http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/t...li=BBnbcA1

Coming from a guy who doesn't have a lot of intelligence himself, I can understand.

I guess he's going to lead based on "what he's hearing". You rethugs have a whopper of a candidate here. LOL. Listening to voices in his head. :)

You do realize that a scathing report just came out that obliterated our intelligence reporting under Obama, dont you? Or did your little Libturd News Network not cover that story.

Says the guy who roots for "deez nuts" in Birmingham.

If Obama said he did not trust intelligence, while running the fist time, he would get a standing ovation from the
peanut gallery and the MSM.

(08-17-2016 03:52 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  Says the guy who roots for "deez nuts" in Birmingham.

I would vote for Deez nuts over the two choices we have today.

Intelligence has its own interests. Besides haven't the media been saying that they should lie to Trump during these briefings? There is no reason for Trump to trust them.

I'd take common sense over intelligence any time. Some of these geniuses probably couldn't figure out how to change a tire but hop-boy they sure can tell us how to run a nation.

(08-17-2016 03:46 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/t...li=BBnbcA1

Coming from a guy who doesn't have a lot of intelligence himself, I can understand.

I don't like Trump at this stage, but it's very easy make a lot of terrible mistakes either underestimating or overestimating his intelligence (or both).

The most troubling part of this statement is:

Trump, before intelligence briefing: I don’t trust intelligence

Quote:"Very easy to use them, but I won't use them because they've made such bad decisions," he added, pointing to apparent intelligence failures ahead of the U.S.'s 2003 invasion of Iraq. At the time, George W. Bush administration officials appeared convinced that Saddam Hussein's government was creating weapons of mass destruction, though that was not the case.

Intelligence agencies don't make decisions - they collect and interpret data, attempt to make projections, and (reluctantly) may make policy recommendations. But, they never make decisions, and I'd expect a leader to recognize that.

(08-17-2016 04:48 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  I'd take common sense over intelligence any time. Some of these geniuses probably couldn't figure out how to change a tire but hop-boy they sure can tell us how to run a nation.

Lost art for sure

(08-17-2016 04:58 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(08-17-2016 03:46 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/t...li=BBnbcA1

Coming from a guy who doesn't have a lot of intelligence himself, I can understand.

I don't like Trump at this stage, but it's very easy make a lot of terrible mistakes either underestimating or overestimating his intelligence (or both).

The most troubling part of this statement is:

Trump, before intelligence briefing: I don’t trust intelligence

Quote:"Very easy to use them, but I won't use them because they've made such bad decisions," he added, pointing to apparent intelligence failures ahead of the U.S.'s 2003 invasion of Iraq. At the time, George W. Bush administration officials appeared convinced that Saddam Hussein's government was creating weapons of mass destruction, though that was not the case.

Intelligence agencies don't make decisions - they collect and interpret data, attempt to make projections, and (reluctantly) may make policy recommendations. But, they never make decisions, and I'd expect a leader to recognize that.

Bingo. The only decisions made at the agency level are made to ensure directives from the POTUS and Congress are followed. That's it. I'd also add that intelligence assessments are only as good as the analyst that made them. And when senior leadership get their hands on them they're always spun (I.e. Centcom). But briefings conducted to the senate and house Intel committees, cabinet members and even POTUS himself are conducted by the analysts and not their bosses.

I see no reason for Trump to trust Obama's hirelings either.

Quote:The GOP nominee's comments follow a House Republican analysis last week confirming reports that intelligence produced through the military's Central Command had been edited or squelched in order to provide an unrealistically positive image of the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The conclusions seriously undermine the Obama administration's claims about the anti-ISIS push and help explain the trouble it has had routing the extremist group from its base in Syria and Iraq.

Well, he had several reasons for making these comments in the article. This should come as no surprise to anyone since he has been consistently slamming King Oballah and portraying himself as a D.C. outsider, he's not a career politician, willing to clean house and he's not going to continue to do things just because that is always the way they have been done. Sounds like a businessman to me.

(08-17-2016 05:54 PM)Claw Wrote:  I see no reason for Trump to trust Obama's hirelings either.

So, you and Trump don't trust the guys who found Bin Laden.

Yeah, yeah, I know. Blind squirrel and Deez nuts.

(08-17-2016 08:51 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(08-17-2016 05:54 PM)Claw Wrote:  I see no reason for Trump to trust Obama's hirelings either.

So, you and Trump don't trust the guys who found Bin Laden.

Yeah, yeah, I know. Blind squirrel and Deez nuts.

You mean the military? Yeah, I trust those guys.

Sent from my VS980 4G using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-17-2016 08:51 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(08-17-2016 05:54 PM)Claw Wrote:  I see no reason for Trump to trust Obama's hirelings either.

So, you and Trump don't trust the guys who found Bin Laden.

Yeah, yeah, I know. Blind squirrel and Deez nuts.

Well, at least Deez nuts are predictable. And they make me vomit in my mouth less than the two most likely candidates at this stage.