A note to my publisher and readers at townbroadcast.com:

As I sipped my first cup of coffee Tuesday morning (and twisted my first savory smoke of the day), it occurred to me there are (probably) at least a hundred reporters, likely more, across the nation assigned to monitor Donald Trump’s “tweets” on a regular basis. (I wouldn’t last a day in that job, no matter how much I was paid). I only monitor them through the media, and I’m truly shocked (nearly paranoid) by the man’s ignorance.

We’ve really done it, now, and I can only hope to God (or whoever runs things ethereally) we haven’t done ourselves in. The picture I’m painting in my mind (my IQ is 164) is of a real dumb-bell. He’s as dumb as a cement block. And like most people who believe they’re brilliant and know all, he really knows very little about anything — particularly anything having to do with his most recent field of endeavor. Condemnation of his ignorance and stupidity is all but universal across our intelligence establishment, and the upper crust of military officers (with the exception of Michael Flynn, who’s showing all the signs of early onset Alzheimer’s disease, or some other debilitating brain affliction).

Everyone who knows me, knows my feelings about the CIA. They’ve made “soup sandwiches” of many projects, and have often done serious harm to our nation, its reputation and its institutions. But those have most often been when they’re assigned projects in which they have little to no real supervision, and which allow them freedom of action in the far-flung field. Where they’re good, very good, indeed, is gathering, reviewing, and providing “broad possible methods and means” of action, or reaction, (thus stirring broad discussion in government of possible response or reaction) to threats, and/or acts against the State. The CIA is not our only intelligence service. There are seventeen (yes, 17) we know of. I’d give my best shirt to know what the overall assessment of all seventeen adds up to. — Barry Hastings

By Barry Hastings        

Recent news reports by the CIA about Russian interference with our electoral processes tickled my political funny bone the in the same way announcement of a break-in at Democratic National Headquarters at the Watergate Hotel in D.C., on June 17, 1972 tickled it — so much so, I began keeping a day to day, often hour to hour, diary of the long-running affair, which proved so disastrous for Richard M. Nixon, many of his most powerful White House staff, and a host of others.

Last Saturday’s CIA announcement forced me to delay plans to publish the first (of two) parts, of a compact history of Cuba from discovery by Columbus, through the Russian Nuclear Missiles in Cuba affair, of October 1962, forward. I believe, by what I’m seeing already, this story will become news at least as big as Watergate and perhaps even bigger.

From the start we must realize the Russians are not our friends, rather they’re our deadly, and deadliest, enemies — have been since the west brought about collapse of the old Soviet Empire, their withdrawal from Germany, Poland, and other Western States they’d occupied since the end of World War II. They have long memories, evil intentions.

As I’ve (often) said before, Russian foreign policy never changes. At the current time they’re trying to force Crimea back into their Russian hands through military force and fear. As they help the Syrian government kill thousands (hundred of thousands), of its own citizens, they’re also terrorizing the Scandinavian nations (Norway, Sweden, Denmark) with regular, but staggered, military aircraft overflights, harassment in the sea trade lanes by Russian naval forces. They threaten the Baltic states in much the same manner, and through more subtle means. Russia hasn’t a near neighbor who doesn’t fear her.

Russia’s fondest hope, since the end of WWII (during which we gave them almost countless billions in tanks, ships, aircraft, heavy trucks, food, (lots of food) small arms, artillery, and many dead sailors, military and merchant, on the Murmansk convoy runs), has been for the downfall of the Western democracies — in truth, for the downfall of Democracy everywhere on this earth. Republican Senator John McCain has hit the nail on the head several times, and in several venues Saturday and Sunday, the 11^th and 12^th of December), when he claimed Vladimir Putin is, “A bully, a thug, and a murderer.” Evidence of the fact is overwhelming. Why would Trump want this man as a friend?

Too cozy a relationship with Putin is already causing questions (endangering?) seating of his nominee for Secretary of State, Rex Willerson, probably reducing his chances of confirmation by at least 50 percent. He certainly doesn’t seem the kind of man likely to understand the cultures of many, even most, nations he’d be dealing with — probably not even interested in them.

There are many dangerous drawbacks in seeking any kind of “grand bargain” with Putin. First and largest, is the poor Russian record in living up to agreements, dating way back to the Truman administration. Then, President Harry Truman, was moved to admonish Stalin’s foreign minister, Molotov, for his and Stalin’s poor record living up to agreements on Greece, Czechoslovakia, and other regions. Molotov asked angrily, “How dare you talk to me in such a way?” Truman answered, “Keep your agreements, and you won’t be talked to that way!” Molotov stormed out in a huff, but they seldom overtly fooled around diplomatically with Truman again.

You don’t have to look far between then, and now, to find a whole host of trouble and problems between the West and the Russians. The Financial Times in November saw Russia’s challenge to American dominance in world affairs (political, military, economic) as the most acute foreign policy issue on the U.S. agenda. While defusing tension with our nuclear-armed rival is important if possible, and striking a deal would help build Trump’s reputation as deal maker, the Times wondered if Trump also recognizes the “huge risks” inherent in any bargain with Russia.

Putin’s highest goal is severing the ties between the U.S., Europe, and other Democratic states around the globe. He views them as inimical, and unfair, to Russia’s world-wide interests. A thaw in relations and anti-Russian constraints restricting Putin’s (Russia’s) interests could possibly deliver a temporary thaw, but it could also undermine long-term American and Western interests, under cutting security and stability in other nations. Putin’s desire, is for a world cut into spheres of influence dominated by the great powers, instead of nations practicing western-style multi-lateral cooperation as the west now does. Such a change cold leave smaller nations, those with less economic/military power (like Russia’s former Soviet regions), extremely vulnerable, based on what we see of Putin’s conduct today. He appears to be laying the ground work for such changes all around the borders of the new Russian state.

To prevent Russian gains toward this goal, the U.S. must resist any attempt to re-create a modern 1945 Yalta Conference. Not doing so, will seem to the world community an acknowledgment of legitimacy of Russia’s annexation of Crimea, and the invasion of Eastern Ukraine. It would also be a denial of the 1990 Paris Charter (which followed fall of the Berlin wall), that Europe’s nations are free to choose their own policies and alliances.

Special care, the Financial Times emphasized in its coverage, should be given to Ukraine. “They must not be sold out.” Doing so could bring on collapse of its pro-western government, and make it easier for Putin to tumble other former Soviet states, and force them back into their former status.

Trump’s plans to reduce, or cut altogether, our ties to NATO might well enhance Putin’s chances of making such collapses possible, even probable. NATO has provided Europe with political and military stability since 1949. Weakening the treaty organization would have a devastating effect on treaty allies, in terms of economics, and defensive capabilities. No single European nation could stand against the military might of Russia. We must increase efforts efforts to convince NATO member-states to “pay their fair share,” but our commitment to defend even the smallest and newest member should remain as it is — unconditional.

U.S. Senator, and former Secretary of Defense William Cohen, said he’s, “Troubled by Trump’s relationship with, and admiration of Putin,” adding “I’m troubled by his statements about withdrawing from old relationships, and by his many unachievable, undesirable, and unrealistic foreign policy proposals.” He added a question of his own, “Can we simply roll ourselves up in a ball?”

(Hitler wanted to own Europe so he’d have the economic and industrial strength to tackle first the Soviet Union, then the United Sates of America. It doesn’t take much in the brains department to figure out why Putin would like to own Europe, does it? The only way he can own Europe, is to break up, or otherwise weaken, our long-standing, very successful, NATO alliance. One or the other, Mr. Trump claims he intends to do.

I repeat, Czars, Communists, the new Russian State, their foreign policy never varies. Dealing with Russia (rather, Putin), Trump should put much emphasis on the security of their neighbors. Improving relations cannot be achieved by giving in to Putin’s demands. When their survival was at stake during the “good war,” they ever, and always, demanded more, more, more. They are still, as Western Europeans described them centuries ago, bears in clothing. They’re not going to change if all we show them is accommodation, acquiescence, acceptance of their never-ending acquisitiveness.

Speaking to Trump’s dealings with Putin and Russia, former defense and security officer Robert Gates, appeared recently on the CBS Morning News. Questioned by Charley Rose, he said Donald Trump, “is one of the worst, National Security problems facing the United States.” He’d earlier claimed Trump, “Was not fit to be President of the United States,” then added, “At least on national security, Trump is beyond repair.” These are very biting condemnations, coming from man like Gates, who has long experience in national security matters, and a spotless reputation among his peers in the ‘trade. He added, an American President, “must thread the needle with Putin, letting him know, clearly, we won’t be pushed around.”

Gates also said intelligence professionals do not want to scrap the U.S. nuclear deal with Iran, but we should make it clear the agreement, “does not prohibit action on other matters, or in other spheres.” He also felt parts of the defense and intel communities are pushing too hard for more combat troops, when they should be pressing for, “better intelligence.”

Trump’s biggest problem, aside from his increasingly troublesome Russian Connection, is the large number of very expensive promises he made to large numbers of people and agencies. The following list of military items consists of about half of them, many of those not on this list have already been broken, i.e., building a wall between us, and Mexico. On national defense, he’s promised to repeal the defense “sequester;” modernize our nuclear arsenal; grow the Army to 540,000 soldiers; grow the Navy from 272, to 350 ships and subs; grow the Air Force to 1,200 fighters; develop a state of the art missile defense system; modify navy cruisers to provide ballistic missile defense for the fleet, at $220 M per ship; increase our presence in the East and South China seas.

Query: if we’re going to be so chummy with Putin, who are these programs aimed at, and what will they do in response?

There are at least this many proposals, often more, in just about every department of U.S. Government. If he’s going to give major tax breaks to the wealthiest people in the nation, who’s to pay for all this. I just got a three-dollar ($3) raise on my Social Security check (my grocery bill has doubled over the last two years), and it’s the first increase in four years. C’mon, Don, get real. You’re gonna’ have old people starvin’ in the streets.

Between the Trump-Putin love and mutual assistance society, a never-ending war, and a government stuffed full of wealthy racists, sexists and xenophobes, my best guess is, We’re in the hell of a mess!