blackjack21 wrote:
1) That's two different schools of thought in play. An ambassador is, in fact, the president's personal representative to another country.
2) That he hadn't even met the holdovers shows that much of the State Department system is broken
3) The DoD has had more influence on foreign policy.
4)Yet, Trump has done something quite interesting there too: he hasn't filled the vacancy of Secretary Mattis by a new appointment. Ironically, even the Senate doesn't seem to have put up a slate of candidates to push on the president. There is a lot of animosity toward the deep state right now.
5) It's not an admission of guilt. It's the voluntary offering of evidence.
6) They have been talking about impeachment since 2016, right after the election.
7)Sure you can.
1) An ambassador is there to represent the country, and carry out the policies of the current administration. Your use of the word personal is simply wrong. The president may appoint him, but he swears his oath to the country.
2) The State Dept wasn't broken until Trump broke it.
3) Any real administration works with the complex interplay of differing agencies and their agendas. Calling it complex is an understatement.
I will give you this much, the rise of empire has reduced the influence of State, and clearly increased the influence of Defense. But that ought to come with about a dozen caveats. That is very true in Iraq, not so much in Belgium. Regardless, a real foreign policy has to balance a lot of competing interests, not just those two.
4) The senate can't nominate. The dirty little secret is that Trump has largely stopped using confirmation. That is for a couple reasons. Few people that could get confirmed want to work for him. But, more importantly, he likes having them be beholden only to him. Even there, he doesn't use the government much. He acts on his impulses, and on what's good for him.
5) "I'd like you to do me a favor, though."
6) "They"?? There is one person in Congress that started talking about impeachment early on. It took over a year from that point before Pelosi came on board. Frankly, they should have started an investigation concerning the emoulements clause shortly after he was sworn in. If you didn't see this coming before he was sworn in, you weren't paying attention.
7) Trump already admitted it. We have plenty of corroboration now, with more coming. Fareed Zakaria interviewed a couple Ukrainians today, to get their perspective.
Oh well..