When people looked back at the people who carried out the 9/11 attacks, it became obvious that we had missed opportunities to disrupt the plot. A couple of the hijackers had been under surveillance both abroad and here in the San Diego area. But the CIA and the FBI didn’t do a good enough job coordinating what they knew and the al-Qaeda members were able to slip off the grid and move around without their communications being monitored. After the fact, it was a reasonable question to ask why our intelligence agencies hadn’t done a better job.
Similarly, even members of the Obama administration are kicking themselves for not doing a better job of preventing the Russians from influencing the last election. But the thing is, at least they aren’t denying that the attack happened at all. They’re not making some half-ass excuse that maybe it wasn’t the Russians after all but some 400 lb. guy on his couch in New Jersey.
This is why Donald Trump has no standing to make the following charge:
Just out: The Obama Administration knew far in advance of November 8th about election meddling by Russia. Did nothing about it. WHY?
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 24, 2017
Trump’s taunt is the equivalent of asking someone why they allowed themselves to get sucker punched. Except, Trump has spent almost a year now denying that the sucker punch came from Russia.
And I want you all to think about this for a few minutes. Trump has been getting intelligence briefings ever since he accepted the Republican Party’s presidential nomination. Those briefings, many of which he turned down, became more detailed after he became president-elect. And he certainly has access to any information he wants now that he’s the president. He long ago should have been aware of what the rest of us have only just learned from the Washington Post:
Early last August, an envelope with extraordinary handling restrictions arrived at the White House. Sent by courier from the CIA, it carried “eyes only” instructions that its contents be shown to just four people: President Barack Obama and three senior aides.
Inside was an intelligence bombshell, a report drawn from sourcing deep inside the Russian government that detailed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s direct involvement in a cyber campaign to disrupt and discredit the U.S. presidential race.
But it went further. The intelligence captured Putin’s specific instructions on the operation’s audacious objectives — defeat or at least damage the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, and help elect her opponent, Donald Trump.
This was admittedly information that was tightly held. It wasn’t included in the Presidential Daily Briefing because that was considered too insecure. Certainly Trump should have been read into it, though, no later than the January 6th meeting at Trump Tower when the heads of our intelligence services briefed Trump on the basis for their unanimous conclusion that Russia was behind the hacks and that they had been seeking to damage Clinton and prevent her election. And, in fact, it was after that January 6th meeting when Trump first reluctantly conceded that the Russians were responsible.
That hasn’t prevented him backtracking repeatedly in the last six months. So, we have to ask why he’s still disputing something that he knows is backed up not only by the unanimous opinion of his own intelligence services but by “sourcing deep inside the Russian government.”
The question that Trump asks (“Why didn’t the Obama administration do anything about it?”) is misleading because they actually did respond to the information and take steps to protect the integrity of the election. A more proper question would be “Why didn’t they do more?”
But even if you ask the fairer question, which many Obama administration veterans are also asking, it presumes that they’d identified the proper perpetrator. Trump didn’t ask about meddling from China or Paraguay.
After 9/11, there were some who doubted the official story, and certainly there was a more widespread feeling that some serious butt-covering was preventing the public from getting the entire story. Lots of people disagreed with how we decided to respond. But, overall, the fact that al-Qaeda had carried out the attacks wasn’t much disputed, and not at all by people in a position of responsibility.
Trump is reacting to the Russian story much differently. Far from acknowledging (at least consistently) that the Russians were involved, it’s as if he’s denying that the World Trade Center has collapsed. Or, if it has collapsed, he’s denying that anything needs to be done about it. And if anyone wants anything done about it, he’s taking that as an effort to discredit him personally. It’s all fake news and a hoax concocted by his political enemies to make him look bad.
Just try to imagine if instead of taking up his bullhorn of the rubble of the Twin Towers, President Bush had doubted for months that they had actually been destroyed. Imagine if every time someone asked him to respond to prevent a repeat attack, he had accused his critics of having a vendetta against him. Imagine if he had not only resisted an investigation (as Bush also did) but actually fired the head of the FBI for investigating.
Of course, unlike Trump during last year’s campaign, President Bush had direct responsibility for protecting the country on 9/11, so he had more right to be defensive about what happened. He did experience an immediate political reward for his failure as the country rallied together and behind his unsteady leadership. But he didn’t take the excuse that a few people were accusing him of letting the attacks happen on purpose to deny that the attacks had occurred at all or to avoid taking any measure to protect the country against similar attacks in the future.
I think Bush’s overall response to 9/11 was a disaster, but he also took reasonable precautions that any sane president would have taken. People had a right to demand that he do so.
What we have with Trump is a refusal to even ask a question about how to take reasonable precautions to prevent a repeat attack on our electoral system. So, here he is, asking why the Obama administration didn’t do anything to prevent the attack when that’s precisely what he’s doing (or not doing) right now.
And maybe this difference between Bush and Trump can be explained by noting that we didn’t find that half the people working for Bush were in communications with Usama bin-Laden or his agents in the lead-up to 9/11.
Just a thought.
You write:
Why on earth would anyone with an ounce of brains think that?
You have written extensively about the idea that the real, effective opposition to Trump is mainly coming from the U.S. intelligence services. Why would they be forthcoming to Trump about any number of things!!!??? because “the law” says that they should? Please!!! They are in many respects above the law! That’s their job…to do whatever it takes to defend the U.S. against hostile forces, by any means necessary.
“The law” says that James Clapper was supposed to speak the truth to a Senate inquiry. He broke the law regarding surveillance measures, and he did not suffer any consequences whatsoever except for some weak bad press.
The IC obviously considers Trump a threat to…to itself, really. To its position as the real law. It may be right. Trump might be the biggest threat to the way the U.S. has worked for at least 50+ years. They are just doing their job as they see it.
Giving Trump information on their war against Trump?
Never happen.
Ridiculous on the face of it.
AG
Do you have any actual facts to back up your assertions? I know you are given to baseless claims, but it is getting tiresome. And a little pathetic.
Nah, it’s just another illustration of Shakespeare’s immortal words:
“…a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
I’m not a big fan of Gilroy, but he’s right on this.
Are you saying the intelligence community is conspiring to keep trump from accessing information?
Or is he in no position to find out about the information they have?
I have no doubt there are many in the intelligence community despise trump for a variety of reasons, and may choose personally to obstruct trump in any way possible. But i assume, correct me if i am wrong, that the US president has access to the information they have, if he chooses to do so. What “any information” means, or what limitations there are to his powers to access it, i would love to hear about, but “they hate him, and they are deceptive, so trump is powerless” doesnt seem all that informative.
I think boomans point was that he has access to the information, but chooses to ignore that information. Which given his situation and mental fortitude doesn’t seem all that surprising, since he seems to be consumed by suspicion and paranoia, with the caveat that its all a masterfully executed ruse ofcourse.
You write:
That is very…innocent…bazzz. The U.S. government resmbles the court of a monarch, with various and sundry scheming courtiers pushing and pulling for their own advantages. Not only is it almost certain that a great deal of information is withheld from the president, it is also fairly certain that he is given false information…or at the very least, seriously spun information…on a daily basis from every corner of the federal government. And he responds in turn.
PostFactual U.S.A.
If you think otherwise, you are as innocent as a 6th grader reading the myths of American history.
It’s rough out there. Politicians and bureaucrats are professional liars. The best of the best liars rise to the top in D.C., where they lie through their teeth for a living. When someone actually tells the truth and/or unveils the lies, he or she is labelled a “whistleblower,” and if their whistle is serious enough they are hounded to the ends of the earth.
Get real.
AG
Ofcourse you arthur, wouldnt offer any more insight than your paranoid ramblings do in general.
Whenever you are right, its about things i imagine everyone assumes already to be true, but you like to pretend noone knows about. I will call it arthursplaining from now.
Its nice that you enrich this forum with your opinion, but it would be nice if you once in a while read comments, took 2 seconds to check if how you are replying to is what was actually written.
So, if its the court of a monarch, and you have any insight in it, you have plenty of juicy stories to tell, that make other people understand how it works, right?
Its not merely a fantasy based on distrust and paranoia, is it?
You asked me to correct you if you were wrong.
I did.
AG
Like always you correct things that arent said, instead you attack your own interpretation of what was said.And is that interpretation ever generous, or even remotely fair?
You must have excellent squinting muscles to see you “answer” as correcting me.
If you were interested in making an argument rather than asessments you would have told me what stops Trump from using his official channels to get “any information”
Or are you saying its a vast conspiracy, and trump cannot in any way find “any information” His position as president is merely a shadow on the wall. he has no channels to find out anything, he is hopelessly blind. And not out of incompetence, but because the IC has all the power to keep him from it?
The problem,Arthur ,is that you rarely explain anything at all. You keep repeating stuff, without any new insight. You rarely seem to manage to go beyond suggestion or speculation based on nebulous realities.
Usually i skip over your messages, i consider them spam. When someone reacts to them in a way that suggests you have something of substance i will read them. Priscianus jr suggested you were right, so i wondered what he thought was right about it. Instead you tell me anything i dont know already, and pretend that i am naive, because i dont agree with your conclusion.
But who am i kidding, you dont care about all that. I see you as angry and frustrated, and incapable of making a decent argument most of the time. But hey thats just me, right?
You write:
Yes.
That about sums up his position.
Except…
Competence or incompetence matter not. He is…rightfully, I believe…perceived as an enemy of the stolid middle by its secret police forces, and hey are going after him with everything that they have. Including witholding info.
Look at it this way…if the U.S. was a medium-sized corporation and the shareholders unexpectedly voted in a new CEO who wanted to completely revolutionize the corporate bureaucracy to attend to his own aims, do you think that said bureaucracy would not do all in its power to get him un-elected? If their jobs were on the line?
Like dat, only much, much bigger.
AG
P.S. Also:
It’s not “just” you, bazzz. You’re not alone.
But you are not correct, either.
AG
Not a bad comment at all, but again, no real insight.
I dont believe in a monolithic opposition to trump, even though he positioned himself as an enemy at every possibility. Whether its merely paranoia, or that its a concious decision to position himself as the victim, and martyr in case he cant avoid whats coming for him. There must be plenty of people sympathetic to trump in the massive IC, if he cant get the information he wants via official channels, via the court, political pressure he might find out through leaks. Obviously people will play games and manipulate, and trump isnt into the trusting game, he is the boss, everyone should do as he says, or be fired. But the US has a president, not a king, or almighty dictator, and every president can expect pushback from the forces that oppose him.
This seems all straight forward to me, and obvious.
Trumps behavior has forced opposition to him, ofcourse.
Where you lose me is the idea that the president, even if its trump, who seems incompetent of anything but being trump to me, has no way of finding out information.
I think he can tell people to do just that for him, and they have plenty of ways to get the information, whether its through his lawyers, through Sessions, congress, his continuous campaining or angry tweeting.
He probably has plenty of information, but his distrust and dislike of the realities that this information portrays makes him ignore it, its not something he can use.
It would be nice to hear an other reasoning though, from people who seem to suggest its impossible for trump to get the information he needs, that he pissed off the IC is clear, and that they wont make it easy for him too. I dont come to the same conclusion though.
Also, I am sure you are not saying how i feel is incorrect. If you mean to say that you are not angry and frustrated, and incapable of making a decent argument most of the time, i would be delighted to be proven incorrect.
You write:
You don’t, eh?
Do you ever look at Google News?
Headline ratios for more than a year have been about 20 to 1 against Trump.
Why do you think that has happened?
Are you not aware of the CIA’s infiltration of the major media services that started in the ’50s? Operation Mockingbird? If you are not, do some damned research.
The CIA is the covert arm of the forces that protect the worldwide dominance of U.S. corporate power…and now, in the time of international corporate dominance, the entire corporate world of the NATO powers. They do it by undermining governments and social movements abroad by any means necessary, and they do it here as well, using exactly the same tactics.
The population of he U.S. is now just another inconvenient bunch of third-world peons to them, to be manipulated in whatever direction helps the Corporate Empire.
Wake the fuck up.
AG
So it is a big conspiracy, and people who cant see the big conspiracy are stupid and blind.
Fuck you Arthur, if you cant manage to make a decent argument and someone calls you out you insult them instead. Its who you are.
And fuck you, noone has to accept your unsubstantiated beliefs. If you fail to make coherent arguments, its on you.
You might as well claim the illuminati, or the lizard people are running the show.
Sure there are things that we know, and things that we dont know. Your clains that you have some special insight in things we dont know, and thus anyone who dont agree with it is dumb and blind, could really need some work.
As it is it looks like a pile of garbage stuck together with duct tape.
Sure its big and scary, but it looks like it will fall apart with the slightest touch.
Is that why you try to scare anyone away who wants to take a closer look at what you are making?
Even if every claim you make is true, it doesnt answer the original one, that trump cant get to “any information”
Are you intentionally ignoring that, as there probably isnt an answer that doesnt involve conjecture?
You are allowed to believe whatever you want, you are a free thinker. But you like to tell people who dont see it your way that they are stupid, naive, blind, or whatever. Other people arent allowed to think freely? or are they too dumb to think freely? Is it ok if i see that as a form of bigotry? And can i state that its hypocritical of you?
But thats enough for this old thread, it was fun to get to learn to know you a bit better, maybe you learnt something too.
You rite:
<blckquote>So it is a big conspiracy, and people who cant see the big conspiracy are stupid and blind.
Ummmm…yes. That’s about it.
Right on the button.
Thank you.
AG
Here, AG, have some tuba playing.
Does this ‘here in the San Diego area’ mean you are in San Diego?
Let’s not forget that Republicans were briefed on that very packet.
Like Digby says….I feel sick.
So many willing to sell out their country. For cash, or policy gains, or on a small scale, attention on blogs, or because the have Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
.
Booman’s in Pennsylvania; I believe the “here in San Diego” refers to the preceding “abroad” — i.e., outside and inside the United States.
I thought maybe visiting.
.
The “What if?” gambit is dangerous. It’s dangerous to my mental health, actually.
What if Obama or Hillary Clinton had spent 30% of their terms in office playing golf or spending weekends at their privately owned resorts?
What if Obama had harped constantly on his election numbers? What if he bragged repeatedly about Inauguration ceremony attendances that were absurdly exaggerated?
What if any President ever in history had invited known enemies to the White House and had multiple contacts with them prior to and soon after their election?
What if any Democratic president had appointed such unqualified, horrific choices to his Cabinet? Or had left necessary appointments unfilled?
There is a “what if?” for every single decision made by Trump and his party of greed. I thought I was a pretty tough cookie. I lived through President Reagan and Bush, Jr. But this joke of a human being and atrocity of a president may be my undoing.
I feel you. This man as president is maddening.
If Trump were president on 911, other than whatever incidents that spring from his own idiosyncratic idiocies, history would have been the same: we would have still went into Afghanistan, we would have still attacked Iraq for the same half baked reasons, the economy would still have crashed in 2007. Does anyone think all of the decisions that informed these historical milestones were actually initiated by and were the brainchild of Bush? And Trump as we have seen is even more of an empty vessel, reliant on whatever voices on the right are ascendant to inform him.
Your thought experiment left out a critical detail: Not only would half of Bush’s people have been in touch with bin Laden or his surrogates, but they shared the same objective. Which Al Qaeda then carried out.
He won’t receive it, but before this is over I think we’ll find that Trump is eligible for the federal death penalty.
I think you mean “What If Trump HAD BEEN President on 9/11”. (Contrafactual protasis.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfactual_conditional