Oh, boy. The discourse in these Republican debates is being dragged down by Donald Trump. As he has done throughout the entire campaign, his behavior is so far from Presidential, it would be laughable if the media hadn’t already proclaimed him the nominee. Good grief.
And the debate moderators are willing accomplices to the Trump Chump Show as they continue to allow Trump to interrupt the others relentlessly, and demean themw ith insults. It is stunning to see the collusion to prop up this man who lies at every turn. He referred to Sen. Cruz as “Lying Ted” during the debate while lying about Trump University, calling Sen. Rubio, “Little Marco,” and talking about his man parts during a DEBATE. Are you KIDDING me with this?! HE is the front runner?? Wow.
While Trump continues his volley of personal attacks and dismisses any legitimate claim with lies, there are some very serious people in The GOP who are VERY concerned about the possibility of a Trump Presidency. Particularly, their concern is National Security. In fact, they are SO concerned about it, they wrote an Open Letter on this very issue (h/t Admiral James Stavridis who mentioned this letter on Fox and Fox Business Network recently). War On The Rocks has the letter:
We the undersigned, members of the Republican national security community, represent a broad spectrum of opinion on America’s role in the world and what is necessary to keep us safe and prosperous. We have disagreed with one another on many issues, including the Iraq war and intervention in Syria. But we are united in our opposition to a Donald Trump presidency. Recognizing as we do, the conditions in American politics that have contributed to his popularity, we nonetheless are obligated to state our core objections clearly:
His vision of American influence and power in the world is wildly inconsistent and unmoored in principle. He swings from isolationism to military adventurism within the space of one sentence.
His advocacy for aggressively waging trade wars is a recipe for economic disaster in a globally connected world.
His embrace of the expansive use of torture is inexcusable.
His hateful, anti-Muslim rhetoric undercuts the seriousness of combatting Islamic radicalism by alienating partners in the Islamic world making significant contributions to the effort. Furthermore, it endangers the safety and Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of American Muslims.
Controlling our border and preventing illegal immigration is a serious issue, but his insistence that Mexico will fund a wall on the southern border inflames unhelpful passions, and rests on an utter misreading of, and contempt for, our southern neighbor.
Similarly, his insistence that close allies such as Japan must pay vast sums for protection is the sentiment of a racketeer, not the leader of the alliances that have served us so well since World War II.
His admiration for foreign dictators such as Vladimir Putin is unacceptable for the leader of the world’s greatest democracy.
He is fundamentally dishonest. Evidence of this includes his attempts to deny positions he has unquestionably taken in the past, including on the 2003 Iraq war and the 2011 Libyan conflict. We accept that views evolve over time, but this is simply misrepresentation.
His equation of business acumen with foreign policy experience is false. Not all lethal conflicts can be resolved as a real estate deal might, and there is no recourse to bankruptcy court in international affairs.
Mr. Trump’s own statements lead us to conclude that as president, he would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe, and which would diminish our standing in the world. Furthermore, his expansive view of how presidential power should be wielded against his detractors poses a distinct threat to civil liberty in the United States. Therefore, as committed and loyal Republicans, we are unable to support a Party ticket with Mr. Trump at its head. We commit ourselves to working energetically to prevent the election of someone so utterly unfitted to the office. (Click here to see the signatories of this letter.)
These leaders have reason for concern given the revelations by the NATO Commander, Gen. Breedlove, about Syrian refugees. Specifically, Russia’s “weaponizing Syrian Refugees”:
That is beyond troubling. It is just this kind of action that is going to require a sober, experienced President. Admiral Stavridis made that point very well in this interview from Fox Business Network from this morning. Click here to watch it.
I would contend this concern about a lack of Foreign Policy and National Security also extends to Bernie Sanders, who has none, and doesn’t address it very much. It also extends to Hillary Clinton, who has a lot, but the way she has handled things has been quite poor.
This has become more evident just this week as one of Clinton’s close aides was given Immunity by the DOJ in regards to the copious number of classified emails Clinton sent and received on an open server. Guy Benson from Townhall highlights this piece from the NY Times about the trouble Clinton is in (potentially):
[…] In addition to the F.B.I. investigation, there are continuing inquiries into Mrs. Clinton’s emails by the inspector general of the State Department, the inspector general of the intelligence agencies, the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Aides to Mrs. Clinton and officials from the State Department also face the prospect of questioning under oath in a separate legal proceeding brought by Judicial Watch, the conservative government watchdog group, under the Freedom of Information Act. In that case, the group has sought emails related to the special employment status given to Mrs. Clinton’s close aide Huma Abedin so she could receive additional salaries beyond the one she received from State. Last week Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of United States District Court in Washington allowed the questioning after a hearing in which he criticized the State Department’s “constant drip” of revelations about emails from the server and said there were many unanswered questions about who authorized its use.“It just boggles the mind that the State Department allowed this circumstance to arise in the first place,” said Judge Sullivan, who was appointed to the District Court in 1994 by President Bill Clinton and to lower courts by Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush. “It’s just very, very, very troubling.” […] (Click here to read the rest.)
Yes, it is troubling. On both the Democrat and Republican side depending on who is elected. If it isn’t Rubio or Cruz, it will be bad news for foreign policy and national security in a BIG way…
What are your thoughts about the debate? National Security? Where we’re headed? This is an Open Thread.