I’m going to bed and scheduling this open thread for midnight, when the Senate might vote on the so-called “skinny repeal” bill. I’ll leave it to our night owls and early risers to report and react.
After what we know about Donald Trump as president do we want him to be able to say the word and launch nuclear missiles in four minutes that hit their targets in 30 minutes?
This is a White House completely unhinged. The latest is communications director Anthony Scaramucci accusing chief of staff Reince Priebus of possibly criminal leaks. This came after the president shocked the Pentagon with a tweeted policy change banning transgender military personnel.
Put the soap operas aside and consider a very big picture. This is not just a clown car. This is a president with the power to destroy the planet.
It’s very important that we change policy to make sure that first-use nuclear attack orders must be cleared with the National Security Council, the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs, or perhaps only under the authority of a declaration of war.
Congress needs to look into this now. No one person should have this power unless we are under attack.
When Nixon was drunk every night in the final days of Watergate reportedly his military chiefs were on notice to clear any nuclear attack orders from the White House through his top aides. We should not rely on such imprecise safeguards.
Trump’s erratic behavior shows that our current policy of granting the president unilateral power to launch nuclear missiles is a danger to our national security, and indeed a threat to the entire world’s safety.
This needs serious attention: Dems tie nuclear first-strike bill to concerns about Trump
Donald Trump’s escalating hissy fits over Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation coincides with signals that his company’s past business dealings with Russia are under scrutiny.
Apparently this strikes a nerve. If, as Trump asserts, the Russia-connection allegations are a hoax, why is he so obviously afraid of this investigation? If there is nothing to hide why not ignore Mueller?
Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner and his lawyers seem to think Mueller is probing pre-Administration ties between Russia and Trump businesses. He went out of his way after testifying to Senate staffers this week to say he did not “rely” on Russian money in his business. That’s not saying he took no money from Russia.
It doesn’t take a lot of tea leaves to figure out where Mueller might be going — that Putin is blackmailing our president. Prove that Trump is trying to hide dirty business deals with Russia that Putin knows all about, connect that to Trump Administration accommodations for Putin, and you’re almost there. Surely a president subject to blackmail by a hostile foreign government is impeachment worthy.
[Cross-posted via HuffPost]
Kushner says, “I did not rely on Russian funds” for business.
Hmmm, doesn’t mean he didn’t get any.
Designed to sound like a denial, Kushner’s obviously lawyer-crafted statement looks more like an acknowledgment he took Russia’s money. Otherwise he would have said he got no money from Russia.
By CajunJoe, a Trail Mix Contributor
The most shared story over the weekend is from the Washington Post about the failure of ISIS terrorists to recover and use radioactive cobalt 60 to fabricate a ‘dirty bomb.’
The key elements of the story are that in Mosul’s university hospital there was a sizable cache of cobalt 60 that ISIS left untouched, either by design or through ignorance as to how to recover and utilize it. “They are not that smart,” opined one health ministry official.
The article goes on to say and imply how hospital waste, along with other nuclear waste, is a dangerous and potentially ‘soft’ target for potential terrorists, both in the United States and abroad.
While the Washington Post stated that it had learned about this cache in Mosul last year, but deferred publishing the story at the U. S. Government’s request, the question remains: Why now? Why at all?
It might be argued that organized terrorist groups are well aware of how to acquire and build dirty bombs, perhaps even ‘regular’ nuclear bombs, if they could procure the fuel. But there are, as is frequently demonstrated, a large number of ‘dumb’ terrorists, for whom articles, such as this one, might serve as inspiration.
I’m a big “First Amendment” guy. I abhor censorship of any kind, including self-censorship. But I also am sensitive to the notion that there is ‘dangerous’ information that, in the wrong hands could do us, could do all of humanity great harm.
What’s a publisher to do?
P.S. This might be a great question for the Washington Post’s Ombudsman/Public Editor. Alas, it has none.
More Posts by CajunJoe