Slashdot Mirror
Bannon Loses National Security Council Role in Trump Shakeup (bloomberg.com)
Top presidential strategist Steve Bannon has been booted from the National Security Council amid a reshuffling of the key panel, Bloomberg reports Wednesday morning. President Donald Trump reorganized the council, removing Bannon and downgrading the role of his homeland security adviser, Tom Bossert, the report added, citing multiple sources. From the report: Bannon, the former executive chairman of Breitbart News, was elevated to the National Security Council's principals committee at the beginning of Trump's presidency. The move drew criticism from some members of Congress and Washington's foreign policy establishment. A White House official said that Bannon was placed on the committee in part to monitor Trump's first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, and never attended a meeting. He's no longer needed with McMaster in charge of the council, the official said. Trump fired Flynn on Feb. 13 for not disclosing to the president or to Vice President Mike Pence the extent of his conversations with Russia's ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak, before Trump's inauguration.
The whole "Susan Rice story" is largely a concoction, an attempt at distraction from the fact that there is growing evidence of significant ties between Trump and Putin. It's almost like a Nixon supporter saying "Clearly Deep Throat broke the law, so Nixon should get off!"
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I think your right, its ultimately a positive thing to see Bannon removed.
However, the fact that Trump only trusts his family is a huge problem. It might "work" in a private family company; but it is fundamentally at odds with how government should be.
IMO There should be laws in place to prevent such nepotism -- because the bond of family is a counter force to transparency and integrity with respect to their obligation to represent the public interest etc.
Hell, many corporations for example have policies prohibiting too much nepotism -- preventing direct reports from being family members, etc. Because it's well documented that loyalty and favortism within the family bond frequently is at odds with their obligations corporate interests.
Trump running the whitehouse like a family business... will ultimately only serves trum; not the public interest.
I just searched CNN.com for "susan rice" and there is -zero- mention of the accusations against her in the first page of the search results. If I click over to the "Stories" tab, the first result is her denying any spying allegations involving the Brits. I'd love to have a non-conservative opinion on this, and their silence speaks volumes.
Fake news is news that is not true, not news you don't like.
No, this is like saying "Deep Throat gave us clues about Nixon, and thus he should be impeached". Rice clearly broke the lie, lied about it, and has implicated most of the previous Administration in breaking privacy laws. But I guess that doesn't matter to you because Trump.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
American voters have wanted a King and a ruling dynasty for the longest time.
There's a worship of political families, and just having the right name increases your odds dramatically of getting votes for election to the same position held by someone of a previous generation of your family. It's not just increased access to connections and vertical knowledge transmission, people want the bloodline. And that's external... within the system, those bloodlines have similar supportive effects.
I'm pretty sure it's basic primate psychology at work. We just really, really want to be ruled by a divinely selected bloodine no matter how stupid that idea has repeatedly been shown to be.
Generally having a role removed from your list of duties is seen as a demotion, and the timing of this, after Ivanka's official installation in the White House, is highly suggestive that the rumored power struggle between Bannon and the Kushners has resolved itself in the Kushners' favor. Also note that there have been rumors that Bannon and Priebus weren't getting along all that well either. I don't expect Bannon to work for that much longer at the White House.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Joke's on you. I'm a registered Republican. (used to be Libertarian but switched when Ron Paul was in the primaries)
As for SJWs, treating people fairly is not really garbage, and has nothing to do with maxism. Most people who are upset by SJWs are upset because they've been called out on their bullshit. That most SJWs are women and are mostly targeting men has a lot to do with the vitriol that is spewed about SJWs. A lot of guys are just too old fashioned to want to here criticism from a woman. I don't care what gender someone is, as long as the criticism is valid and constructive. Usual response to SJWs is: I don't like what you're saying, so I'll mock you to take that power away from you. But that funny thing is you can't win that way (well at least *I* find it funny)
Democrats like Obama and both Clintons are very right leaning. They are no Howard Dean, Ralph Nader or Bernie Sanders. Not that a 1 dimensional scale for measuring political views is a good metric, it lacks nuance. For example, I'm a Republican and believe in small decentralized government and in supporting small business owners, but I'm against the death penalty. Does that make me a liberal? Probably not.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Uh, are you calling Trump a Libertarian?
LOL.
He's apparently a corporatocrat, which makes him just as much of a libertarian as most of the people who call themselves libertarian. Don't like it? Separate yourself from that label to escape the association with all the crypto-corporatocrats hiding among you. Sometimes a label is too tainted and has to be discarded.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
There's a lot of noise about the likes of Flynn being outed, but strangely little outrage about what they were doing, at least from Republicans.
There isn't much talk about "what they were doing" because there wasn't much going on at all and that takes all the fun out of the story for the Democrats. There's a reason that even Obama's DNI said that despite having access to everything, he say no evidence of anything out of bounds. There's no there there. All the hype is just the ongoing Democrat theater designed to find some way, any way, to distract from their horrible choice of candidate and idiotic conduct during the election. And the fact that under Obama they lost nearly a thousand legislative seats, most of the governoships, both houses of congress, and now the White House and the Supreme Court. The whole ZOMG RUSSIANS! meme is getting downright hilarious. Meanwhile we have every indication that people in actual power at the time of the election and leading up to it were using intelligence resources for political research.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Well when you host your own website you can decide what can and cant be posted.
In the mean time, I'll keep reading slashdot and continue to be not surprised about news articles related to major players in major online political movements and how they are fairing in their current role in real world politics.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.