'Fact checkers' attempt to defend Obama's 'toughness' in dealing with Russia and fail

Daily Caller:
President Donald Trump clearly enjoys using his Twitter account to prime our already impish elites for a day of flailing, a week of wailing. This time, we were treated to career diplomats, professional babblers and esteemed fact-checkers, all in a hurry to show their man Barack Obama was, despite all objective evidence, a real tough guy.

Like a skinny-armed “Guernica,” the blob howled out its independent, completely individual rulings.

“President Trump Tweeted He’s Been Tougher on Russia Than Obama. That’s Not True,” Time magazine decreed. “Trump tweets that he’s been tougher on Russia than Obama — but he hasn’t been,” CNBC declared. “Mostly False,” Politifact chimed in. “No, Trump Hasn’t Been Harder on Russia Than Obama,” Mother Jones echoed a day later.

Nicholas Burns, a former Hillary Clinton adviser, tweeted that Trump hasn’t “defended us” from Russia, citing Obama’s expulsion of 35 diplomats, closing of two compounds and economic sanctions. The Hill, in its write-up, cited Mr. Burns as “a veteran U.S. diplomat and current Harvard professor,” notably leaving out his failed stint at electing Clinton. Pretty kooky.

But there’s more wrong here. More left out.

In addition to keeping the two Russian compounds closed over Kremlin protest, President Trump added three Russian compounds to the list.

In addition to keeping the Obama sanctions in place, President Trump’s Department of Treasury sanctioned 38 groups and individuals connected to Ukrainian separatists, froze assets on five of Vladimir Putin’s prominent allies, and began to roll out a new batch of congressionally mandated sanctions, providing a list of targets and a report on sanctions’ impact. Having provided these lists, the administration is currently well within its 120-day timeline to evaluate which targets have changed their ways or require the hammer.

But what else?

President Obama was afraid to enforce America’s chemical weapon treaty with Syria because he didn’t want a confrontation with the Russians. President Trump struck Syria without a single utterance about red lines, calmly informing the Chinese dictator of his unilateral action over “the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake that you have ever seen.”

President Obama scrapped George W. Bush’s promise to deploy a missile-defense shield to Poland. President Trump sent American missiles back along with American natural gas — a direct slap to Russia, which uses its energy-exports to threaten Europe at will. (RELATED: 5 Times Trump Has Slapped Down Russia)

President Obama withheld lethal arms to Ukraine after Russia’s invasion. President Trump OK’d lethal weapons to Ukraine.

President Obama let the military budget lapse under the weight of multiple wars and domestic caps. President Trump increased military spending.

President Obama asked Russia to stop breaking the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and was soundly ignored. President Trump responded“with a missile of [our] own.”
...
US energy policy under Trump makes it harder for Russia to build its military.  If Hillary Clinton had won there would be more attempts to thwart US energy growth which would have mainly benefited Russia.  US LNG shipments to Europe also make it harder for Russia to threaten to cut off gas supplies.

Trump's approach appears to follow Teddy Rosevelt's model of "speak softly and carry a big stick" as opposed to Obama's speak harshly and then act like a wimp.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more