Latricia James should he disbarred for this!

I thought you don’t do YouTube. It’s funny how a platform you say is for children’s videos is your go-to source when it suits you. I’ll bet you’re on YouTube, Twitter, TicTok, etc all the time. Even if you deny it, I won’t believe you, no one will.

 

I told you I don't watch any TV "news"

Apparently some have short term memory issues.

 

I don't.
But I know where to find a liar.
A skill you should develop.

 

maybe we should ignore you the next time you give an opinion.

It's about opening your mind, getting out of the echo chamber.

 

No, your request is reasonable. I've given it some thought.

When you think about national security, it's natural to envision military threats, cyberattacks, or espionage. But sometimes, the greatest threats come from within, shaped by the actions and decisions of leaders. Donald Trump's presidency and post-presidency period provide a compelling case study of how a leader's behavior and policies can pose a significant threat to a nation's security.

Consider, for a moment, the concept of national security. It's not just about protecting borders or fending off cyber-attacks; it's also about ensuring the stability of democratic institutions, maintaining alliances, and fostering trust within the government. On these fronts, Trump's actions have raised serious concerns.

First, let's talk about trust. Trust is the bedrock of security. Allies share intelligence based on trust. Citizens follow their leaders based on trust. When Trump showed a tendency to side with foreign adversaries over his own intelligence agencies, it did more than raise eyebrows. Remember when he seemed to accept Vladimir Putin's denial of election interference over the conclusions of U.S. intelligence? That moment wasn't just awkward; it was a blow to the credibility and morale of the agencies that protect the U.S. It sends a message to allies and adversaries alike that the U.S. is divided, potentially making the nation a more appealing target for disinformation and manipulation.

Then there's the issue of division. A unified country is resilient. A divided country, however, is vulnerable. The rhetoric used by Trump throughout his presidency often inflamed divisions, whether it was along political, racial, or social lines. This internal fragmentation can be exploited by foreign adversaries to weaken the U.S. from within, without firing a shot. The Capitol riot on January 6, 2021, serves as a stark example. It wasn't just a domestic crisis; it was a national security breach that reverberated around the world, showing how internal divisions could escalate into violence and chaos, shaking the foundations of democracy.

Erosion of alliances under Trump's administration also merits discussion. Alliances like NATO are not just diplomatic niceties; they're strategic assets. When Trump called NATO obsolete and questioned the U.S.'s commitment to its allies, it created uncertainty and instability in international relations. Such alliances are deterrents against common threats, and weakening them can embolden adversaries, making the U.S. and its allies more vulnerable to aggression.

On the economic front, Trump's approach to trade, characterized by tariffs and confrontations, might have been intended to strengthen U.S. industries, but it also sparked trade wars that had broader implications for national security. Economic stability is a component of national security, and unpredictable trade policies can undermine the economic standing of the U.S., reducing its leverage on the global stage and potentially fueling economic conditions that can lead to conflict.

Finally, Trump's handling of sensitive information has been troubling. Instances where he disclosed classified information to foreign officials, or his alleged mishandling of classified documents after leaving office, underscore the risks. Such actions not only compromise current operations but also deter intelligence sharing among allies, as they may fear their sensitive information could be mishandled or leaked.

When you put all these elements together, it becomes evident that national security is not just about external threats. It's also about the actions and decisions of a nation's leaders. The way they handle information, engage with foreign adversaries, uphold democratic institutions, and foster unity among their people plays a critical role in ensuring the nation's security. In these respects, Trump's presidency has highlighted how leadership can become a national security issue, reminding us that the strength of a country lies not just in its military might but in the integrity of its institutions and the unity of its people.

 

She's far more vile ugly and vicious than she is smart.

 

There was nothing ill-gotten, nothing proven ill-gotten, no one claimed they had any loss, no one claimed any interest rate was based on information HE gave them, no one claimed any amount of the loan was based on the information HE gave them, no tax authority claimed they used HIS assessment for tax purposes.

So show me the formula the law says the court should use in this calculation. The judge could not explain how he came up with the number and James hasn't.

 

Someone hasn't been keeping up with the case. Yes. These were ill-gotten. Whether or not anyone else claimed a loss has NOTHING to do with whether or not his own gains were ill gotten. And lying on your balance sheet when submitting it to banks, investors, etc. is patently illegal. If you gain from lying on them, you have ill-gotten gains. This ain't rocket surgery, bud.

 

Nah brah.. I'd suggest that you learn by having been so duped you still post BS like this.

 

I'm sorry that the facts hurt your feelings.

 

Rather than lashing out at at our justice system, officers of the court, and their families, the sexual abuser should focus on concocting a credible defense in a court of law.

If that is an impossible challenge, tantrums against public officials are a pathetic substitute.