Trump Thread

**Republican security experts rail against Trump in open letter

An open letter signed by 50 Republican national security experts warned that party nominee Donald Trump “would be the most reckless president” in US history.

The group - which includes the former CIA director Michael Hayden - said Mr Trump “lacks the character, values and experience” to be president.

Many of the signatories had declined to sign a similar note in March.

“None of us will vote for Donald Trump,” the letter states.

The letter comes after a number of high-profile Republicans have stepped forward to disown Mr Trump.**

Mr Trump has broke with years of Republican foreign policy on a number of occasions.
The candidate has questioned the whether US should honour its commitments to Nato, endorsed the use of torture and suggested that South Korea and Japan should arm themselves with nuclear weapons.

“He weakens US moral authority as the leader of the free world,” the letter read.
“He appears to lack basic knowledge about and belief in the US Constitution, US laws, and US institutions, including religious tolerance, freedom of the press, and an independent judiciary.”

Also among those who signed the letter was John Negroponte, the first director of national intelligence and later deputy secretary of state; Robert B Zoellick, who was also a former deputy secretary of state and former president of the World Bank; and two former secretaries of homeland security, Tom Ridge and Michael Chertoff.

The letter echoed similar sentiment shared by some Republican national security officials in March, but the new additions came after Mr Trump encouraged Russia to hack Mrs Clinton’s email server, according to the New York Times.

Mr Trump later said he was “being sarcastic” when he made the remarks about hacking his rival’s emails.

So Trump is basically a national security risk, correct? Too risky to have as President, correct? But some of them will vote for Hillary Clinton? What about the 33000 emails? What about all the things James Comey said even though she was not charged? If her emails don’t all come out by the time of the election, and she becomes President, she could be bribed as President over the content of her emails if they’ve gotten into the hands of hackers. She could have put American national security at risk by her actions and what do these 50 have to say about her actions as Secretary of State? Some of them would vote for her? They can make their arguments about Trump and that will be debated, but the fact that some of them criticise Trump for what they see as as his failings and the potential threat he would make and yet they would vote for Hillary Clinton, is curious, to say the least. It creates more questions for these people.

These are some heavy hitters. If they aren’t worried about her emails, maybe there is nothing to worry about.

Good chance that those really being vocal about possible change coming to DC, probably have the most to loose by this change imo

And btw, Trump is the not the first candidate to run on the “Im going to change DC, Im not a Beltway insider” platform…well, why didnt all these folks come out with their concerns with any of those candidates like they do with Trump?..My opinion, they realized most of the former candidates who liked to run on that, were not actually going to change anything, Trump is a different story, and they are fearing for their future security,(likely been feeding at the same trough as many others), they feel trapped in a corner.

What you say is true but there appears to be no more shock value in those emails. Very few would understand them anyway. Trump OTOH is an unknown quantity in politics and has given very little confidence in his ability to lead a major superpower. It’s really a race to the bottom. Gary Johnson is looking better every day.

Tell that to the Guy Iran hanged today

There are two things that could seriously Derik Hilkary One is the probable leaking of her private emails in October The other is a seizure during a speech

As someone who is contemplating voting for 3rd party for the first time in his life, Gary Johnson will not be getting my vote. Way too socially liberal for me to consider. If the message is to shake up the poltical system, a more viable option is necessary. Johnson isn’t that candidate. I wish he was.

Instead of “Republican security experts,” should read: “Bush cronies.”


All of these so-called Republicans that are railing against Trump are heavily invested in the “System”, the establishment, the status quo. These globalists have a lot to lose under an America First administration. Americanism is out with these folks, globalism is in. Hillary is the patron saint of globalists like these that would sell their own country out for a patronage position and a dollar.

People like this have been in government for so long, working against the interest of the American people, that IMHO, their words are worthless.

It seems odd to argue that 50 national security advisors (from Trump’s own party) are somehow necessarily crooked because they have expressed what they believe to be the dangers of a potential Trump presidency. Isn’t it possible that this is just their opinion as national security experts?

Isn’t it also possible that they understand (maybe even better than posters on this forum) the situation regarding Ms. Clinton’s emails and nonetheless feel Trump is far more dangerous. Why reject their combined wisdom based on speculation about what might (or might not) be in these emails.

I’m not saying that they are ultimately right or wrong, just suggesting that the grounds offered this far for rejecting their concerns seem problematic.

So how much stronger does the dollar have to be and how much many more Treasury bonds do we have to sell and how much more military do we have to strengthen so to make America great again? A lot of the world depends on the U.S. for its imports and the like. Do we really want to stick it to them?

Trump Opponent =/= Clinton Supporter

Neocons have been against Trump from Day 1.

I don’t think neocons have the right strategy.

I said he was looking better. I didn’t say I would vote for him. I might not vote at all. I don’t see standing in line just so to vote for the “lesser of two evils.”? Six out of ten Americans hate both candidates. I wish they wouldn’t keep doing this to us.

How much worse can Mr. Trump do than what Mrs. Clinton did in her reign as Secretary of State? She, along with our President, has made a complete mess of much of the world, a mess like I’ve never seen in my lifetime. The Middle East is a cauldron of death and anarchy due to her actions and there is no end in sight using their strategy.

And these Republican “security experts” think she is fit to lead this country? Again, I reiterate, their words are meaningless…

There are other important races going on that day. Please vote, if not for President, certainly there’s got to be some candidates in other races worth considering.

:thumbsup: You are right of course.

It boggles my mind how some posters here, and many Trump die-hards elsewhere, simply cannot grasp the dangers of a Trump presidency, as it is also well outlined in that letter. I hope that in the end it does not matter because Trump will lose – and like many, including a good number of Republicans, would prefer, he should lose badly, as a lesson to everyone.

Can Cruz, Bush, Kasich, Rauner, et al be all wrong in not endorsing Trump? And if you think the cold or lukewarm endorsements by Paul Ryan, McConnell, McCain et al will translate into a Trump landslide, I would suggest rethinking that strategy.

Had no idea where to put this since the Trump thread 2 has apparently been closed.

But Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, announced tonight that she would not vote for Donald Trump in the presidential election, dealing another blow to Mr. Trump as he tries to unite his party and win more support from women.

She joins Cruz, Kasich, Bush, Rauner, Kirk, and many other Republicans.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit