[nathanbedford]

Your comments take me back to my first reply in this thread which is we have to decide whether to back Trump right or wrong or to judge the matter on the merits. I prefer to judge this matter on the merits. In doing so I am not indifferent to the indispensable nature of Trump's presidency. Against that, I balance the fact that he, by all accounts so far, has acted precipitously and without a safety net on the very eve of his impeachment.

We have to back Trump when it is reasonable to do so and we must back him to the hilt in this preposterous impeachment hoax. The question for me is, at what level of threat do I surrender my own powers of discernment?

[mewzilla]

I sincerely doubt, especially when it comes to foreign policy, that Trump has ever done anything precipitously.

Trump knows we can’t trust our allies.

This isn’t about the Kurds. The Kurds are just grist for the mill.

[Leaning Right]

> he, by all accounts so far, has acted precipitously and without a safety net on the very eve of his impeachment <

Trump has acted precipitously and without a safety net pretty much from day one. In one way, that’s good. Because you can’t drain the swamp by acting like just another good old boy.

But in a very significant way it’s also bad. Trump has made enemies where he need not have made enemies. In that respect, I wish he would have channeled Ronald Reagan more, and Andy Jackson less.

I have mentioned this to friends of mine, and the usual response is “Trump gotta be Trump”. Some truth there, I suppose.