respected; broadly, deeply, comprehensively.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?