Posted on 09/12/2019 10:11:19 AM PDT by rintintin
President Trump on Wednesday ripped his ex-national security adviser John Bolton, calling him “Mr. Tough Guy” and asserting that he’d damaged Trump’s effort to cut a nuke deal with Kim Jong Un.
“John wasn’t in line with what we were doing and actually in some cases he thought it was too tough what we were doing,” he said.
“Mr. Tough Guy, you know, you had to go into Iraq. Going into Iraq was something he felt very strongly about,” the president told reporters after a White House meeting on vaping.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
The Swamp needs a lot more personal vendettas and general ass kickery thrown its way. Especially to little chickenhawk b*tches ready and willing to suit up your kids for their bloody nation building sport show.
I think you are right that he was unable to change the presidents mind. I noticed he became bolder and bolder the more his advice was rejected.
I do think our president wanted all kinds of opinions but I think he was blindsided when Bolton went became openly hostile to the other members of the team.
Like I said ... Bolton wasn't there to ADVISE the President. He was there to INFLUENCE him. And that's not supposed to be the purpose of the National Security Advisor.
There’s a good argument about having advice from various viewpoints, and Bolton certainly brought a lot to the table even though his philosophy is pretty much opposed to Trumps. The real issue seem to be that Bolton alienated KJU and/or his team, and Trump values a deal with NK above just about anything else. He gains a bargaining chip with Kim now having gotten rid of the guy they didn’t like.
Oh cut it out. From at least the middle of that war on, everyone did their best to avoid serving in that war.
It was clear we weren’t in it to win it.
“The Swamp needs a lot more personal vendettas and general ass kickery thrown its way.”
>>>>>>>>>>
Bingo! Tired of phony “My good friend...”.
I like Trump’s nastiness and vindictiveness. We need more of it.
Agreed, I expect this is good cop - bad cop and orchestrated... even if Bolton himself doesn't recognize it. There are times to show the hawk and times to show the dove. Negotiating.
The thing that has baffled me from Day 1 with this guy (Bolton) is that he seemed so out of place in an administration where Trump's MAGA/nationalist agenda was supposed to be a breath of fresh air compared to the globalist idiocy we've seen in Washington since 1990. And John Bolton has been one of the defining figures in that globalist idiocy.
President Trump could not possibly have been naïve enough to believe he was getting an honest, objective advisor when he hired Bolton.
So why did he hire him?
One possibility crossed my mind this morning: I wonder if Trump hired Bolton for the explicit purpose of firing him later.
More on that as events unfold, folks ...
What does Bolton say to the guy who went instead of him? Or maybe to the next of kin if he didn’t make out alive?
“One possibility crossed my mind this morning: I wonder if Trump hired Bolton for the explicit purpose of firing him later.”
>>>>>>>>>>
Had the same thought. I think it’s very plausible.
I don’t care that Cheney and Bolton did their best to avoid serving in a distant where we shouldn’t have been. It’s their efforts to send other people’s kids to new, needless, distant wars that steams me - and makes them hypocrites.
I don’t know about Boston’s family, but as far as I’ve seen, not even any of Cheney’s immediate family have volunteered to serve in uniform - but he remains an unerhawk always pushing for warlike policies that would put other people’s kids in harms way
I believed eve I have credibility to talk this way, because like Trump I opposed the Cheney-Bush invasion of Iraq from the beginning
Are you a long-lost twin brother of mine? LOL.
Bolton was generally considered to be a ‘right guy’. When and where did he derail?
Excellent thoughts/post Tads!
Bolton was hired to make his case for his position, Trump weighed those views against others’, and in the end, he decided not to go with Bolton’s direction.
I assume Trump hired him in part to assuage the other warmongers in the party that Trump is letting their point of view be vetted in the Oval office, and partly to say “make the case, try to convince me but it won’t be easy” so he could be assured he wasn’t just getting a yes-men briefing. Bolton did something that made his role as devil’s war advocate no longer be desired. I’m guessing he leaked, intentionally or just by having a big mouth in “off the record” conversations. But either way, Trump said “alright, I’ve heard enough from broken-record Bolton.”
He didn't derail.
Some of us have been saying for years that he never should have been considered a "right guy" in the first place.
I would think anyone who supports President Trump -- including his earliest supporters as well as those who came on board later (some of them reluctantly, perhaps) -- should have no trouble recognizing that John Bolton is a perfect example of the D.C. career bureaucrats Donald Trump railed against back in 2016 when he promised to "drain the swamp."
Bolton deserved criticism for, based on cold war attitudes and old wrongs, false-flagging people who are now far from our worst enemies; but he does not observe the abuse that conservative pacifists and isolationists are heaping on him.
Agreed 100 percent, FRiend Ken.
Considering the backstabbing scum DJT has to deal with, I don’t blame him for a little vendetta now and then.
“ he does not observe the abuse that conservative pacifists and isolationists are heaping on him.”
What do you mean by “pacifist” and “isolationist”? I opposed the Iraq war. So did Trump. Does that make Trump and me “pacifists” and “isolationists”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.