Fox News’ Ainsley Earhardt justified on Tuesday President Trump’s inaction on reports that he had been provided a written assessment on a Russian bribery scheme to pay militants to target and kill American and coalition troops in Afghanistan because not all presidents “read all of their briefings.”
My mom used to say, “Well if all the other kids jumped off a cliff, would you be stupid enough to follow?”
Seriously. A toddler’s excuse from a toddlers administration.
“If he is briefed on it, then he can act on it.”
Ummm…so now that he knows, he’s planning to act? Bullshit.
It took fox a full three days to figure out the lie they were gong with,let’s see how long it lasts. Real tell there…
The truth is coming out on this one, as it is a bridge too far for about 30% of the Republican Party. Part of their base really does revere and/or served in the military, and no lie can cover up that Donald is selling out our solders’ lives. This cuts Too hard against the Propaganda narrative Donald and Fox are trying to sell to stick. But the “oh he was not doing his job, do you expect him to” lie will blow up as more people leak the truth.
The actual date - February 27 - when trump was briefed is in the nyt piece. That is “take him down” level leaking.
The smart republicans. (E.g. Liz Cheany, Ben Sasse) are already breaking from him.
‘You know that reading stuff takes time, concentration, vocabulary, a grasp of English grammar and general knowledge. More than that, it takes time away from your golf game…’.
How does any woman still work for that network? Its not like they’ve changed anything there. If anything its only gotten worse in all respects.
Just pathetic mouthpieces totally devoted to propaganda. Look at your own polls, bimbo barbie. You’re not helping yourself in the credibility department. Let’s hope this is her last high-profile job and she’s working out of a drive-thru at Mickey D’s the next time we see her.
Ainsley, crawl back under the sheets with your Hannity. This is way over your head.
And as to your assertion, Obama sure as hell kept up with the intel; think Osama bin Laden.
But if you mean, say, that Duhbya ignored the intelligence that al Qaida was going to attack us, then yes.
By the way, do you see a pattern here? You know, moronic rethuglican pResidents screwing up?
Bad Call, Ainsley. A non-thinking Horribly Bad Call.
Actually, he just doesn’t care.
But no presidents read none of the briefings…until now.
I swear when this is over, we’re going to find ‘Sesame Street’ style animations on a computer in the WH somewhere. A little animated characters “FBI GUY”, NSA Nancy" and “CIA Cindy” singing and dancing and explaining in simple terms, the serious issues of the day.
And none of them over thirty seconds long.
They’re really struggling if this is the best they can come up with.
He’s in a really bad spot here and they know it.
“I believe it was titled ‘Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US.’”
Not reading security briefings is a Republican feature not a bug.
Next it’ll be, “well, there was a briefer in the room and he did say that Putin was killing American Soldiers, but Trump was too busy tweeting and didn’t hear him.”
Obsequious, ingratiating, sycophantic, fawning, unctuous, servile, groveling, subservient, slavish, bootlicking, ass-kissing, submissive from Mr. Dominate.
HAH!
Oh, and nauseating.
Briefings are too much for Trump. They need a new, more concise format: “Thongings.”
The President’s Daily Thong. That would get Trump’s attention.
My troops knew what they were getting into.
What higher honor than to die for me and Putin?
Ouch. That’s pretty brutal, and so on target.