The Trump - Putin Ticket

Discussion in 'Politics' started by joepistole, Jul 31, 2016.

  1. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    #MotherRussia | #WhatTheyVotedFor

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    It seemed risky enough to accuse Repubicans of voting against America. After all, conservatives like to think of themselves as patriots. And with all the signs of Russian meddling, nearly sixty-three million Americans voted for Vladimir Putin's poodle.

    Once upon a time, Republicans liked to tout themselves as some Party of Accountability. The GOP is now the #GloryOfPutin.

    Some Obama White House officials had little faith that a Trump administration would make good on such pledges, and the efforts to preserve the intelligence continued until the administration's final hours. This was partly because intelligence was still being collected and analyzed, but it also reflected the sentiment among many administration officials that they had not recognized the scale of the Russian campaign until it was too late.

    The warning signs had been building throughout the summer, but were far from clear. As WikiLeaks was pushing out emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee through online publication, American intelligence began picking up conversations in which Russian officials were discussing contacts with Trump associates, and European allies were starting to pass along information about people close to Mr. Trump meeting with Russians in the Netherlands, Britain and other countries.

    ‡​

    The concerns about the contacts were cemented by a series of phone calls between Sergey I. Kislyak, Russia's ambassador to the United States, and Michael T. Flynn, who had been poised to become Mr. Trump's national security adviser. The calls began on Dec. 29, shortly after Mr. Kislyak was summoned to the State Department and informed that, in retaliation for Russian election meddling, the United States was expelling 35 suspected Russian intelligence operatives and imposing other sanctions. Mr. Kislyak was irate and threatened a forceful Russia response, according to people familiar with the exchange.

    But a day later, Mr. Putin said his government would not retaliate, prompting a Twitter post from Mr. Trump praising the Russian president — and puzzling Obama White House officials.

    On Jan. 2, administration officials learned that Mr. Kislyak — after leaving the State Department meeting — called Mr. Flynn, and that the two talked multiple times in the 36 hours that followed. American intelligence agencies routinely wiretap the phones of Russian diplomats, and transcripts of the calls showed that Mr. Flynn urged the Russians not to respond, saying relations would improve once Mr. Trump was in office, according to multiple current and former officials.

    Remember that what we're talking about here merely includes ... wait.

    Remember that what we're talking about merely includes a retired Army General betraying the United States of America.

    And remember, the President of the United States is okay with this betrayal.

    But, yeah, you know, that's just ... I mean, how is that the tip of the iceberg?

    You know ... just ... or merely the tip of the iceberg?

    Caught off guard is one thing, but clearly the Obama administration expected the betrayal to continue. And how right they were.

    After all, the FBI Director has no credibility. Congressional Republicans are loath to investigate this, and must be dragged kicking and screaming over some of the most ridiculous excuses. And they're reluctant to invoke a special investigator because, you know, the Republican chairman of House Oversight has his priorities straight, chasing after Sid the Science Kid and a sticky label on an empty box in a tourist map display for national parks, because, well, right, compared to Russia, Rep. Chaffetz's priorities are clear.

    And, you know, this can go through the Intelligence committees; they can run a good, clean, investigation. That is to say, they can run a good, clean investigation when they aren't out defending the White House at the President's behest.

    Meanwhile, the People should expect no help from the Department of Justice, where former Trump campaign official and present Attorney General J.B. Sessions III refuses to recuse himself from any investigations, and, oh, the other shoe dropped minutes after the NYT piece about the Obama administration's efforts when the Washington Post published a devastating lede:

    Then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) spoke twice last year with Russia's ambassador to the United States, Justice Department officials said, encounters he did not disclose when asked about possible contacts between members of President Trump's campaign and representatives of Moscow during Sessions's confirmation hearing to become attorney general.

    Consider this: Attorney General Sessions, then a U.S. Senator, was in contact with the Russians during a period when Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort was being blackmailed↱, and apparently by Russians.

    Quite honestly, Republicans, there are many among the rest of us who wonder just what it will take. You had plenty of signs on the front side; you still voted for President Trump in an historic victory marking the greatest total ever achieved by a popular vote loser. You've had plenty more signs since, and the result seems to be increasing solidarity.

    So there does come a point at which we shrug at each other and say, yeah, it would seem this really is #WhatTheyVotedFor.

    And now that risky vice, to tease that you voted against America, isn't a tease anymore.

    You really, really did.

    And, yeah. We are so amazed.

    Look at this fucking mess. The White House is compromised; the Department of Justice is compromised; Congress is compromised; and this is all Republican will.

    You chose this. You wanted this for your country. And why? You want us to believe it wasn't for the supremacism? What was it, your fake email scandal? Your disgraceful fake Benghazi scandal? Your decades-old misogynistic conspiracy theory? And how's that anti-corruption bender going, anyway? Congratulations. You have, in your vote and the days since, proven to the world that those years of screeching and wailing were complete lies.

    So do something for your country for once. We all have some work to do, here, and face it, you still get a batshit stupid Republican in the Oval Office when we're done, except that Pence is likely dirty, too, so we'll get to hear you cry about how you didn't get to punish Hillary Clinton for not really doing anything wrong so why should you keep having to punish other people who actually did stuff wrong when they're Republicans? You know, the usual bluster and bawl about how Democrats are just so unfair. Still, even then you would finally get President Ryan.

    Seriously, this part is straightforward. You want us to believe this was just some sort of accident? That you didn't realize you were actually voting for Russian usurpation? Then try acting like it. You know, no insincere bullshit about how, oh, shit, you didn't mean to set the house on fire which is why you're dancing around in the yard, cheering as it burns to the ground. Yeah, a complete accident that couldn't possibly have anything to do with the serial arsonist taking far too much personal gratification in an alleged tragic accident.

    Part One: Let this nation come together long enough to turn back the Russian usurpation. After all, it's not what you voted for, right?

    (Right?)​

    Part Two: Once Mr. Trump is properly and legally removed from office, begin crying loudly about how President Pence is absolutely innocent because he couldn't possibly have known a damn thing about it which, by the way, proves that he's smart enough to be president. Get that part done before '17 is out and the GOP should do alright in the '18 midterm.

    Part Three: Know that while there will always be conservatives in the world, this generation of American conservative is forever marked by their betrayal of their country. You're putting traditional conservative platforms to rest; now that people see what you're willing to do to win them, it can't be unseen. We cannot simply erase this history, and, you know, you're not going to actually succeed at that part, so can we please just skip it? You know, the old, "Let's not, and say we did"? Think of it this way: One liberal joke right now is that we can prove the election was stolen because there's no way you could ever get that many people to admit they voted for Donald Trump. Or, as the parlance has it: Congratulations, Republicans, you're a cuck joke.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Entous, Adam, Ellen Nakashima, and Greg Miller. "Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disclose". The Washington Post. 1 March 2017. WashingtonPost.com. 1 March 2017. http://wapo.st/2lusuAB

    Rosenberg, Matthew, Adam Goldman, and Michael S. Schmidt. "Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking". The New York Times. 1 March 2017. NYTimes.com. 1 March 2017. http://nyti.ms/2mN9wGK

    Vogel, Kenneth P., David Stern, and Josh Meyer. "Manafort's Ukrainian 'blood money' caused qualms, hack suggests". Politico. 28 February 2017. Politico.com. 1 March 2017. http://politi.co/2lYAY4M
     
    joepistole likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    #PutiTrump | #WhatTheyVotedFor

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    These bylines are killing me. Never mind, I think it's an inside joke.

    Top congressional Democrats called on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to resign Wednesday after revelations that he had met with the Russian ambassador in the months before the election — meetings that Sessions did not disclose during his confirmation hearings.

    House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) led the effort late on Wednesday night, accusing Sessions of "lying under oath" during confirmation proceedings about his contacts with the Russians.

    "The Attorney General must resign,” Pelosi wrote in a statement. “There must be an independent, bipartisan, outside commission to investigate the Trump political, personal and financial connections to the Russians.” Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the ranking member on the House oversight committee, also called on Sessions to resign, as did Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).

    In a statement in the wee hours of Thursday morning, Sessions said, "I never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign."

    "I have no idea what this allegation is about," he added in his short statement. "It is false."


    (Morin, Meyer, and Wright↱)

    The next paragraph actually suggests this "may be the political smoking gun" Democrats are after, but truth told, it's just another brick in the wall.

    We might also add another, recalling here the New York Times blockbuster story about the Obama administration's efforts to protect and preserve vital information in the shadow of a rising administration likely intending to bury the evidence. The Politico article delivers a powerful accusation:

    An Obama White House national security official said the administration was gravely concerned in its final days about increasingly apparent ties between Trump associates and Russians, and about what appeared to be promises made by more than one individual to representatives of Russian President Vladimir Putin about policy changes that would occur once Trump was sworn in as president.

    The senior Obama White House official was not told the names of the specific individuals involved because the official’s portfolio was foreign policy, not intelligence, so they were not briefed on aspects of the investigation involving U.S. persons.

    “It seems pretty clear that [former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn] was not a rogue here,” the senior official said. “I don’t believe that Flynn was the only person promising things to the Russians, communicating to them what would happen once the Trump administration came in.”

    The senior official was not aware of any specific information suggesting that Sessions was one of the Trump associates discussing potential changes in U.S.-Russia relations once Trump was sworn in.

    Where the NYT article took some pains to specify the nature of various contacts was unknown, Politico’s talk of promises is nigh on extraordinary.

    Indeed, there was a strange moment on msnbc tonight when Chris Matthews became fixated on the Washington Post’s↱ attribution of the Sessions story to "Justice Department officials", a significant phrasing. Andrea Mitchell looked past the DoJ headquarters and considered FBI, and whether an anonymous source would follow that route for better cover. It was interesting; Matthews wanted glittering implications, while Mitchell saw this as straightforward as it can be under the circumstances. Still, though, don't let the distraction thoroughly distract; the question of attribution is significant because it tells us something about reliability and the nature of the story, as well as the leak vectors themselves.

    And to a certain degree, yes, if this former Obama official and Politico alike are willing to use the word promise, yeah, it really does feel like the lede.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Entous, Adam, Ellen Nakashima, and Greg Miller. “Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disclose”. The Washington Post. 1 March 2017. WashingtonPost.com. 2 March 2017. http://wapo.st/2lusuAB

    Morin, Rebecca, Josh Meyer, and Austin Wright. “Sessions under fire over Russia meetings”. Politico. 2 March 2017. Politico.com. 2 March 2017. http://politi.co/2lYO1Uc

    Rosenberg, Matthew, Adam Goldman, and Michael S. Schmidt. “Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking”. The New York Times. 1 March 2017. NYTimes.com. 2 March 2017. http://nyti.ms/2mN9wGK
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    The one thing I don't understand is why is a good relationship with Russia so bad for the Democrats? The Democrats are the ones complaining the most, and therefore this tells me they have the most to lose by a good relationship between Russia and the USA.

    As one scenario, If Russia was indeed doing all that hacking, do they have all of Hillary's lost e-mails? We have been made to take our eye off that ball. Common sense would say Hillary's private server should have been as easy as the DNC serve to hack. However, it would have been a juicier target for Russian National Security, since Hillary, as secretary of state, had more relevant intel to Russia. Could the content of those e-mails not only embarrass the Clintons, but also Obama? It stuck me odd that Putin was able to act in ways that Obama was not able to respond to too. Did Putin know secret US moves in advance? Does perpetuating an adversarial perception of Russia, head off potential scandal at the pass; creates plausible deniability. If we were friends, the same lost e-mails would be more credible.

    The other thing I can think of is funding for some military and intelligence agency missions is dependent on maintaining the perception of an adverse relationship with Russia. For example, if Russia and USA became cooperative, and split the costs and manpower for eliminating terrorism in the middle east, instead working to undermine each other, like in the current scheme of things, the US will not need as much resources for this same mission. Instead of spy vs spy, which cancels to zero gain, but costs $, if we had both spies on the same side, that adds to 2 and costs the USA only half. That means jobs and careers.

    Without the perception of fear and an undermining adversary, it will be hard to justify the same levels of spending. The question becomes, how do the Democrats and establishment Republicans benefit by this higher level of spending in the potentially affected agencies and missions? For example, does the shadow government of Obama, under the control of the Democrats, need this spending? Is there a fear that a down size will act as a cover for targeting the hidden Democrat party operatives, who can no longer use tax payer money for patrician intrigue scams?

    The leaking, inside the intelligence agencies, of classified information, which benefits the Democrats, is attempting to undermine the chain of Command in the USA, starting at the top; Trump. Isn't this also what Russia is being accused of? Is this all connected to a Russian black mail using Hillary's lost e-mails? Normally corruption in intelligence agencies is handled internally, so as to not help the enemy by releasing information. Is giving this free classified information to Russia, under the guise of leaks to the media, what the Democrats are really doing?

    As a side note, did you hear about the accusation that the Obama Justice Department diverted considerable tax payer money to liberals action groups? Maybe this is connected to those lost e-mails. Which means the Democrats need to double down.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2017
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    You really should start following the news. After years of complaining that Putin was outfoxing Obama, it took a retired Army General actually betraying the country for Republicans to finally manufacture that appearance.

    You're so gullible, Wellwisher. Look at you; you'll believe pretty much anything.

    And you'll apparently even support the betrayal of the United States of Amierca as long as you get to feel special playing make-believe.
     
    joepistole likes this.
  8. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Why do you think this is a good relationship between "Russia" and "the USA"? Neither country, as a whole, seems to be in the loop here.
     
  9. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Well there are many things you clearly don't understand Wellwisher. It's not just Russia that you do not understand. No one opposes having a good relationship with Russia. You are setting up a fallacious argument there. What Democrats and all red blooded Americans are opposed to is the price Republicans want to pay for "a good relationship" with Russia. Democrats and independents don't want to sacrifice and betray our allies for that "good relationship". Democrats don't want to destabilize Europe for a "good relationship" with Russia. Democrats don't want to sacrifice our democracy and the integrity of our elections for a "good relationship" with Russia. Democrats don't want to sacrifice our free press and civil rights for a "good relationship" with Russia. Democrats don't want to repeat the mistakes which led to WW II in order to attain a "good relationship" with Russia.

    The price for a "good relationship" with Russia is too high. That's what Democrats are opposed to.

    Well, Russia has been doing all that hacking. That really isn't disputed at this point. Two, Hillary's private emails were not lost. They were destroyed. Trump asked Russia to publish them if they had them, and Russia hasn't published them. So there is no reason to believe Russia was able to hack her email server.

    Just because you don't like it, it doesn't follow that "we've been made to take our eye off the ball.


    Hillary isn't POTUS. She's not in any way shape or form involved in government. She's a private citizen. She is totally irrelevant at this point, and your machinations about her are totally irrelevant as well. Her private emails are irrelevant. And just what do you think Obama wasn't able to respond to and where is your evidence to back it up?

    You do realize Trump has proposed increasing the defense budget by 10% and he is Russia friendly. He's Putin's man. Where is your evidence that military funding is dependent upon "perception of an adverse relationship with Russia"? There is no evidence to back that up, because it isn't true. Intelligence funding isn't dependent upon an adverse relationship with Russia. That's sheer nonsense. It doesn't make any sense.

    Where is your evidence Russia could reduce the costs of fighting terrorism? The fact is Russia has little to nothing to offer the US in regards to terrorism. We don't need their military participation in anything. Allying our selves with a mass murder and war criminal is probably not a good thing for the US to do. Russia has intentionally bombed hospitals and civilians in Syria.

    You do realize your man, The Donald, wants to increase defense spending by 10%? No Democrat has done that.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Well here is the thing Wellwisher, you don't know who is leaking. There is evidence the leaks are coming from inside the Trump White House. And why would those leaks undermine the "chain of command". Please do be specific. If Trump doesn't want to embarrassed by his actions, there is a really simple solution to that. Don't do embarrassing things. When I was in corporate American we use to have a rule. If you'd be embarrassed by something if it appeared on national news, then you shouldn't do it. Well, the same rule applies here. The truth doesn't undermine the chain of command.

    You need to move on. Hillary's emails are no longer relevant. She lost. Trump won. You need to get over Hillary. She and her emails are no longer relevant - as if they ever were.

    Maybe you could provide some credible evidence? But if history is any judge, you can't. There are allegations Hillary is a murder. There are allegations Hillary is running a child sex ring inside of a Washington DC pizza storefront, e.g. Pizzagate. But that doesn't make those allegations true. In fact, history has proven those allegations to be false. Unfortunately in the Republican world allegations are as good as truth if it hurts Democrats and advantages Republicans. But unfortunately for Republicans, for millions of Americans the truth still matters, and they are not as dumb as folks like you need them to be.

    And again, Obama isn't POTUS, Trump is. You have no credible evidence to back up your assertions, and that should be a problem for a seeker of truth. But it isn't a problem for you. Is it? And that in and of itself is a problem.
     
  10. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    What a remarkable change....a few days ago the leader of the Russian investigation in the House publicly said there was no there, there, even before the investigation had begun is now saying, "I don't know". Why the sudden change? Is he embarrassed by the blatant absurdity of his denial? He seems to be more concerned about administration leaks than he does investigating the Russian involvement in our elections.
     
  11. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Why did Sessions give a non-responsive answer to Al Franken's question, which was, "what woud you do" (if you found out that there had been communication with the Russians during the election pperiod)?
    Instead of answering the question, Sessions voluntarily deflected the question. by stating a justifiable falsehood.
    I am still waiting for Sessions to reply to the question, "What would you do?"
    .
     
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  12. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    The lack of credibility probably smarts a bit.

    Notice how much of what Republicans have complained about for the last eight years is coming true.

    To wit, sure, the executive branch is leaking like a sieve, and if we attend Chris Matthews and Andrea Mitchell's brief back and forth last night about WaPo's attribution to "Justice Department officials", the only real difference 'twixt them was the difference between a pundit and a reporter. Matthews really wants the obvious implication; Mitchell is standing on the dynamic. That is, "Justice Department officials" is language, by Matthews' read, implying Sessions' own people are leaking, while Mitchell is willing to say FBI will cover itself that way if circumstance so demands. And we all know why Matthews wants this piece of information; many of the leaks we're getting would seem to require "Trump people" to be talking, instead of merely the "career hands" who would, as theory suggests, be choosing country over president per their duty. A WaPo↱ piece from last week might have effectively outed CIA Director Pompeo as a leak; it's a complicated thesis↱ ... I think ... er ... never mind. Oh, hey: As I noted a couple weeks ago↗:

    To the one, these are mostly career professionals, the allegedly apolitical. To the other, these are mostly career professionals; some of Trump's people―staffers who have more of a clue how Washington and the government work than Trump, Bannon, or any number of their inexperienced imports from the private sector―are leaking, too.

    And the reason they're doing so is that the Trump administration is not how it is supposed to go, to such degree that they perceive real and genuine danger.

    It just seems as if all the shouting Republicans did about what the evil Democrats, Clintons, leftists, liberals, women, people of color, homosexuals, transgenders, Muslims, atheists, and ... uh ... yeah, you know, it's a long list .... Right. It just seems as if all that noise really was based on their fevered, insensate projections of what others think and do according to the conservatives own outlook, i.e., expecting of others what one would do for or by their own self. This is how Republicans do it, therefore the Republican expects this is how everyone else does it. Because, really, what have we, here? Foreign cabal conspiring toward presidency? Check. Potentially criminal collusion 'twixt Justice and White House? Check. Email scandal? Yes, check (and check). Executive overreach? Financial conflict of interest? Racism? Check, check, and check.

    Now we know what Republicans were shouting about. This seeming disaster is, in fact, #WhatTheyVotedFor.

    I haven't found the msnbc video segment online, yet, but it was in the scheduled special report last night. Mitchell wins on journalistic principle, but I think Matthews smells legitimate blood in the water. Still, last night started to feel like everyone is stage managing at this point.

    Because, well, okay, we already know, for instance, that if you're msnbc and you run on television, you're stage managing. Leaks from the administration itself suggest an extraordinary degree of stage management. But newspapers are also assembling reportage teams—something about long bylines goes here—to manage the tremendous amount of information they're dealing with in order to roll out blockbusting shoe drops right around the time the marquee talk hosts take the air on cable. To the one, yes, coincidence because there is that much flying around, but if you're WaPo and NYT, knowing that msnbc is assembling their A-list for a #PutiTrump focus block in prime time, yeah, you want those stories that didn't make five or six o'clock ready to go at, say, eight fifty-two and nine thirty-five, which I think were the stamps on the Sessions and Obama administration stories that quite literally seized the msnbc broadcast. And if you're the administration officials feeding the press? This is now unquestionably stage managed.

    And Republicans can say what they want about Obama; the NYT article means we're going to start hearing that one as soon as the GOP can manage a coherent statement. But it's not just ... I mean ... er ... seriously. Okay, how's this for a headline: "How the ultimate D.C. insider penetrated Trump's White House"

    Donald Trump railed against Establishment Washington in his presidential campaign. But now that he’s in the White House, it’s actually a pretty good time to be a Washington insider.

    Just ask Sen. Rob Portman.

    There’s no more archetypal Washington operator than the Ohio Republican, a former House member, U.S. trade representative, Office of Management and Budget head and lower-level White House staffer. And now he’s got a direct line to the Trump White House on national and home-state priorities, as the administration has been quietly stocked with aides and advisers with longstanding ties to Republican Party leadership.

    “It’s good. As you know, I’ve got a lot of Portman team members down there,” Portman said in an interview in his Washington office after decisively winning reelection last year. “We’ve got a lot of friends.”

    He’s not the only one. House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, not to mention uber-lobbyists like former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, all count close relationships within the Trump administration.

    Indeed, even after a chaotic first month for the White House, Portman and a number of longtime Washington Republicans say they’re largely at ease with Trump’s West Wing operation and confident they’ll be able to influence policy.


    (Everett and Dawsey↱)

    Those last couple 'graphs are worth including because they describe a GOP posture that, really, ought to be expected because it's Politics 101. They're not evil or stupid for posing as such; it's just what you do.

    Because think about what this means. Okay, so let's go with the complicated DailyKos thesis↱ about WaPo outing Pompeo, who is supposed to be Team Trump in the context of political and career hands, and, you know, it's not really so risky because the larger point is that establishment Republicans littered through the administration aren't simply showing fealty to Portman or McConnell or Ryan. I may disdain especially the Senate Majority Leader and Speaker of the House, but neither are they so far gone as to not know the score. Their people, as such, also face the choice 'twixt president and country.

    It is not impossible to imagine Republicans of such conscience, and the Donald Trump cabal so dangerous, that these Congressionally-connected hands are also doing their part.

    Apparently, Americans were bored. So they elected Donald Trump. And now we're going to save the nation from ourselves in exhilarating fashion.

    The intelligence leaks are career hands literally acting to save the nation.

    The unsettling leaks about the President and his team are Trump's establishment wing signalling their Congressional allies: Columbia, we have a problem.

    President Obama knew exactly what to do on his way out the door, which is kind of astounding when we pause to think about it, becuase that's another bit of right-wing tinfoil: Obama would find an excuse to suspend the Constitution and seize power. Do we all remember that one? Conservatives just dared Obama, and the first black president once again passed an extraordinary test. It's almost as if they would be happier if he actually went and did it. And what was he going to do? Get into the election? Start wrecking his successor in the public square before inauguration? This is the last test; it's why it was so damn important to Kilmeade. And Mr. Obama is passing with flying colored. Colors. I mean, passing with flying colors.

    Okay, so maybe he didn't know exactly what to do, but as I noted in that post a couple weeks ago, after President Trump was told of a security risk, he did nothing to help, and appears to have been just fine with perpetuating risk exposure. And when he didn't respond, the people with this intel and evidence started leaking in an effort to prod action. We don't do armed coups; the intelligence community, is verging toward the closest thing to, which will be to take a massive freaking oppo dump all over the front pages in order to force Congress to impeach the President.

    But this was, really, the only way through if you're President Obama: Peaceful transition of power. Believe in America.

    And, you know, we can do this.

    Yes, we can.

    And in a way, when all is said and done, it will be hard to shake the feeling that this was the way it was supposed to go, that the game show host cum supervillain was vanquished by a wise, knowing, and ready people who set their trap and found their vindication when a dumb cuck named Donald J. Trump caught himself in it like a raccoon on acid grasping after imaginary bits of tinfoil.

    Seriously, if you wrote this script, who the hell but American conservatives would actually greenlight it?

    Everybody seems to be doing their part; I wonder if the administration recognizes it. I mean, Bannon should be able to figure it out. So to some degree I wonder if, knowing their days are numbered, the point is to do as much freaking damage as possible before being evicted.
     
  13. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    Notes for #149↑

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Distraction: Click to seek the Purple Moon.


    Everett, Burgess and Josh Dawsey. "How the ultimate D.C. insider penetrated Trump's White House". Politico. 1 March 2017. Politico.com. 2 Marcy 2017. http://politi.co/2mIanJc

    Garrett. "WaPo Pretty Much Exposes Mike Pompeo as a Source". Daily Kos. 25 February 2017. DailyKos.com. 2 March 2017. http://bit.ly/2mjkmHy

    Miller, Greg and Adam Entous. "Trump administration sought to enlist intelligence officials, key lawmakers to counter Russia stories". The Washington Post. 24 February 2017. WashingtonPost.com. 2 March 2017. http://wapo.st/2l6ggCV
     
  14. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
  15. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    You mean like what Republicans did to Hillary Clinton and Democrats at large? You know, Pizzagate, Hillary' child sex ring, the people she has murdered, death panels, Obama's birth certificate, etc.?

    Yeah it should have been said decades ago. It was but you folks weren't listening. Better late than never I guess.

    It turns out Pence used a private email server for his government emails....Talk about hypocrisy!
     
  16. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    Orders from the top?
     
  17. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    What a novel concept, when a political opponent offers you ammunition on a plate, you use it against them.

    Not since the beginning of the Cold War has a U.S. politician been as fervently pro-Russian as Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. Just four years after his predecessor Mitt Romney declared Russia to be Washington’s greatest geopolitical threat, Trump has praised President Vladimir Putin as a real leader, “unlike what we have in this country.” Trump has also dismissed reports that Putin has murdered political enemies (“Our country does plenty of killing also,” he told MSNBC), suggested that he would “look into” recognizing Russia’s annexation of the Crimean peninsula and questioned whether the United States should defend NATO allies who don’t pay their way. When Russian hackers stole a cache of emails in July from the Democratic National Committee’s servers, as security analysts have shown, Trump called on “Russia, if you’re listening,” to hack some more.

    “Trump is breaking with Republican foreign doctrine and almost every Republican foreign thinker I know,” says Michael McFaul, U.S. ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014. “He is departing radically from Ronald Reagan, something never done by any Republican Party presidential candidate.”


    http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/09/vladimir-putin-donald-trump-493946.html

    Anti Hillary types on both the left and the right propagated the McCarthyism meme as soon as she began to capitalize on the gifts the Useful Idiot in Chief delivered to her back in July of 2016. And from that time to the present, the foundation for those allegations has only gotten stronger, so much so that you now have Trump supporters calling for an investigation.

    From Tail Gunner Newt:

    "Because it's the kind of thing that can grow, and it looks early on like it's not a big deal, and then one morning it's a big deal and now it's really expensive to deal with," Gingrich said. "The earlier they have a central person directing their efforts, the less problem it will be, the faster it will go away."

    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livew...t-investigator-trump-russia-proberussia-probe
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2017
  18. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Apparently the FBI isn't cooperating with the congressional investigation. One must wonder why. Is the FBI being pressured by Republicans to supress the investigation? There are some very significant questions that need to be answered. If what Republicans have said is true, then why are they so actively resisting the investigation? It was only after great pressure was applied to Sessions did he concede to partially recuse himself from the matter.

    If there is no there, there as Republicans have maintained, then why is there such Republican resistance to an investigation of the matter? If there is no there, there, then why all the obfuscation?
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2017
  19. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Perhaps as I mentioned in other posts there is another "secret male dominated organization" happening in the background, that is neither Republican or Democrat? (though leaning strongly towards Republican ideology)

    Looking at number of videos it appears that most of Trumps picks are in some way associated via this "secret club" which is why they are not being picked for their skills but more for their association and naive loyalty.
    Also why strange behavior from the FBI executive etc...
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2017
  20. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    George Washington...
    "The Anglo-American (Freemasonry) style is especially dominant in the United States, and the countries that once formed the British Empire. It has a minority presence in France and most Latin American countries. The Anglo-American branch has several noteworthy sub-branches, most notably Prince Hall Freemasonry (a legacy of past racial segregation in the United States, and so predominantly found in that country)." ~wiki
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2017
  21. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    #RussianInterest | #WhatTheyVotedFor

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    It is uncertain, at this time, what the impact will be; what follows is a not-quite tweetstorm from Jim Acosta of CNN:

    [1] Former Trump campaign nat sec adv JD Gordon tells me he and other nat sec adv's met with Russian Amb in Cleveland during GOP convention.

    [2] Gordon says he discussed goal to forge better US relationship with Russia. But there was no conversation about Russians helping Trump camp.

    [3] At convention Gordon says he and others advocated for GOP platform to include language against arming Ukrainians against pro-Russian rebels.

    [4] Gordon says this was in line with Trump's views, expressed at March national security meeting at unfinished Trump hotel in March.

    [5] Gordon says Trump said at meeting at unfinished Trump hotel in March that he didn't want to go to “World War Three” over Ukraine.

    [6] Then Senator Jeff Sessions presided over the meeting, Gordon added.

    [7] Gordon says he briefed WH spox Sarah Huckabee Sanders on conversations he and other Trump advisers had with Russian Amb during convention.

    [8] Gordon's conversation with Sanders was today, I'm told.

    It is, unfortunately, not a proper tweetstorm, so you can pick up at the first tweet↱, and follow the sequence from there. (I have compiled the tweets with their source links into a blog post↱, but that's not much better.)

    Still, though, we get a cheap neologism, or perhaps portmanteau works: reportage + tweet = reportweet.
     
    joepistole likes this.
  22. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Trump tweeted today that Obama ordered his campaign phones to be tapped. That's a stunning accusation to make, and Trump has offered no evidence to prove it. But here is the thing, Obama didn't have the authority to order the wire tapping of Trump's campaign phones. If the Obama administration did indeed order the tapping of Trump's campaign phones, Obama needed a court order and in order to get a court order, the Obama administration needed to provide the court evidence of criminal misconduct.

    I think Trump has unknowingly stepped in it again.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    By accusing Obama, Trump has inadvertently admitted there is evidence of criminal wrong doing on his part.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I'm guessing Trump's cohorts are stressing this morning. This is just more evidence Trump doesn't have a very functional brain. The guy just doesn't think, and seems to have little inclination to do so.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-wire-tap-trump-tower/?utm_term=.3fa9caea0393
     
  23. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    #trumpstyle | #WhatTheyVotedFor

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Turn it up: Click for A Senile Animal, but you'll need to turn it up. Like, really effing loud.
    (You can wait until you're there and do so gradually, but ... yeah. Loud.)

    So, I've been working the joke about long bylines↑, which in turn brings to mind a hasty blog post↱ in which it was easy enough to make a little bit of hay out of the metajoke about the ledes; I actually saw it a few places for a Reuters↱ lede, and the joke is that someone leaked Mnuchin's anti-leak comments, just like they leaked Spicer's anti-leak phone checks, and so on.

    But that post also has the first sketch of an idea I've been mulling; note the wreck of the latter paragraph, which is the result of not being able to keep up with everything going on between nineteen- and twenty-two hundred Eastern on the cable circuit; I couldn't tell, yet, if another hammer headline was coming, and compared to the rest of the week the answer turned out to be no.

    Still: Benen↱ made the obvious joke about the press secretary and phone checks: "Naturally, Spicer's efforts to crack down on leaks also leaked ... Morale in the West Wing must be amazing right now."

    As I reading the omens:

    Which, in turn, is its own point, too, because the leaks coming to the newspapers handing down articles in time for the marquee cable talkers at a seemingly increasing pace keeps an understaffed White House running itself ragged overnight. Attorney General Jeff Sessions sounded like a tired, confused old man in his Thursday press conference. President Trump, pushing off questions as he wandered around an aircraft carrier, sounded a weary curmudgeon.

    Here is an interesting question: Is a triple-bylined WaPo exclusive↱ about coming cuts to NOAA enough to keep the heat on? Likely not. But Congressional Republicans are picking up the slack with their secret basement plan↱; and there is no rule that says things can't get worse↱ over the weekend.

    And it would appear the weekend hammer has arrived. Here's the tricky part: It's self-inflicted.

    And you are correct; but this is sort of a thing with the Trump administration. Which suggests a fine example of the Trump conundrum; I started with a single quote from a news blogger, and wound up with something like twenty-three works cited, and all for a joke↱ that it would behoove us to attend the frequency with which the administration's response is to simply confirm the question at hand and pretend to brush it aside; or, more cynically, that it's not quite to the point that we should wonder if maybe Nixon should have said, “Yeah, I'm a crook and all, but ...”.

    How many late nights did the press just take out of the administration and its allies? And I think it was showing by Thursday. This morning's tweet tantrum (#tweetrum? doesn't quite work, does it?) seems almost like reaction and unwinding: Pitch a tantrum against what frustrates, then turn to re-etablishing one's sense of empowerment and control by finding something or someone to attack. And if this was, say, my teenaged daughter instead of a President of the United States, there are certain behavioral concerns we might express if conflict address behavior includes such a prominent dose of ego defense. The whole exercise was not about actually addressing the issues in the role of the president, but, rather, taking personal satisfaction in order to assuage anger. It's not the healthiest of behaviors, to be certain, and its thoughtless, insensate phases often result in E&O gaffes like, well, tacitly confirming that some of the excremental tornado swirling around him is actually true. And when it all hits the fan and Trump, Bannon, Conway, and Priebus are astanding around covered with the stuff, holding their cartoonish pinwheels and staring, dazed, at something in the near distance nobody else can see―(blinking awake, bloodshot eyes piercing a crap cascade)―just how are they going to deliver their blame-Obama line? Timing is everything, but we know how that's going to go, and it reads like an Aristocrats sketch. (Conway and Spicer each telling different and conflicting, but equally impossible, lies while Donald Trump tweets to undercut them both and Priebus either metaphorically or literally stands around gratifying himself, and better for the sketch if it's literal. Bannon, meanwhile pours a drink and pats himself on the back for a job well done.)

    I keep thinking there's a punch line, here, but so far it's all just a horde of angry midget demons not understanding that they need to actually put some effort into jumping if they intend to kick us in the teeth.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Benen, Steve. "New leak exposes details of Team Trump’s anti-leak campaign". msnbc. 27 February 2017. msnbc.com. 4 March 2017. http://on.msnbc.com/2mPlaBx

    Mohammed, Arshad, Jonathan Landay, and Warren Strobel. "Trump aides' bid to plug leaks creates unease among some civil servants". Reuters. 3 March 2017. Reuters.com. 4 March 2017. http://reut.rs/2mMZvK6

    Mufson, Steven, Jason Samenow, and Brady Dennis. “White House proposes steep budget cut to leading climate science agency”. The Washington Post. 3 March 2017. WashingtonPost.com. 4 March 2017. http://wapo.st/2mPhj7w

    Rucker, Philip, Ellen Nakashima, and Robert Costa. "Trump, citing no evidence, accuses Obama of ‘Nixon/Watergate' plot to wiretap Trump Tower". The Washington Post. 4 March 2017. WashingtonPost.com. 4 March 2017. http://wapo.st/2lqyRKk
     

Share This Page