CNN Is Outraged Over Donald Trump's Hilarious Tweet Of Hitting Golf Ball At Hillary Clinton

CNN Is Outraged Over Donald Trump's Hilarious Tweet Of Hitting Golf Ball At Hillary Clinton election, members of the federal bureaucracy have taken unusual steps to stop him. Soon after November 8, online guides for how to "resist from below" or to "dissent from within" the administration popped up. During the transition, and continuing after the inauguration, federal employees who were repulsed by the new president and his agenda discussed strategies to hide or alter documents, leak damaging information, and slow down the process of changing government policy. "You're going to see the bureaucrats using time to their advantage, " an anonymous Justice Department official told The Washington Post in January. "People here will resist and push back against orders they find unconscionable." These tactics had been used before; clashes between the governing class and a new administration are not uncommon. But the scale of the effort, and especially how it was coordinated, was new. "Federal workers are in regular consultation with recently departed Obama-era political appointees about what they can do to push back against the new president's initiatives, " The Washington Post reported. Federal employees used encrypted communications to avoid detection by the president's team, and a number of anonymous Twitter accounts attributed to government officials—@Rogue_DoD, @alt_labor, and the like—cropped up to organize resistance and release damaging information about the administration. Leaks are not new, but we have never seen anything like the daily barrage of leaks that have poured out of Trump's executive branch. Not all of them have come from bureaucrats; Trump appointees have engaged in leaking too. But many of the leaks appear to have come

http://bit.ly/2x5WpGZ

national-security adviser, Michael Flynn, that included a discussion of U.S. sanctions against Russia. (This was the leak that exposed Flynn's lies and led to his resignation.) Other leaks by current and former intelligence officials have involved intercepts of Russian government officials discussing "derogatory" information about Trump and his campaign staff; of other Russian officials bragging that they could use their relationship with Flynn to influence Trump; of Kislyak claiming to have discussed campaign-related issues with then-Senator Sessions; and of Kislyak reporting to Moscow that Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, wanted to establish a secure of a phone conversation between the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, and the incoming communication channel. The leaks of Russia intercepts may seem commonplace, but they violated taboos that had been respected even in the wild west of unlawful government disclosures. The first was a taboo against publishing the contents of foreign intelligence intercepts, especially ones involving a foe like Russia. It is hard to recall another set of leaks that exposed so much specific information about intelligence intercepts of a major adversary. This form of leaking risks compromising a communication channel and thus telling an adversary how to avoid detection in the future. The Russia leaks may well have burned large investments in electronic surveillance and constricted future U.S. surveillance opportunities. The Russia leaks also breached a taboo against revealing information about U.S. citizens "incidentally collected" during surveillance of a foreign agent. The government

boogke

the leaks has been significant and may outlast the Trump presidency. Although a future president likely won't find advantage in following Trump's example, intelligence officials who have discovered the political power of leaking secretly collected information about Americans may well continue the practice. A world without norms to prevent the disclosure of sensitive information about U.S. citizens is not just a world in which Michael Flynn is revealed as a liar and removed from office. It is also a world in which intelligence bureaucrats repeat the trick for very different political ends that they deem worthy but that might not be. Trump has not attacked the U.S. military while president, but he has taken a wrecking ball to customs of civilian–military relations. More than other presidents, he has staffed senior positions with current and former military brass. He has attempted to leverage popular admiration for the military into backing for his policies, such as by signing his initial executive order on immigration in the Pentagon's Hall of Heroes and by giving political speeches before military audiences. He has even urged soldiers to contact members of Congress in support of his policies, contrary to regulations and customs forbidding them from lobbying. These practices threaten to politicize the military and leave "tattered shreds of the military's ethics and values in their wake, " Phillip Carter of the Center for a New American Security wrote for Slate. Even if future presidents don't repeat Trump's practices, he will have done great harm if attitudes change within the military toward the chain of command and the appropriateness of service members' engagement in politics. Trump is also politicizing the judiciary. He has accused the judges reviewing their own. Courts have always been political, in the sense that laws and precedents don't always yield obvious answers and, especially in high-stakes cases, judges' personal views can matter. But it is important to judicial legitimacy that judges appear neutral and detached, that they appear to follow precedent, and that they appear to pay presidents appropriate deference and respect. This is especially true in cases touching on immigration and national security, where the executive branch's authority is at its height. In the Trump immigration cases, the judges sometimes abandoned these norms. They were in a tough spot because they were reviewing extraordinary executive-branch actions in a highly charged context. But they reacted with hasty and, in some ways, sloppy judicial opinions. They issued broad injunctions unsupported by the underlying legal analysis. They seemed to extend constitutional protections to noncitizens who lacked any connection to the United States. And they failed to give the government's national-security determinations proper deference. The judges had many avenues to rule against Trump on many issues, especially with regard to the first order. They had plenty of reasons to be angry or defensive because of his tweeted attacks. But they neglected principles of restraint, prudence, and precedent to rule against him across the board based on what seemed to many a tacit determination that the just-elected president lacked legitimacy on immigration issues. If judges were to continue such behavior for four or eight years, judicial norms and trust in the judiciary might take a serious hit. But there are reasons to think this norms that govern the news media. Journalistic practices, of course, were already evolving as a result of social media, the decentralization of news production, and changing financial models. But Trump has had a distinct effect. The vast majority of elite journalists have a progressive outlook, which influences what gets covered, this reason, the judiciary has a fighting chance to return to normal patterns. The same cannot be said of the and how, in ways that many Americans, especially outside of big cities, find deeply biased. The press was among the least trusted of American institutions long before Trump assaulted it as the "enemy of the people" and the "lowest form of life." Members of the media viewed these attacks, correctly, as an effort by Trump to discredit, marginalize, and even dehumanize them. And they were shocked when the strategy worked. "The country was really angry at the elite, and that included us, and I don't think we quite had our finger on it, " Dean Baquet, the executive editor of The New York Times, said with exquisite understatement during a roundtable discussion with his reporters in June. Reporters are "binge-drinking the anti-Trump Kool-Aid, " Bob Woodward says. After the election, news organizations devoted more resources than ever to White House coverage, and they have produced exceptional in-depth reporting that has been integral to the constitutional checks on the presidency. Reporting on a flagrantly norm-breaking president produces a novel conundrum, however. A Harvard study found that Trump's mainstream coverage during the first 100 days of his presidency "set a new standard for negativity": four "binge-drinking the anti-Trump Kool-Aid, " as the venerable Bob Woodward argued in May. Such excesses lend credence to Trump's attacks on "the fake-news media." So, too, do other changes in the norms of covering the president. Many journalists let their hair down on Twitter with opinionated anti-Trump barbs that reveal predispositions and shape the way readers view their reporting. And news outlets have at times seemed to cast themselves as part of the resistance to Trump, and seen their revenues soar. (It cannot be an accident that The Washington Post's "Democracy dies in darkness" motto, though used in-house for years, was rolled out publicly in amount of resources such as gold, elixir and gems. Features: Using this COC hack tool is very easy and simple. Online Clash of Clans hack tool is safe and provides ban protection. These Clash of Clans cheats takes place through a proxy system. No need to Jailbreak and Root your iOS and Android devices. 100% safe and undetectable with its anti-ban script. How to use COC This hacking is very much safe to use and it has no chance of getting banned. It can be used as many times to get the desired Hack No Human Verification System? (Steps) Go to Online Clash of Clans hack generator page above. Enter your Player Tag of is to Verify Simple Captcha only. (No Survey) Necessary Gems, Gold, Elixir and Dark Elixir are added to the player's account. the Clash of Clans. Enter the amount of Gems, Gold, Elixir and Dark Elixir then push generate. Then you have to complete only Captcha Verification system in order to prevent abuse of this hack. The gems will be updated once the Captcha Verification is your account.) Click on "Verify Now" button. Share this COC hack tool by clicking any social media icons. Now, The last step CNN Is Outraged Over Donald Trump's Hilarious Tweet Of Hitting Golf Ball At Hillary Clinton

Nhận xét