Trump as tragicomedy

[Kriegsspiel]

Further to Moda's request for a "source" establishing the absence of evidence sufficient to initiate an investigation, the following testimony provided by FBI Director Christopher Wray at a House Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday would seem to pretty much settle the issue:

Two simple questions: How did the FBI's Russia investigation start? And was it started because the Trump "dossier" was presented to somebody at the FBI?

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) asked FBI director Christopher Wray those questions at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, but he got no answers:

"How did the Russia investigation start?" DeSantis asked Wray. "Did (FBI counterintelligence agent)Peter Strzok -- was he -- did he start it?"

Wray answered, "I'm not aware of who started the investigation within the FBI."

DeSantis followed up: "Was it started because the dossier was presented to somebody in the FBI?"

"I don't have the answer to that question," Wray said.

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/su ... ump-russia

Wray is either lying or totally incompetent.

Either way, he must be fired.

But we know the answer to this question, don't we?

But if everyone in government who was incompetent or a liar was fired then there wouldnOH NOW I SEE WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THIS

[moda0306]

Trump has no problem with the CIA, permanent war, gangster global capitalism, etc, as long as it's doing what he sees as being "in our interests" as they murder, torture, lie, steal, and secretly manipulate the public. He just wants to use these tools for less globalist aims. He's no enemy of the deep state. He just wants to use its power somewhat differently.

What we are witnessing, at worst, is two wings of the permawar surveillance state engage in quasi-espionage against each other. What we are witnessing is our corrupt justice system actuall turning against power rather than doing its bidding.

So in that context I won't lose one ounce of sleep for a neofascist police statist at the head of the executive branch when the corrupt justice he wants dealt to poor brown people gets turned on him.

That said, I'm more than willing to simultaneously call for the indictment of any other powerful folks engaging in illegal activity on-behalf. Hillary Clinton... CNN... Faux Newd... James Clapper... Other individuals and institutions who act illegally or immorally towards the public they're supposed to serve, can rot with the rapey slimeball Trump.

But if the globalist wing of the deep state wants to go to engage a secret "war" with the jingo wing, I'm more than happy to watch. Trump is simply an imperialist war-monger of a different flavor.

[Maddy]

Trump has no problem with the CIA, permanent war, gangster global capitalism, etc, as long as it's doing what he sees as being "in our interests" as they murder, torture, lie, steal, and secretly manipulate the public. He just wants to use these tools for less globalist aims. He's no enemy of the deep state. He just wants to use its power somewhat differently.

I'd be surprised if Trump fully understands, at this point, what the deep state is and what its objectives are. No doubt his learning curve has been steep, but he's had neither the time nor the experience to know what's really at stake, who's really running the show, and little information or control he has over anything. It may be that the oligarchy will, in the end, play him like a fiddle (as they have every president in recent history), but I think it's too early to brand him one way or another.

[Kriegsspiel]

Trump has no problem with the CIA, permanent war, gangster global capitalism, etc, as long as it's doing what he sees as being "in our interests" as they murder, torture, lie, steal, and secretly manipulate the public. He just wants to use these tools for less globalist aims. He's no enemy of the deep state. He just wants to use its power somewhat differently.

I'd be surprised if Trump fully understands, at this point, what the deep state is and what its objectives are. No doubt his learning curve has been steep, but he's had neither the time nor the experience to know what's really at stake, who's really running the show, and little information or control he has over anything. It may be that the oligarchy will, in the end, play him like a fiddle (as they have every president in recent history), but I think it's too early to brand him one way or another.

I think he understands exactly what the deep state is and what its objectives are.

If he can stay alive and avoid being railroaded out of office I believe he will go down as a great President.

I think he's gonna need to start a war or something to join that club.

[Kriegsspiel]

Ok, maybe just win one.

Though I don't think anyone really wins wars anymore*.

*For instance
Iraq Prime Minister Declares Victory Over ISIS

"Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq declared victory over the Islamic State on Saturday, announcing the end of more than three years of battles to regain control over nearly one-third of the country that had been under the terrorist group’s dominion...

Hours before Mr. Abadi’s speech, a bomb suspected of being planted by insurgents exploded in the center of Tikrit"

[moda0306]

Trump has vociferously advocated for torture, imperialistic war and theft, murdering family-members of alleged "terrorists," and an expanded police state.

I'd love to see tech's evidence that he's any sort of reliable threat to the deep state.

But I know we won't get it.

[flyingpylon]

Trump has vociferously advocated for torture, imperialistic war and theft, murdering family-members of alleged "terrorists," and an expanded police state.

Or maybe he’s just “pacing and leading” on some or all of those issues.

[Benko]

Trump has vociferously advocated for torture, imperialistic war and theft, murdering family-members of alleged "terrorists," and an expanded police state.

I'd love to see tech's evidence that he's any sort of reliable threat to the deep state.

But I know we won't get it.

Advocated for=words. What has actually changed/been done on the basis of those words?

[Maddy]

In today's headlines, the Pentagon has made known its intent to defy President Trump with regard to his ban on transgenders in the military. So you tell me: Who's actually in charge, and what reason is there to believe that the Pentagon isn't establishing US foreign policy as well?

[Benko]

in all fairness candidate trump did "vociferously advocated for torture, imperialistic war and theft, murdering family-members of alleged "terrorists," and an expanded police state." i don't recall president trump advocating or following through on any of this hyperbolic election nuttery at all. this is certainly in keeping with how heat of the campaign bloviating is forgotten by most/all candidates... he has however(against all political norms) managed to follow through on some of his legitimate campaign promises which is an unorthodox precedent that i am happy to see set...

The deep state is all too much in charge in many areas.

If Trump were more ruthless and authoritarian as people think, he would have fired Comey day 1, cleaned house as fast as possible and the country would have been better off.

[Cortopassi]

How much of the last minute stuff was done by Obama just in order to potentially mess with Trump were he to win?

***Transgendered people -- June 2016, 8 years into his presidency, is when Obama decided to allow them? Why not earlier?

-- Section 1. Policy. (a) Until June 2016, the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (collectively, the Departments) generally prohibited openly transgender individuals from accession into the United States military and authorized the discharge of such individuals. Shortly before President Obama left office, however, his Administration dismantled the Departments' established framework by permitting transgender individuals to serve openly in the military, authorizing the use of the Departments' resources to fund sex-reassignment surgical procedures, and permitting accession of such individuals after July 1, 2017. The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security have since extended the deadline to alter the currently effective accession policy to January 1, 2018, while the Departments continue to study the issue.

***Utah Bears Ears, in December 2016??:

Obama, as expected, named 1.35 million acres of federal land as the Bears Ears National Monument in late December, just a month before leaving office. Tribes and environmentalists celebrated, but Utah officials were angry.

***Jerusalem, seems every president in the past 25 years ran on this but then pulled back, but Trump finally pulled the trigger?
------------------------
My head is spinning. Last month I was 100% anti-Trump, after voting for him. I am now starting to reverse that position....

until 25 more women come out and accuse him of sexual misconduct....

Yes, my head is spinning.

[dualstow]

Where is the best place to read about the so-called deep state?

between the lines.

[Maddy]

Where is the best place to read about the so-called deep state?

This is a very interesting and eye-opening multi-chapter work that delves into the Deep State's intimate connections to Hollywood, the music industry, pedophilia, the military-industrial complex, the U.S. intelligence apparatus, the occult, psychedelic drugs, and the hippy movement.
http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/laurelcanyon/

[dualstow]

Where is the best place to read about the so-called deep state?

This is a very interesting and eye-opening multi-chapter work that delves into the Deep State's intimate connections to Hollywood, the music industry, pedophilia, the military-industrial complex, the U.S. intelligence apparatus, the occult, psychedelic drugs, and the hippy movement.
http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/laurelcanyon/

oooh i like that one, i read all the way through it a couple years ago, it was a strange and almost addictive read on the sixties and the counterculture... it put an entirely different spin on it for me as a post sixties child, it created a wonderful and healthy skepticism in me about a decade its music and culture that i was mostly just in awe of beforehand....

I started it. Thank you!

[Maddy]

As I skim this morning's news concerning the surfacing of FBI e-mails referring to an "insurance policy" addressed to the unlikely possibility of a Trump presidency, I'm thinking that you've got to be nuts to conclude that Trump has voluntarily allied himself with the Deep State. Who could possibly be targeted in this Stalinesque way and not become rabidly disenchanted with the establishment?

[Maddy]

I recently heard an excellent interview with Stephen Cohen, self-avowed liberal and professor emeritus of Russian studies at New York University and professor emeritus of politics at Princeton University. His view is that the recurring baseless accusations of treason against President Trump have become a serious national security threat by thwarting the effort toward diplomatic rapprochement and fueling a brewing international crisis comparable to the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.

Those "progressives" who think Trump is the problem need a reality check and should give some serious thought to whose agenda they are, in reality, supporting.

"What he's being accused of is treason. This has never happened before in America, that there is a Russia agent in the White House. And we have a whole array of allegations from Putin helped him get in the White House, to his associates are doing wrong things with Russians."

"There is no evidence there was any wrongdoing, and indeed Flynn should have talked to the Russian ambassador. That was his job. This is beyond belief now... This has become a national security threat to us in and of itself,"he explained.

"Two motives have driven this false narrative about Trump, that he is somehow a Kremlin agent. There have been two forces. One is the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party, which doesn't want to admit she lost the election... and that may be because she wants to run again.... At the same time, there has long been in Washington, let's call it the fourth branch of government -- the intelligence services, who have opposed any rapprochement or cooperation with Russia."

"Remember, in 2016, President Obama worked out a deal with Russian president Vladimir Putin, for military cooperation in Syria. He said he was going to share intelligence with Russia, the way Trump and the Russians were supposed to do the other day. Our Department of Defense said they wouldn't share intelligence, and a few days later, they killed Syrian soldiers ["by accident"] violating the agreement, and that was that," he explained.

"So we can ask: Who is making our foreign policy in Washington today?"

Host Tucker Carlson presses him to explain and Cohen says: "You and I have to ask a subversive question. Are there really three branches of government. Or is there a fourth branch of government? These intel services? What we know for a fact, Obama tried not very hard, but he tried for a military alliance with Putin in Syria against terrorism, but it was sabotaged by the Department of Defense and its allies in the intelligence services. Trump sais on the campaign trail, 'Wouldn't it be great to cooperate with Russia?' My answer is, it would be great. And Trump wants that to happen, but he is being thwarted. Every time he gets close, we get a new leak of a story."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... today.html

Related video interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhkzF0npUnc

[moda0306]

I recently heard an excellent interview with Stephen Cohen, self-avowed liberal and professor emeritus of Russian studies at New York University and professor emeritus of politics at Princeton University. His view is that the recurring baseless accusations of treason against President Trump have become a serious security threat to the United States by obstructing the effort toward diplomatic rapprochement and fueling an international crisis of monumental proportion.

Those "progressives" who think Trump is the problem need a reality check and should give some thought to whose agenda they are, in reality, supporting.

"What he's being accused of is treason. This has never happened before in America, that there is a Russia agent in the White House. And we have a whole array of allegations from Putin helped him get in the White House, to his associates are doing wrong things with Russians."

"There is no evidence there was any wrongdoing, and indeed Flynn should have talked to the Russian ambassador. That was his job. This is beyond belief now... This has become a national security threat to us in and of itself,"he explained.

"Two motives have driven this false narrative about Trump, that he is somehow a Kremlin agent. There have been two forces. One is the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party, which doesn't want to admit she lost the election... and that may be because she wants to run again.... At the same time, there has long been in Washington, let's call it the fourth branch of government -- the intelligence services, who have opposed any rapprochement or cooperation with Russia."

"Remember, in 2016, President Obama worked out a deal with Russian president Vladimir Putin, for military cooperation in Syria. He said he was going to share intelligence with Russia, the way Trump and the Russians were supposed to do the other day. Our Department of Defense said they wouldn't share intelligence, and a few days later, they killed Syrian soldiers ["by accident"] violating the agreement, and that was that," he explained.

"So we can ask: Who is making our foreign policy in Washington today?"

Host Tucker Carlson presses him to explain and Cohen says: "You and I have to ask a subversive question. Are there really three branches of government. Or is there a fourth branch of government? These intel services? What we know for a fact, Obama tried not very hard, but he tried for a military alliance with Putin in Syria against terrorism, but it was sabotaged by the Department of Defense and its allies in the intelligence services. Trump sais on the campaign trail, 'Wouldn't it be great to cooperate with Russia?' My answer is, it would be great. And Trump wants that to happen, but he is being thwarted. Every time he gets close, we get a new leak of a story."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... today.html

"Libs" that support the ilk of Hillary are surely in many forms a threat insofar the establishment dems are a threat to our liberty and security.

But that doesn't mean that all the areas outside of Russia that people are extremely weary of Trump aren't warranted. While we're worrying about Trump/Russia relations, Trump might ignite a war with North Korea. There are lots of threats in the establishment, and lots of idiots outside of it.

Trump is certainly not THE problem... but to think that he's not A problem is ridiculous. Nobody that impulsive, unable to articulate a coherent thought, and willing to employ violence can be written off as leader of the largest killing force in the world.

[moda0306]

By the way, I'd highly suggest listening to the most recent episode of "Intercepted." Jeremy Scahill is excellent at disassembling garbage establishment arguments and media malfeasance without being Trump's c*ck-holster.

https://theintercept.com/podcasts/

[moda0306]

Other great sources on this stuff are the Scott Horton podcast, Glenn Greenwald, Tom Nichols, and some others I'm blanking on right now. None are Russia alarmists, and strike the right balance between condemning Trump for being the buffoon he clearly is, but not ever letting the establishment dems/media/"progressives" off of the hook.

I'm pretty sure Scott Horton is an "Anarcho-Capitalist"... so I'd be curious what tech has to say about his opinion on Trump's foreign policy to-date.

[Maddy]

While we're worrying about Trump/Russia relations, Trump might ignite a war with North Korea.

Moda, I don't follow you when it comes to North Korea. What has changed, in your view, to make North Korea a greater threat to the world than before the inception of the Trump presidency?

[moda0306]

While we're worrying about Trump/Russia relations, Trump might ignite a war with North Korea.

Moda, I don't follow you when it comes to North Korea. What has changed, in your view, to make North Korea a greater threat to the world than before the inception of the Trump presidency?

I don't know if they are a greater threat. Trump's threats to them may or may not be advisable, however. Scott Horton is really good to listen to on the topic of North Korea.

Obviously, words one says is only one part of what we can see, while there is a ton we don't see. By all means, perhaps behind closed doors Trump is making "great deals." I'd love to see actual evidence of that.

And they're not the only threat. So are we. A nuke dropped on N. Korea could cause a cascade of utter disasters, even if they don't get a shot off.

[Benko]

Who really expects us to nuke anyone? Seriously?

[moda0306]

Who really expects us to nuke anyone? Seriously?

On what basis do you think we wouldn't? We have before. We've made threats and had contingencies that have left us within inches of nuclear war with Russia. We have a president with the composure of a cocky, uneducated 12 year old bully who's said we "must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability."

But let's pare it waaaay back. Even a conventional war without nukes would be an absolute disaster for the region from what I've heard from many different sources (they might all be full of it... but I've actively tried to find smart people on these potentially larger geopolitical issues. I'm more than open to exploring more hawkish ones, if you recommend any).

The U.S. has done a massive amount of damage in Japan, Korea, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam killing millions of people with conventional bombs & non-nuclear attacks.

[moda0306]

I'm open to all sorts of ideas if they can be backed up by evidence, but this idea that Trump is a threat to the deep state and that our main concern should be their war against him, with no mention of his expanding our nuclear arsenal immensely, staying cozy with Israel and Saudi Arabia in downright creepy ways, continuing to support war/genocide in Yemen, expanding the police state, giving generals more control in our wars, flip-flopping on Syria intervention and discussing NONE of these issues with any nuance or intelligence is just-as-if-not-more-so idiotic than the flamboyant display of bad/manipulative journalism with regards to Russian collusion. I'd say far-more, since the claims are ridiculous on their face, where-as someone has to do digging to develop an educated opinion on the Russia collusion stuff.

Donald Trump is NOT Ron Paul. He's a war-monger police-statist who could care less for due-process, human rights, the 1st/4th Amendments, limited war-making powers, or limiting the scope of the nefarious powers of the CIA or the NSA (he thinks Snowden should be executed, remember?). He might disagree with how these powers are projected, but he doesn't disagree with using them. He's made this abundantly clear both before and after he was elected/inaugurated.

If someone disagrees with this last paragraph, I guess I don't know what to say. It's fine if you agree with him, but let's acknowledge what exactly you are agreeing with, and it certainly is NOT the elimination of permanent executive war-making abilities and other secretive/violent "national security" power-centers.

[Maddy]

Seems to me this is nothing more than what we lived with throughout the Bush, Clinton, and Obama presidencies. I see absolutely nothing new and different from Trump in the areas of civil liberties and foreign policy.