>>"These people are bereaved."

>>Check it out and you'll get my point.

Of course I get that. However, I don't believe Trump started the hyper-partisan politics that is dragging down the US and it's not often that he strikes the first blow. Yes, I agree that "they started it!" has never been a defense and my grandpa used to urge that every time a dog barks on the street, you're not obliged to rush out and bark back- but IMHO Trump could be a roll-your-eyes likeable Dennis the Menace character if not constantly under attack.

In response, can I point to General Mattis who famously resigned as Secretary of Defense following Trump's announcement of withdrawal from Syria. Mattis commented in his resignation letter that "because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position." Now Mattis is promoting a new book and was interviewed by the MSM this week. You will not be surprised that his interviewer offered opportunities to do a Scaramucci and attack Trump: however, here's how Mattis responded to the multiple attempts:

“I didn’t cook up a convenient tradition here... You don’t endanger the country by attacking the elected commander in chief."
" I may not like a commander in chief one fricking bit, but our system puts the commander in chief there, and to further weaken him when we’re up against real threats - I mean, we could be at war on the Korean peninsula, every time they start launching something."
“I know the malevolence some people feel for this country, and we have to give the people who are protecting us some time to carry out their duties without me adding my criticism to the cacophony that is right now so poisonous.”

Is he correct? Is this honorable, or is he the poisonous one?

Where do you stand?