Jon Schwartz writes for The Intercept.

In this post, he gives a list of (mostly) practical ways that we can organize to survive the next four years and beat back the white nationalism that Trump used to get elected.

Categories Trump

43 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

FLERP! says:

January 13, 2017 at 9:09 am

This is a nice line:

“When and where are the next Democratic and Republican Party meetings in your neighborhood? You don’t know, because neither the Democrats nor Republicans are political parties in the historical sense. Mostly they just demand we send them money and then yell at us about voting every few years.”

Reply
- Laura H. Chapman says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 9:38 am
  
  I agree. I plan to send that along to the local and state Dems.
  
  Reply
Catherine Blanche King says:

January 13, 2017 at 9:22 am

Love it. Thanks for posting.

Reply
marynwill says:

January 13, 2017 at 9:55 am

I’m a die hard Progressive Democrat but I don’t think selling that brand will get us very far. As a person, I want to meet Trump-supporting persons in non-political, comfortable, social settings and just get to know them well enough to have brief conversations – first about anything and later, possibly, about political issues.
I look for places or organizations that interest people of all political leanings – book clubs, garden clubs, adult education classes, PTA meetings, meetings about community issues. Conversations on grocery lines, elevators, and bus stops where faces become familiar will probably not be very fruitful but seeds can be sewn anywhere people encounter each other. I think we have to get to know more people of every sort so we can understand them before we try to sell our lines.

Reply
- Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 11:32 am
  
  Try it some time, it is quite a trip. The peripheral swing voter will be reached only when he gets his ass kicked by Trump policy .
  
  The problem is not the Trump voter . The problem lies with the rot at the heart of the Democratic party. Witnessed just yesterday . I was talking to a Trump voter last night. A Union shop steward who first should not be in that position.
  Who secondly is probably on par with established doctors in earnings. So he is certainly not a suffering worker. But the position allows him to take the position as representing Labor . What was my answer to him when he said what has Obama done for us . Now I
  could go into the nuances of the auto bailout or any number of things. But frankly every one of those policy initiatives was far overshadowed by a much broader lack of leadership for workers and neoliberal policy on his/Clinton’s part. Why have so many teachers voted for Trump 20% , 43% of labor overall.
  
  How do I argue with him when he touts Trumps arm twisting of American manufactures to bring the Jobs back . Yes he had nothing to do with Ford, Chrysler , Soft Bank , Carrier was a big show about little . But Trump is out there making the arguments that traditionally belonged to the Northern Democratic party . While Obama visited Caterpillar, avoided Wisconsin, put the convention in Charlot one of the most non union city’s in America, attacked viciously America’s largest union the NEA/AFT with policy that will render them non existent. Never managed to bring the Employee free choice act out of committee which would have reversed a small part of Taft Hartley increasing the ranks of labor massively. And finally was ” running around the Nation with a big red cape and the black letters TPP in front of a raging bull” Wisconsin,Michigan,Ohio,Pennsylvania, even Indiana . Time to “projectile vomit”
  
  So what was I left saying to him . When Trump comes after Prevailing Wage and Right to Work .You will get kicked in the ass.
  I am afraid that is what it will take . Economic collapse and hardship. How much damage will be done by then. Further these policy failures that Trump will bring may not even be evident 4 or god forbid 8 years from now. Stimulative Keynesian policy could put the nation on a sugar high. The Clinton failures did not become evident till the financial collapse of 2007/2008 . Which was as much a result of a declining standard of living as of financial deregulation.
  Well paid workers do not seek or need subprime mortgages.Or seven year car loans. The Reagan policy has had a long term effect of declining standard of living . As FDRs policy did not reach full fruition till the 50s and 60s in a vastly empowered middle class.
  
  Reply
  - NYC public school parent says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 12:29 pm
    
    I’ve met those Trump voters, too. They either are convinced Hillary is a crook or they secretly like Trump’s racism because they agree that all those lazy (fill in the blank) are the reason that they aren’t earning upper middle class wages.
    
    Your insistence that they are rejecting all those Obama policies is put the lie by the fact that they voted for right wing Republican Senators and Congressmen who offered even WORSE policies and rejected progressive Senators and Congressmen who were fighting for unions.
    
    And they have been voting for those anti-union Representatives and Senators for years. Based on something OTHER than their own pocketbook. Like abortion. Or prayer in school.
    
    I think you need to ask yourself what draws all those white voters to the right wing Tea party anti-labor Republicans. They rejected Russ Feingold out of hand to re-elect someone who supported all those supposedly nasty things that made them hate Hillary. Plus they voted for a Republican who is also happy to privatize their social security and medicare instead of Russ.
    
    What is the mainstream Republican Party selling to them? The party that supports free trade and every right wing pro-business belief that you keep claiming voters were rejecting?
    
    When you figure that out for yourself, let me know. Because I already do know. Republicans are selling themselves to white folks as one of them against the others. They have handy scapegoats that those guys love. And those voters are happily willing to vote for free trade and anti-union right wing Republicans over progressive democrats as long as their “white victimhood” is recognized for what it is. They haven’t been able to get ahead because they are white is what they believe. They believe that they don’t get the “freebies” offered to the “others”. And if you really want the Democrats to change their policies so that those angry white “victimized” voters get the scapegoats they want, then you are surely very short sighted. It plays right into Trump’s hands.
  - Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 1:40 pm
    
    NYC Parent
    
    I will keep this short
    You are assuming that they knew who their Senators/Congressmen were or that more likely they knew policy positions .
    They likely do not. Most vote for the head of the Ticket and coat tails carry the down ballad races.
    
    I have said that most Trump voters are deporables. But you fail to explain why some of these same voters voted for a black man twice and that is who we must reach. But good luck with Hillary, Barack and Corry .
    
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/07/24/barely-half-of-americans-know-the-political-party-of-their-representative/?utm_term=.3eb0db60add4
  - Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 1:41 pm
    
    as usual ballot
- Catherine Blanche King says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 12:38 pm
  
  marynwill: You speak of but one context and kind of communication. There is also the more formalized political meeting where people attend for a more express purpose. The note speaks to the latter kind without de-legitimatizing the former.
  
  Also, you write: “I think we have to get to know more people of every sort so we can understand them before we try to sell our lines.”
  
  First, it’s more of a present crisis than that? or a “clear and present danger”? Also, there are communications just for that purpose and where they are not “weaponized” for some other hidden or later purpose (selling our lines?), but are about just getting to know people, regardless of content. (There’s nothing worse than finding that a seemingly nice person is just trying to politically or religiously evangelize you.) And then there are other-purpose communications. Both are legitimate but also both can be misused. If you go to a political meeting, though you might have coffee or beer with your neighbors, you also know which of the two kinds of communications the meeting is about.
  
  Reply
Dienne says:

January 13, 2017 at 10:07 am

“4. We don’t need a third party, we just need a party.”

Well, yes, but the two parties we have are never going to allow what he’s talking about. Therefore, yes, we need a third party.

Reply
- NYC public school parent says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 12:38 pm
  
  So I just witnessed the Democratic primary winner running for President on the most progressive platform I can recall since I was old enough to vote.
  
  The Democratic primary winner ran on a platform nearly identical to Bernie’s platform.
  
  You rejected it because you bought into it all being a lie. Even though neither Obama nor any other Democratic candidate had run on such a progressive platform — in fact, they pivoted right after winning the primary, not left.
  
  It’s ironic that for the first time you actually had the Dems running on a REAL progressive platform in the general election. And voters like you believed the propaganda that a woman whose entire life had been about working for vulnerable Americans should not be trusted to enact it. That we’re better off rejecting her based on your knowledge that she is simply lying to us, so that a man who is one of the scariest people ever to run this country could win.
  
  The problem is that I don’t trust that voters like you won’t believe the propaganda about Elizabeth Warren or Russ Feingold or whoever candidate the progressives win. No one will ever be good enough because the propaganda tells us so.
  
  Reply
  - RaiseTheBarHigher says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 1:05 pm
    
    Your definition of progressive platform differs from unionized workers’ view:
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/06/bernie-sanders-dnc-union-platform-committee-223787
  - Duane E Swacker says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 2:05 pm
    
    “. . . on the most progressive platform I can recall . . . ”
    
    Were you born yesterday? “most progressive”-horse manure. Perhaps most neocon regressive platform.
  - NYC public school parent says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 2:22 pm
    
    Raise the Bar,
    
    Why are you posting an article from JUNE? The convention was in August. Surely you can find something that talks about how the final platform was the most neoconservative in history and reflected Hillary’s intent to turn over the country to Wall Street and of course, the foreign oligarchs who donated to her foundation.
    
    So many of your posts seem like the ones the trolls post. Where do you get your news from?
LG says:

January 13, 2017 at 10:18 am

I saw a red flag with #5, a non-corporate media.

“Fortunately, there’s a patriotic solution: public funding.

It’s totally forgotten now, but for the 100 years after the American Revolution, the U.S. government made it free or almost free to send newspapers anywhere by mail. It was available to papers of all political perspectives, with no government censorship. The rationale was straightforward: This was necessary for people to participate in governing themselves.

The cost was significant, the equivalent of about $30 billion today. One intriguing idea that would support the media on a comparable scale with a comparable lack of government influence would be $200 vouchers for every adult, who could then give them to any nonprofit outlet of his or her choice. To work, such outlets would have to take seriously the realities of human cognition, described above.”

Giving the public money to pay anyone who calls himself a journalist is asking for trouble. With so many fake news outlets that exist already, any accountability would be out the window with a voucher system.

Reply
- dianeravitch says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 11:01 am
  
  LG, agreed!
  
  Reply
- Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 11:49 am
  
  “Why should we allow the competition to the media we own which is serving us so well ” What Powell would say if he were alive today.
  
  We can’t get Democrats to be Democrats. Again yesterdays vote where Booker and 12 or 13 Democrats voted to make Americans pay more for drugs, defeating a Sanders amendment. Perhaps we should be following Booker (the Great Black Hope of the Democratic identity politics party) ET-al screaming profanities and making their lives miserable morning noon and night, we have to clean our own house. The Republican right can only be dealt a blow by a Democratic Left . We have two corporately owned subsidiaries in this Oligarchy.
  
  Reply
  - NYC public school parent says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 1:01 pm
    
    I despise Booker’s pro-privatization stance but I admire that he stood up to speak against Sessions.
    
    I admired that as Mayor he really did talk to the poorest Newark residents and not just use them for props. He was trying to figure out solutions. I despised him when he came up with charter schools as a solution — not because he tried them, but because he seemed to double down on his support for them and ignore all evidence to the contrary instead of figuring out what part of charters worked, and what part was ripping off public schools while demanding to only teach the best performing students there and leaving the rest behind.
    
    It doesn’t matter what party you have. You aren’t going to have a newly named “progressive party” where a majority of politicians fall neatly in line with the Democratic agenda.
    
    Somehow when it came to blurring the differences between charters and true public schools and not being a strong advocate for gun control, Bernie always got a pass. That’s fine. I gave him a pass, too. The difference is that I refuse to see Cory Booker as all-evil, just like I refused to see Hillary Clinton as all-evil.
    
    All of them — Bernie, Warren, Hillary, Cory — are politicians. If you ask me, their core values are still decent.
    
    Tim Kaine is one of the few Democrats who actually got what was wrong with charters and privatization movement. He supported real public schools when he was governor. So does his wife. He also is accused of being too pro-Wall Street.
    
    Meanwhile, neither Bernie nor Warren have really taken a strong stand against charters. It has been very milquetoast and limited and in the past they have never spoken out about what is really wrong with them and how their lack of oversight and disproportionate use of resources hurts non-charter students.
    
    In other words, no one is perfect. But once a politician is elected, organized pressure to support an issue he may not be inclined to support makes a difference. Especially if he just needs to get better educated.
  - dianeravitch says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 1:05 pm
    
    NYC Public School Parent,
    
    I agree that there will not (anytime soon) be a new party that is entirely progressive.
    
    The root of the evil in our system is money. All politicians need money to run for office. Where is the money? Wall Street.
    
    Bernie was the outlier. He was able to capture the moment and raise large numbers of small contributions.
    
    Not many politicians will be able to replicate that success.
    
    And where will they turn for money? To Wall Street.
    
    The essence of this evil is Citizens United and the gutting of campaign finance regulations and reform.
    
    Until we can get money out of politics, those with the most money will be elected, and those without money will not.
    
    If Trump gets 2 or even 3 appointments to the Supreme Court, the reversal of Citizens United will not happen.
    
    But there will be another election in less than two years, and another one in less than four years.
  - Duane E Swacker says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 2:08 pm
    
    “I admire that he stood up to speak against Sessions.”
    
    Admire that an African American stood up to speak against a known racist? Pretty low admiration bar.
  - Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 2:30 pm
    
    NYC public school parent
    
    ” I despise Booker’s pro-privatization stance but I admire that he stood up to speak against Sessions”
    
    Wow that was tremendous courage on his part .
    
    Just like standing up and criticizing the critics of Romney on Vulture capitalism was a bold move . One that made me puke . Putting him to the right of Newt Gingrich who first coined the phrase in describing the practices of corporate America which decimate workers to enrich billionaires who then buy the Booker’s of the world.
    
    If Corry Booker was not black he would not be the senator from New Jersey that attribute propelled him in the Democratic primaries. As it destroyed the Jew from Brooklyn in many of those primaries .last spring. One can not explain 90% of blacks in states from SC to Mississippi… Voting for one candidate unless her opponent was George Wallace rather than a Civil rights warrior.
    
    King said and I holey agree” it does no good to be able to sit at the lunch counter and not be able to buy the sandwich”
    
    There should be no division between the White working class and the Black working class. For too long the Democrats have been the party of Wall Street and welfare . Policy that has decimated the hopes and aspirations of working class (to me that is the bottom at least 80% ) voters of every race while pledging to keep the minimum of subsistence support for those devastated by their Wall Street friendly policy. It is a formula that elected Trump .
    Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio , Indiana, keep it up we will add Illinois and Minnesota to the list shortly.
    
    The only grace for Democrats is that they have benefited from the likes of Bush 2 who couldn’t see a Clinton created disaster coming. Of course his policy would have been the same Trade policy and Deregulation
    
    Policy not pretty speeches count. I will take Warren/Sanders on a bad day in the education wars over Clinton Obama on a good day.
    
    Policy or as Billy boy said but never meant “it’s the economy stupid”
    
    http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/weak-labor-market-president-obama-hides-behind-automation
    
    And Duane I was typing that response when you admired Booker.
  - NYC public school parent says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 2:33 pm
    
    A sitting Senator testifying AGAINST another Senator’s appointment to the cabinet? And you say it’s meaningless because he’s African-American?
    
    So let’s see, that means that all white Senators get a pass for NOT speaking out. I mean, why should Bernie use his bully pulpit to speak out against a racist because he isn’t African-American.
    
    No wonder so many voters were turned off by the Bernie bots.
    
    I sure thought I was highly critical of Booker. But I forgot that unless a candidate is Bernie or perhaps Warren, all positive actions must be characterized in the nastiest light. If it’s Bernie, it’s fine that you are for “public” charters and have never once stood up and said “they are wrong”. I guess when Bernie throws union teachers under the bus, he gets a pass because he is – Bernie! He can do no wrong. And Warren coming so late to the Massachusetts vote — as if she had no core beliefs about charter schools of her own but was waiting to see which way the wind was blowing? I like her, but darn if either of them demonstrated REAL profiles in courage that might have stopped the privatization of public education NATIONALLY.
    
    I voted for Bernie. I like Bernie. I just find it ironic that you overlook his failings, but hold Hillary Clinton to a ridiculous standard so high that you couldn’t even state she was any better than Trump.
  - NYC public school parent says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 2:38 pm
    
    Diane,
    
    I have no doubt in my mind that Hillary Clinton would have appointed Supreme Court justices who would overturn Citizens United. I also have no doubt that there were Hillary-haters who just knew she only wanted to govern to make all her donors from Wall Street even richer. There was absolutely no evidence that she planned to appoint pro-Wall Street justices nor was entirely owned and operated by big donors. But that didn’t matter.
    
    Those same voters will be out there next time undermining whatever Democrat is less than ideal. However, they get to decide and if Bernie throws union teachers under the bus in order to pander to white factory workers who blame minorities for all their problems, then that’s no problem for them.
    
    Has Bernie ever come out truly strongly for public schools and union teachers? He finally spoke out about Mass Proposition to increase charter schools, but it was not an outright condemnation of the privatization of public education.
  - dianeravitch says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 6:36 pm
    
    I agree, NYC Public School Parent. That is why I supported Hillary. Not as the lesser of two evils, but because she is sane, experienced, and knowledgeable. Whereas Trump is an angry fool, a fraud, a con man, and a pathological liar.
  - GregB says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 9:51 pm
    
    NYC: Don’t be fooled. Booker testified against Sessions not because of principle but because it was his opening move to run in 2020. He is the very worst type of Democrat. He’s an apologist for Wall Street and enables them as he uses poor people in Newark as props. He was one of 13 Democrats who voted in favor of big Pharma today. They are his second tier sugar daddies. And there’s no need to get into his education record. He is a mercenary with a silver tongue, pure and simple. If you want to give credit to someone who testified against Sessions, then look to John Lewis. He’s a real hero and role model.
  - GregB says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 9:52 pm
    
    Hit post too soon again. Read Joel’s commentary above. He’s got it exactly right.
  - NYC public school parent says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 11:34 pm
    
    Greg B and Joel,
    
    Did it sound like I was “fooled” by Booker? Did you actually read my post?
    
    I can’t believe I get attacked for acknowledging one positive thing among all of Booker’s actions I criticized. You’d think I called him the second coming of Elizabeth Warren.
    
    What’s truly sad amidst all your cynicism is that you are insinuating a true evil and corruption to Booker’s neoconservative views that you don’t apply to the Republicans with even more right wing views. He isn’t just a Democrat who happens to be pro Wall Street or conservative. Nope — he is a corrupt sell-out who is lying even in his speaking against the Sessions appointment. He’s just doing it for show. For money. For power.
    
    There is a shocking casual racism to it. Shouldn’t ALL Democratic Senators be willing to speak out? Quietly casting your no vote as this man gets approved isn’t exactly a profile in courage.
howardat58 says:

January 13, 2017 at 10:43 am

I liked this a lot.
Just a small quote:
“Part of Trump’s story was “Muslims are lunatics who want to slaughter your children, we can’t let them in!” Clinton would respond, “An intriguing Harvard School of Government study found our circa-2014 immigration vetting procedures were able to measure radicalization by five benchmarks that [audience loses consciousness].” “

Reply
- LG says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 11:43 am
  
  I thought the story suggestion was the best part of this article.
  
  Reply
- NYC public school parent says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 12:43 pm
  
  Sure but guess what? Obama was a great speaker. That didn’t help enact the progressive agenda.
  
  LBJ wasn’t a great speaker.
  
  Maybe a “wonk” like Hillary Clinton can never win. But then we get pretenders who talk a good game but have no idea how to get things done. Democrats should be smart enough to overlook wonkiness. We should be teaching America that simplifying issues that are complicated leads to terrible public policy.
  
  Once in while you might get both — perhaps Bill Clinton was both, but he came out of a philosophy that Dems had to prove they weren’t too liberal. Obama did too. But I would trade the soaring rhetoric in a minute for someone who knew how to get legislation passed.
  
  Reply
  - dianeravitch says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 1:08 pm
    
    The only way to pass a progressive agenda is to elect a progressive Congress.
  - NYC public school parent says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 2:42 pm
    
    Or to elect someone like LBJ who knows how to get things done.
    
    If anything, the right wing is taking over Congress and the state houses nationwide. Why are they rejecting the progressive candidates when they run? Why do they reject them in favor of the Republicans who are more tools of Wall Street money than Democrats? Not Trump “we’ll protect your jobs” Republicans. But the most conservative right wing pro free trade anti union Republicans were handily re-elected.
  - Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 2:53 pm
    
    dianeravitch
    
    How short our memories are.
    In 2008 the Democrats had a veto proof majority (of corporate lackeys ).
    
    Did EFCA make it out of committee.
    Did home owners get bailed out or Bankers
    Did just one Banker go to jail.
    Was one single payer advocate allowed on the committee .
    You don’t want me to continue the list
    
    We will have a progressive agenda when we have a progressive alternative to be elected to congress.
    
    Is that change top down or bottom up. Does vision like Medicare, Medicaid, a war on poverty come from the top or the bottom. LBJ knew exactly what voting/civil rights would do he had the courage to do it .
    
    Tump is the direct result of the Hopey Changey guy being a total failure.and fraud . With all eloquent speeches the head of one Banker on a platter would have been more powerful than a hundred speeches .
    
    Most presidents go out of office popular we long for what we know.
    I puke to this day that Reagan is admired . I puke more that tools like Obama kiss the a$$ of his memory . .
  - Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 2:56 pm
    
    And let me add LBJ accomplished that agenda against a sizable opposition in his own party . He dragged them kicking and screaming.
Linda says:

January 13, 2017 at 12:08 pm

Cory Booker, Bennet of Colorado and Pat Murray of Wash., were among the 13 Democrats who opposed legislation, this week, that allowied the import of cheaper pharmaceuticals from Canada (Joel Herman referenced it above.)

Reply
- Linda says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 12:14 pm
  
  Bennett’s friends extend to the charter school industry. The National Alliance of Charter Schools honored him.
  
  Reply
- Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 2:59 pm
  
  NYC
  
  My thought exactly . You grabbed LBJ from me as I was partaking in my inferior typing skills .
  
  Reply
  - Joel Herman (@jwherman11) says:
    
    January 13, 2017 at 3:00 pm
    
    my post should have been above .
Dienne says:

January 13, 2017 at 12:45 pm

As is often the case, Taibbi nails it: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-russia-story-reaches-a-crisis-point-w460806?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=daily&utm_campaign=011317_12

“Meanwhile, Ynet in Israel is reporting that Israeli intelligence officials are deciding not to share intelligence with the incoming Trump administration. The report indicates they came to this conclusion after a recent meeting with American intelligence officials, who told them the Russians have “leverages of pressure” to use against Trump.

This is an extraordinary story. If our intelligence community really believes this, then playtime is over.

No more Clapper-style hedging or waffling. If Israel gets to hear why they think Trump is compromised, how is the American public not also so entitled?

But if all they have are unverifiable rumors, they can’t do this, not even to Donald Trump.

The only solution is an immediate unveiling of all the facts and an urgent public investigation. A half-assed whispering campaign a week and a half from a Trump presidency, with BuzzFeed at the center of the action, isn’t going to cut it. We need to know what the likes of Clapper and Comey know, and we need it all now, before it’s too late.”

[Emphasis added]

Reply
- dianeravitch says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 1:07 pm
  
  It would be reassuring to hear the Liar-in-Chief say something, anything about Putin that is not praise and blown kisses.
  
  Reply
- Duane E Swacker says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 2:11 pm
  
  For an interesting expose of THE “hacking” (and I ain’t talking about Ian) event see: https://turningpointnews.org/hack-everything-special-report
  
  Reply
- NYC public school parent says:
  
  January 13, 2017 at 11:45 pm
  
  Is any country in the world going to “share intelligence” with Donald Trump?
  
  Does it matter whether the Russians have something on him or not? (I happen to believe they do, because Trump NEVER does anything that makes him look “weak” – like apologize when caught in a lie – except when it comes to Russia, when he looks like a puppet with Putin pulling the strings.
  
  Trump has no self-control. None. He thinks only of himself. What country in world would want that man to know anything that they don’t want to get out.
  
  Although I suspect some countries will happily use him for propaganda purposes. “Let’s share this “intelligence” about the leader of our rival nation with Trump so he can tweet it”!
  
  Reply
  - dianeravitch says:
    
    January 14, 2017 at 9:43 am
    
    I wish someone would “share intelligence” with Trump. He thinks he knows everything because he has mastered the arcane art of dazzling the public with BS.