berg80
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2017
- 16,030
- 13,474
- 2,320
They are out there and they are out there in droves. The people who are making them come from all quarters, including former members of his first administration.
NEW YORK (AP) — Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper has called him a “threat to democracy.” Former national security adviser John Bolton has declared him “unfit to be president.” And former Vice President Mike Pence has declined to endorse him, citing “profound differences.”
As Donald Trump seeks the presidency for a third time, he is being vigorously opposed by a vocal contingent of former officials who are stridently warning against his return to power and offering dire predictions for the country and the rule of law if his campaign succeeds.
It’s a striking chorus of detractors, one without precedent in the modern era, coming from those who witnessed first-hand his conduct in office and the turmoil that followed.
Sarah Matthews, a former Trump aide who testified before the House Jan. 6 committee and is among those warning about the threat he poses, said it’s “mind-boggling” how many members of his senior staff have denounced him.
apnews.com
The reasons for the warnings are as varied as the people making them. Some point to Project 2025, an authoritarian playbook centering on tearing down what is widely referred to as the "administrative state." Replacing it with those who pass a test of loyalty to the person who would head up an unitary executive with newly, expansive power. Some point to his immorality, some to witnessing first hand his incompetence and impetuous behavior, some to the virtually incomprehensible times he has run afoul of the law and basic decency. They all boil down to the same thing. They fear he will break us.
My answer to those concerns is, we are already broken.
We, the people, can not agree on who the legitimate leader of the country is. We can not agree on how to view the events that transpired on Jan. 6 nor who is responsible for them. We no longer agree adherence to a basic moral code is a prerequisite for holding high office. We do not agree on whether both threats and acts of violence in someone's name should be condemned by that person. We are at virtual polar opposite sides when it comes to environmental, immigration, gun control, and abortion policies. We can't agree on elemental facts, making constructive discourse and effective governance impossible. We do not agree as to the reasons for historic congressional inaction while there is a pressing need for action on many fronts. We can not agree on the best way to move forward. That is not sustainable.
Can we be fixed? I believe we can. We are on the cusp of deciding whether to begin that process this coming November.
Former Trump officials are among the most vocal opponents of returning him to the White House
NEW YORK (AP) — Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper has called him a “threat to democracy.” Former national security adviser John Bolton has declared him “unfit to be president.” And former Vice President Mike Pence has declined to endorse him, citing “profound differences.”
As Donald Trump seeks the presidency for a third time, he is being vigorously opposed by a vocal contingent of former officials who are stridently warning against his return to power and offering dire predictions for the country and the rule of law if his campaign succeeds.
It’s a striking chorus of detractors, one without precedent in the modern era, coming from those who witnessed first-hand his conduct in office and the turmoil that followed.
Sarah Matthews, a former Trump aide who testified before the House Jan. 6 committee and is among those warning about the threat he poses, said it’s “mind-boggling” how many members of his senior staff have denounced him.
Former Trump officials are among the most vocal opponents of returning him to the White House
As Trump seeks the presidency a third time, he’s being shadowed by a chorus of people who served in his administration who have become sharp critics, some offering dire predictions about his return to power.
apnews.com
The reasons for the warnings are as varied as the people making them. Some point to Project 2025, an authoritarian playbook centering on tearing down what is widely referred to as the "administrative state." Replacing it with those who pass a test of loyalty to the person who would head up an unitary executive with newly, expansive power. Some point to his immorality, some to witnessing first hand his incompetence and impetuous behavior, some to the virtually incomprehensible times he has run afoul of the law and basic decency. They all boil down to the same thing. They fear he will break us.
My answer to those concerns is, we are already broken.
We, the people, can not agree on who the legitimate leader of the country is. We can not agree on how to view the events that transpired on Jan. 6 nor who is responsible for them. We no longer agree adherence to a basic moral code is a prerequisite for holding high office. We do not agree on whether both threats and acts of violence in someone's name should be condemned by that person. We are at virtual polar opposite sides when it comes to environmental, immigration, gun control, and abortion policies. We can't agree on elemental facts, making constructive discourse and effective governance impossible. We do not agree as to the reasons for historic congressional inaction while there is a pressing need for action on many fronts. We can not agree on the best way to move forward. That is not sustainable.
Can we be fixed? I believe we can. We are on the cusp of deciding whether to begin that process this coming November.
