Trump's America, March 2017: Using His Inside VOICE

the narrative that he was speaking in his capacity as a Senator was like a piece of chewing gum holding a shoe together even prior to this

unless he has a pic of him wearing his Senate beanie w/ propeller on it in the meeting.

They have explained why they were sitting on it. They couldn't prove any of it was true - and, for the most part, still can't. Had the oppo dump been 'Flynn discussed sanctions' and 'Sessions met with the Russian ambassador but nobody knows what they talked about' - both of which were known to the intelligence services but not journalists - that would have been released.

Obviously that stuff about Flynn and Sessions was less essential 9 months ago, when the dossier apparently started circulating and before they had been nominated to anything. What it does sound like the dossier achieved is that a lot of these people/acts are being investigated by the FBI, and increasingly by other parties as well. We wouldn't have learned virtually anything about anything had this stuff not all leaked via the investigative press. And since the stuff has leaked, at least some of the material in the dossier has been verified, to degrees, and with each new big leak it seems we have learned that there are several investigations still in progress. Plus, Steele's credibility has, if anything, actually gone up with the news that no less than the FBI was paying him heed.

Long story short: had the dossier not leaked we might know virtually nothing about the Russia connections, and there would likely have been much less of an impetus to investigate further. Had the dossier leaked last summer, or last fall, maybe it would have been just as unprovable at the time, but maybe much of it would have been proven, or investigations launched, before this idiot became president, not after. Dossier didn't have to be 100% verified, it just needed to be credible enough to push things forward. Because it didn't even take the dossier directly to take down Flynn or possibly take down Sessions, it just partly took the cloud of suspicion the dossier farted into the White House. And until the claims in the dossier are proven false, from the question of blackmail (which is what started the Flynn takedown) to the criminality of a rogue's gallery of Trump people like Page, Manafort and Cohen (is that Felix Sater guy in there, too?), all these targets remain in the crosshair (speaking of which, how many Russians connected with the dossier have been killed/arrested now? 4? 5? More?), and minus the cloak of classified there is mounting public and congressional pressure to dig deeper.

OK, not long story short, but so far this whole mess is going to take several Robert Caro books to unravel.

idk this all worked out pretty well for the media don't you think? blockbuster ratings during the election and now blockbuster ratings after the election.

― Mordy, Thursday, March 2, 2017 11:41 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

most sane thing anybody has said in any of these politics threads in a year

Yeah, and subscriptions to the Post and Times up, too! And um Vanity Fair.

https://m.popkey.co/3b708c/76bRe.gif

Long story short: had the dossier not leaked we might know virtually nothing about the Russia connections, and there would likely have been much less of an impetus to investigate further.

The dossier was published after the investigation into hacking had concluded that Russia was responsible, sanctions were imposed, Manafort had resigned, dozens and dozens of articles claiming connections between Trump and Russia had been published and the FBI was wiretapping individuals. Leaks would have continued in relation to the actual intel (like Flynn's phone call) regardless. Throwing a whole load of other claims, many of which are either inaccurate or implausible into the mix might have added pressure on the White House but gets us no closer to knowing what actually happened.

Had the dossier leaked last summer, or last fall, maybe it would have been just as unprovable at the time, but maybe much of it would have been proven, or investigations launched, before this idiot became president, not after. Dossier didn't have to be 100% verified, it just needed to be credible enough to push things forward.

The argument seems to be that journalists who spent months trying unsuccessfully to make the pieces of a story-of-a-lifetime fit and felt that it was too weak to publish - because they knew bits were untrue or impossible to verify - should have thrown ethics / credibility out of the window and published anyway as it might have swung the election. We know the intelligence services were investigating at the time, it's not like they thought 'eh, as long as the public doesn't know about the MASSIVE FOREIGN PLOT TO TAKE OVER THE US then we'll just let it slide'.

In

In all seriousness, I don't think we are at a place where we can safely make that assumption. We have no idea what the FBI is investigating, was investigating, or why they were investigating it, because of evidence and indicators, or because of pressure. But there is no doubt that Flynn would still be there in the administration without leaks, and Sessions would still be the acting attorney general during these investigations.

Just seems like the voters should have been made aware that this guy was being investigated for collaborating with a foreign power to hack his opponent's campaign. Whether it was leakers who should have done this or if media organizations should have spilled what they knew before their stories were Pulitzer-ready, idk, but whatever damage those types of actions would have done to the integrity of our democracy pales in comparison to the tragedy of Trump's inauguration.

Xposts

He fucking won due to making baseless insinuations about his opponent an no one on the side of stability was able to stop and say, "look there is something weird about this guy who is hiding his tax returns and seemingly coordinating his campaign message with Sputnik and RT"?

That was the core message of such a large proportion of the pre-election coverage that it almost dwarfed any other message coming out, either from journalists or the opposition, at times. There is a difference between credible news organisations publishing insinuations (which they did) or under-cooked stories about Russian business contacts (which they also did) and publishing allegations, for example, that the Trump camp was being bribed with a percentage of the Qatar / Rosneft oil deal.

You're all way more trusting in institutions and process than me to believe that this will bring down Trump in any meaningful way - if Sessions goes, there's always another Republican ghoul waiting in the wings to gut voting rights, the House is never going to abandon him even if a few Senators grew spines or felt scared of re-election.

― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, March 3, 2017

^^ this

that is one reason, yes xxp

i have 0% doubt that trump made a deal w/ putin to ease sanctions / improve relationships in exchange for help defeating hillary. not only is the evidence just overwhelming at this point but as conspiracy theories go it's extremely believable. you'd have to think even moderately well of trump to believe he wouldn't make such a deal.

― Mordy, Thursday, March 2, 2017 11:17 PM

I tend to think Trump's people spoke to Russia about enriching their boss, hence the refusal to release his please the tax returns. Pretty sure Trump thought, like the rest of us, that he was gonna lose in November.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeff-sessions-used-political-funds-for-republican-convention-expenses-1488509301

Ok so Sessions def broke the law here

Soto otm

Hillaryco did a great job defeating themselves, i know that's hard for a lot of you to see

idk this all worked out pretty well for the media don't you think? blockbuster ratings during the election and now blockbuster ratings after the election.

― Mordy

that heart attack i had last year worked out great for me. not only did i get a lot of sympathy cards, but people just flat out started giving me free stuff! plus since the heart attack i've lost a lot of those extra pounds and am in much better shape. can't believe i didn't think of it sooner!

Hillaryco did a great job defeating themselves, i know that's hard for a lot of you to see

― Supercreditor (Dr Morbius)

yes i'm sick of how every other post on this thread is "HILLARY DID NOTHING WRONG"

Lol

I think the real story here is that the initial flurry is over to a large degree. Notice, for instance, how the whole executive-order thing has dropped off -- there'll be other changes (hardly good ones) as Cabinet secretaries settle in, but Trump and team can't snap their fingers too much any more because things are shifting more to Congress in terms of carrying out policy. And on those fronts, it's already been plenty clear that:

* there's no way any sort of consensus on the ACA and its putative replacement exists or if it could even scrape through the Senate
* 'tax reform' as such seems similarly dead in the water
* massive disagreements about the budget exist

All of which factors into every last one of Trump's big claims re defense, 'the wall,' SS/Medicare etc. etc. In all cases, these are differences driven within the GOP Congressional delegations themselves; if Sessions hadn't pissed on himself, the big story of the day would probably have been the ACA theatrics and it was Rand Paul leading that. All the Democrats have to do is shrug at their counterparts, and it's a big reason why there's already talk -- half a year out -- about a government shutdown again.

all of this is an attempt to cover up the fact that hillary lost (306)

and this media onslaught - whether or not the allegations are true (which i'm inclined to think they are) - cannot be good for "getting things done." this stuff takes up mental real estate in DC. how do you pass complicated and possibly extremely unpopular legislation when the entire nation is paying close attention to everything you do, protesters are screaming for impeachment/resignations, and you're embroiled in multiple ongoing investigations? tbh we'd probably be looking at something v similar if the other candidate had won, maybe for less legitimate reasons (or in some of yr minds for equally illegitimate reasons).

The Donald - no connection confirmed; just treating Russia better than he treats our closest and most longstanding allies.
Melania - no connection reported
Eric - stated that a large amount of money from Russia goes into the Trump business empire
Donald Jr. - $50k to speak to a pro-Russian group
Ivanka - vacationed with Putin's girlfriend
Kushner - confirmed contact with Russian officials in December
Tiffany - lucky if Donald can remember her name
Pence - appears to serve no master other than white-skinned, blue-eyed, Republican JEsus
Manafort - resigned due to Russian ties
Page - resigned due to Russian ties
Gordon - Russian ties during RNC
Stone - had very, VERY specific "guesses" as to what details were going to be in DNC email leaks
Bannon - nobody can stand looking closely enough at him to determine if there are any Russian ties
Tillerson - received Russian Order of Friendship
Flynn - resigned due to Russian ties
Sessions - forced to recuse self from investigations due to Russian ties
Ross - directly tied to Russian money through Cyprus bank
Mattis - no connection reported
Devos - Amway fortune has increased tremendously due to the Russian side of her family's pyramid - same fortune funds numerous Republican candidates
Carson - probably thinks Russia is where Jesus filled bags of ice for picnics
Conway - no connection reported
Spicer - assured the press that no member of the administration is wearing a tie that was made in Russia

Loooool

lmao qualmsley

I had a student ask the other day when was the last time I made a photocopy.

and this media onslaught - whether or not the allegations are true (which i'm inclined to think they are) - cannot be good for "getting things done." this stuff takes up mental real estate in DC. how do you pass complicated and possibly extremely unpopular legislation when the entire nation is paying close attention to everything you do, protesters are screaming for impeachment/resignations, and you're embroiled in multiple ongoing investigations? tbh we'd probably be looking at something v similar if the other candidate had won, maybe for less legitimate reasons (or in some of yr minds for equally illegitimate reasons).

This could be true but there's a lot of mental real estate on the other side being taken up by the Russia stuff. There's a reasonable argument for saying that the easiest way to pass unpopular legislation is to get someone to do it quietly in the background while Sessions, et al take centre stage. Also a case for saying that the best way to secure long-term Democrat ideals might not be to rehabilitate Frum / Dubya, the best way to counter a rising wave of xenophobia / racism may not be to wrap yourself in the flag and accuse your opponents of not loving America enough, the best way to secure a robust centrist press might not be to throw your lot in with the editor of Heat Street, etc, etc. I am not a political strategist, though.

What's annoying, and probably fatally dangerous for our society as far as we're concerned, is that our media and news system is owned by what, 6 corporations? That have no legal or business obligation to make sure our country doesn't fall apart, or our lives don't turn to shit, beyond what's profitable for them.

It's sad how it's come to this. What are the alternatives? Some leftist stuff that is oddly reminiscent of the same Putin crap Trump and his supporters talk about. Great.

What Democrat ideals?

oh and how could i forget michael cohen?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/says-who-piecing-together-the-michael-cohen-story

it's hard to keep all this straight! but let's not go russian to any conclusions :)

You must now recuse yourself from this thread for that pun.

i will, after one last Friend of Trumputin i left out -- steve schwarzman

https://aheadofthe.news/is-trump-advisor-steve-schwarzman-ceo-of-blackstone-group-the-missing-link-in-the-trumprosneft-scandal/

nothing to see here folks!

Apparently the write doesn't believe in apostrophes.

*writer

We could write and tell them had their source story not been scrubbed from the HuffPo website:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/is-trump-advisor-steve-schwarzman-ceo-of-blackstone_us_58a0340de4b080bf74f03d62?

Meantime...

http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/03/news/economy/donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs/index.html

I found the quote at the end to be the most telling.

at a glance this seems entirely unbelievable:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837633820417482754

I mean, the president, reading? beggars belief. but then I looked on Amazon and saw that this book is a whopping 112 pages long. so maybe, just maybe, he sat still long enough for someone to read it to him.

found it weird tha the book was written in Russian

What's annoying, and probably fatally dangerous for our society as far as we're concerned, is that our media and news system is owned by what, 6 corporations? That have no legal or business obligation to make sure our country doesn't fall apart, or our lives don't turn to shit, beyond what's profitable for them.

Such a blow to learn that all of the independent media outlets have apparently been acquired by Kraft and Lockheed Martin, I need to sit down for a minute.

Jon Favreau‏
@jonfavs
Again, I'd love to hear one innocent explanation for why all these senior Trump officials met with Russian officials and then lied about it.

@adamjohnsonNYC
They met w/ Russians because they're ideologically in sync and lied about it b/c it would look bad. Not saying i believe it but there you go

Hurrrr, what's the reach of these independent media outlets, and how much credibility do they have in the public's mind, especially when they write about things that counter mainstream narratives? Due to what I wrote above, their practical impact is effectively 0, especially when it inspires apparent readers to criticize people who should be in alignment.

xp

ruh roh:

https://twitter.com/AdamSerwer/status/837679008179445761

this is going to fuel so many stupid stupid internet and cable TV fires.

WaPo has done outstanding work and it didn't change a goddamn mind. I'm not sure what your point is. Corporate media, indie media – a Trump voter isn't reading it.

WaPo has done outstanding work and it didn't change a goddamn mind. I'm not sure what your point is. Corporate media, indie media – a Trump voter isn't reading it.

― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, March 3, 2017 3:12 PM (five seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

One news outlet, one time, on one occasion, isn't going to counter decades of hearing the same messages over and over again, and having it appear to be objective reality.

as much of a giant buzzkill as they are to my hopes that a Trump-connected conspiracy is thisclose to being unraveled, I do appreciate ShariVari's posts here as a means to help me clarify my thinking. I do still have a hard time wrapping my head around why the Trump team would really need to be involved in any of the hacking/subterfuge in the first place. Russia's goal of destabilizing the US either through tainting an HRC presidency or better yet through helping a Trump presidency happen, wouldn't seem to require any actual participation of the Trump campaign. I'm not even sure how it would be necessary to have dirt on Team Trump to keep them in line. but then again, there are all of these connections and meetings that have repeatedly been insufficiently explained away. and the push to ease sanctions in the convention platform still rings a lot of alarm bells. maybe Alfred's right, maybe it is just money. it's usually money.

One news outlet, one time, on one occasion, isn't going to counter decades of hearing the same messages over and over again, and having it appear to be objective reality.

― larry appleton, Friday, March 3, 2017 10:15 AM

do you read anything other than this thread?

WaPo has done outstanding work and it didn't change a goddamn mind. I'm not sure what your point is. Corporate media, indie media – a Trump voter isn't reading it.

I feel like again and again people are confusing "Trump voter" with "Trump supporter." The lunatics who spend all night tweeting about Pizzagate? Those people aren't changing their minds. But that's a very small portion of people who voted for Trump. Most Trump voters are like, well, most voters; they don't pay much attention to politics and have vague impressions of who people are and what they're like. A constant drumbeat of Trump is a crook, Trump is a crook, Trump is a crook DOES change those people's minds.

The larger issue is simple tribalism. Logical arguments and airtight exposes of corruption aren't going to have any discernible impact upon people who reject facts and experts. The basic mindset among the hardcore-est of the hardcore Trumpists is 'anything our team does is cool, anything your team does is criminal'. It helps to keep this in mind anytime we find ourselves getting sputtery over the naked hypocrisy of GOPers giving their own a pass to engage in behavior that they believe a libruhl should be jailed over. It's never about the act itself but rather the perpetrator.

Any dirt they have on Trump could just be their behavior insurance to make sure he doesn't ever start throwing them under the bus in a sudden series of tweets somewhere down the line.

xposts