More Evidence CNN Was Right: Multiple Outlets Confirm Comey Personally Briefed Trump On Dossier
First DNI James Clapper issued a statement that tended to support the CNN report that the intelligence community had briefed Donald Trump about allegations that the Russians had gathered compromising information about Trump. Then Joe Biden confirmed that he and Obama had been briefed on the material.
Tonight, multiple outlets are reporting that James Comey briefed Trump on the material personally. The Hill:
FBI Director James Comey briefed President-elect Donald Trump on a two-page summary of an unverified dossier claiming Russia had compromising information on the real estate mogul, CNN reported Thursday.
That contradicts claims by members of Trump’s transition team and other news outlets that intelligence officials never briefed Trump on the two-page addendum to a classified report given to President Obama and leaders in Congress about Russian efforts to interfere with the presidential election.
Well, well. Looks like CNN may have gotten it right after all.
A lot of people, including smart people, wanted to conflate CNN with BuzzFeed. This is why you don't need to jump to conclusions on Day 1. https://t.co/rFa92hjSxM
— Just Karl (@justkarl) January 13, 2017
“Other news outlets” specifically refers to NBC, which had issued a report that claimed Trump had never been briefed on the information. Even NBC is now confirming the story about the briefing by Comey.
As Jay Caruso said after the Biden confirmation of the briefing:
Will all the of the Trump people were screaming at Jake Tapper now call out NBC for reporting “fake news?” They shouldn’t. NBC merely got the story wrong. CNN got the story right. That sometimes happens in journalism. Don’t be so quick to accuse reporters of bad faith.
Sometimes, they just get it wrong.
Indeed.
[Cross-posted at RedState.]
Suggested response to this post: tell me I am naive or insufficiently skeptical or that I love me some CNN or that I’m not worth reading any more.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:05 pmThank you for following up on this Patterico.
Tillman (a95660) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:14 pmRight, wrong, right, wrong and now that it contradict’s team Trump it’s declared the final word?
Harkin (a9a478) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:17 pmIf an FBI director briefs a President-elect and the President-elect forgets it by the time of his press conference, did the FBI director make a sound?
nk (dbc370) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:18 pmThe better part of valor, is to not admit knowledge of or ownership of said dossier, which may have come from Blair from sbu, even Putin himself.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:29 pmDid Comey tell Trump that prostitutes peed on his bed? Just asking.
AZ Bob (f7a491) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:33 pmMeanwhile the Chinese are deploying a news class of nuclear sub, an Islamist apparently attacked the consulate in guadalajara.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:34 pmMy memory may fail me.
I thought the climate here was to let all of the other people go crazy in real time and then sit back and see what was what when the dust cleared, that is all.
My point, stupid or not, is, since I do not know what reports exist or don’t, where they came from, who leaked what and why, and will never know because of what they are by nature,
I don’t care if CNN got one detail of questionable consequence correct.
If we are all being played by Putin, what difference does it make if CNN got one thing correct?
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:37 pmBecause we are citizens, not subjects, and are in charge of our lives and governmment.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:40 pmABC, the Hill, NBC (which said the opposite to begin with), CNN, all have the story — corroborated by Clapper (who can be a liar) and Biden (dirty Dem, obviously lying).
So we have the media which always lies and some other liars. The Smart Conservative Take is that it must be wrong.
By God, I’m going with that whether I believe it or not.
FOR THE CLICKS!!!!!!
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:43 pmBob, you understand that I think that story is stupid, as does virtually everyone else on the planet who is not a raving partisan Democrat?
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:44 pmHere is the central thesis of my original post — you know, the one so crazy that several long-time readers have flounced or are threatening to:
That right there is some crazy talk! Now that I read that again, I have decided to stop reading me too!
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:48 pmkeep jumping that shark.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:51 pmFinding the truth = Jumping the shark.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:53 pmIt shows how events like ft Lauderdale and Orlando and Ohio state, seem to occur,that we’ve discussing this collection of offal is obscene in so many wats, it is the epitome of fake news ‘sound and fury,,,
narciso (d1f714) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:54 pmbarack awarded slow joe biden some kind of medal for not peeing in the bed during the past 8 years
he was the first caucasian who was inarticulate, unclean, yet decent-looking to receive such a medal from an articulate, clean, nice-looking black president
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:54 pmDRJ,
As I said before, if you are given half of a case file and told to enter court, you really are not equipped to handle the case responsibly, are you? As a doctor if I was only given 1/2 of the information about a patient I would not be confident that I would be of any help.
My point is, when all we have to go on is what we are told through leaks, it is pretty foolish to think we are in a very good position to accurately judge anything about our government.
Our own lives within our local sphere of influence is another thing.
That is why I have always said the only responsible thing a person can do is try to put trustworthy people in office and let them deal with the things we will never know about,
but the country hasn’t been too enamored with that idea, so we have disreputable politicians being covered by disreputable media people,
I wish everyone a good night and a better tomorrow.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:54 pmI’d recommend letting this “who briefed who on what” story play out a week or so more before believing anyone.
steveg (5508fb) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:55 pmClapper is a maybe. Biden is Biden. Comey needs a week or tow before twisting himself in knots before reversing the field.
Oh. Trump lives in his own version of reality
That’s a fair point. This transition has seen a simply amazing number of stories based on anonymous sources that are directly contradicted by other anonymous sources within days, indeed sometimes hours.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:57 pmDID YOU HEAR ABOUT THAT WASHINGTON POST REPORTER WHO TOOK A PICTURE OF TILLERSON’S NOTES IT’S JUST TERRIBLE JIM HOFT HAS THE STORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:58 pmsteveg-
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:58 pmyou said it much better than I,
please go first next time,
I’ll let you
Well, you see that’s where the intelligence services went wrong. They told Trump bad things about Putin. To make it worse, that Putin was spreading false rumors about Trump.
Now everybody knows that when a man is in love, the worst thing you can do is tell him bad things about his amour. He will refuse to believe you and turn against you. Friends have turned against friends, brothers against brothers, children against parents, over it. So it’s little wonder that Trump has turned against the intelligence service and news organizations who are trying to break his heart by telling him what Putin has been doing.
nk (dbc370) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:59 pmWhen people are murdered by jihadists or tortured in Chicago by uneducated thugs, it lasts in the news cycle for no more than 12 hours.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:59 pmBut when there’s some kind of dossier made by Russians about golden showers, it lasts in the news cycle for weeks.
(Unless the dossier about golden showers involves Democrats in which case it doesn’t even make the news cycle — yeah, I’m pointing a finger at you Teddy Kennedy and Chris Dodd!)
Hahahahaha I think nk nailed it.
There seriously might be a little tiny bit of truth to that, for reals. I’ve been thinking the same thing lately myself.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:00 pmWhen will Jake Tapper or any of the other Democrats-with-bylines be called out/held to account for their collusion with the Democrats? ANY of them. They get rewarded. Who cares, right?
Keep jumping that shark.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:01 pmA video from my Christmas vacation.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:02 pmSeriously… do keep jumping that shark. Keep that laser focus on the top news stories!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:03 pmI said good night before, and I mean it now,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:04 pmbut nk,
be that as it may,
Ii think the intel community under Bush gave Trump plenty of reason to come at them with a grudge,
he does believe the best defense is a good offense
The story serves the limited use of making sure never to deal with Steele or fusion gfs, outside that it’s a waste of time.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:07 pmAll I did last night was spend hours writing a post about Garry Kasparov’s book and the Tillerson hearings. I’m serious: it took hours.
Kasparov’s book ain’t one of the top news stories. But I wrote about it because I found it interesting. I have received some nice feedback from a few people about it.
I did not see a comment on that thread from you, Haiku, so I don’t know how you felt about that post. Probably too long didn’t read, I guess?
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:09 pmHe’s doing the Lord’s work and jumping that shark.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:10 pmIf you are going to act like a standard Internet troll, Haiku, I will start treating you like one. Is that how it’s going to be?
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:11 pmToo entertained by the shark jumping, Patterico. It’s fascinating.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:11 pmI’ll take that as a “yes.”
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:12 pmI wonder what the Russians could possibly have that would actually make Trump change his behavior to keep it quiet. The man has demonstrated a remarkable lack of shame over a very long time period. It’s not like we just suddenly learned that he’s a lousy person.
Maybe that old line about dead girls or live boys.
eeSoronel Haetir (86a46e) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:12 pmStep one, Haiku: you have said the same thing four times in a row. You are boring me and you get muted for the night if it happens again. That’s the sort of thing I do to deal with trolls. My guess is you’ll push it, so let’s get it over with now.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:13 pmThank God ISIS has been defeated, Iran has been defanged, and China has withdrawn its aggression in the South China Seas. *Whew.*
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:13 pmWhile doing your victory dance try to remember that it has taken 2 days, more unconscionable intel leaks from somebody or somebodies, a Clapper mea culpa-type clarification, and multiple updates from multiple media sources to be able to reach your conclusion. At the moment when you wrote the headline proclaiming Cnn’s story on Trump, the IC and the Russians to be responsible journalism, if you are being honest with yourself you had no more idea if that was true than I have right now that my painter is being truthful when he says the special on-order paint will arrive and he will be done by noon Saturday.
So yes, I’m sorry but I absolutely agree that you should have been more skeptical than you were. And I absolutely wish you were more interested in who is leaking garbage to the media and why, especially now with the insertion into the mix of the British retired MI6 guy who was apparently initially hired by Republicans and was then paid by Democrats to get dirt after the primaries. And I wish you could admit to yourself that although we all understand and agree they were two different documents involved, there would not have been a need for the “two pager” had not the 35 page dossier existed and been in media hands.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/01/which-dems-are-behind-the-fake-buzzfeed-story.php
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:14 pmNo, I’m going to read Kasparov’s book. Because I know that more sharks will be jumped tomorrow… and the next day… and the day after that.
Seriously… I’ll give it a rest here. It’s getting to the point that when I have trouble falling asleep, I don’t count sheep. I count sharks.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:15 pmI respect Jake Tapper — a point I made before. I don’t know what your relationship is with your painter, but if you don’t respect or trust him then I would be skeptical.
I’m glad you’re reading the Kasparov book and I look forward to your take on it.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:16 pmNo should want credit for the thing, like all highlander films after the original,
narciso (d1f714) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:17 pmThat’s cute, Haiku. I’ll help you give it a rest for the night, as I promised to do. Remind me tomorrow to lift the moderation. Enjoy the Kasparov book.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:18 pmNow false flag operation are nothing new, the okrana ran azev who was no 2 in the social revolutionaries after savinkov and they were in contact with bgaev, storyline assasin
narciso (d1f714) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:23 pmGood night, MD.
Let’s not offend too many sensibilities with love/shmove, Patterico. Let’s go with a quote from The Wild Bunch: “There’s a hell of a lot of people who just can’t stand being wrong.” Trump is one for sure.
nk (dbc370) — 1/12/2017 @ 8:29 pmThere may or may not be something to the allegations presented by the intelligence community — but no matter how you slice it, the fact that the intelligence community chose to brief Trump and Obama on these issues is a legitimate story.
Except it wasn’t. Particularly to other news outlets familiar with the gossipy content of the material for months. All CNN management did was choose an opportune time to light up the screen w/one of it’s ‘breaking news’ banners, spotlight a non-story– which has been a ‘MO’ of theirs for years now- and legitimize it in the MSM through peak viewing hours then overnight into the Trump morning presser to draw eyes. It’s a decision that made it easy for Buzzfeed to do its dump while CNN’s on-air talent hyped their pitch with the infamous ‘we got a hot story but can’t verify the contents’ for hours.
This had little to do with ‘news’ and everything to do with television.
And all CNN got out of it was Acosta’s ears boxed on global TV and their reputation sullied by the President-elect worldwide. CBS News’ Dan Rather wore it as a badge of honor all the way to the anchor chair after his dust-up with Nixon at a presser. Can’t blame the on air talent, as they report to the managing editors who have the last word. It was a poor call by CNN suits. Nothing new there. But media suits know what CNN management was up to and why.
It’s television.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/12/2017 @ 9:00 pmSo where do you fall on California secession?
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/12/2017 @ 9:00 pm“DID YOU HEAR ABOUT THAT WASHINGTON POST REPORTER WHO TOOK A PICTURE OF………”
Haven’t seen shouting like that since the Lewandowsky “assault” fake news.
Harkin (a9a478) — 1/12/2017 @ 9:09 pmI’m going to post a long comment later that is going to eviserate this defense of CNN’s original report yesterday. I would suggest anyone interested read the story at CNN from yesterday that is linked in Patrick’s post yesterday and watch all of Tapper’s video with his guests. Then read closely the stories late today on Comey that are being touted as backstopping CNNs original report after NBC questioned it.
Shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/12/2017 @ 9:10 pm@46.So where do you fall on California secession?
So where do you stand on the LA Chargers?
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/12/2017 @ 9:22 pmThe funniest thing that I find out about this whole “Russian Hack” and now the “Trump was being spied on by the FSB” story, is that now all of a sudden the DNC and its propaganda arm (otherwise known as the Mainstream Media) is that they are trying to walk back almost 30+yrs of trashing the intelligence community. Just an example of the stupid the media tried to discredit the intelligence commmunity with was the now infamous “OMG! CIA is destroying black American communities with CRACK!!! FOR REALZS!”, Patterico remember when the LAT ran full hard and heavy with that story? A link to a 2006 book review on the whole story, http://articles.latimes.com/2006/aug/18/opinion/oe-schou18, just in case anyone forgot about that awesome bit of media sensationalism. Now all of a sudden the media are repeating the same mistakes, the same mistakes that ultimately lead to a reporter to take his own life and the big story of what did the intelligence community and when did they know it got lost in the conspiracy that the CIA was full of Skokie Nutsys or Closeted Clansmen who were all about the albinoism.
I am just an outsider to how the intelligence community works, and only spent a few years working on a minor in college on the community since parts of it aligned with my larger interest in international relations. However, that said there have been plenty of other stories where the MSM and/or the DNC have lead to say that the American population shouldn’t trust the CIA, DIA, ONI, or any of the other 17 codified intelligence agencies in the nation (you would be amazed as to who has an intelligence arm) for at least 30 years if not longer. From the missing of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in the 90s to the missing of the fall of the Wall and ipso facto Communism in Europe; on over to the mistakes about the Arab Spring and the Iranian Nuclear Program. Let alone the whole Operation Iraqi Freedom and debate about WMDs and what the intelligence community could see, prove or just took a WAG at to help make the case. Hell, there are still folks in the more radical side of the left that want to have kangaroo courts for the folks that did up those estimates and then hang the analysts from their necks, simply because the leftists hate the Iraqi War. That is if they aren’t casting the intelligence community and the employees as idiots worthy of straight line family trees. Then they are casting them as political tools used to exploit war and unrest because that is what is good for America. Again, the whole debate and many books/articles/blogs/hot air about the intelligence and Iraq and WMDs and “Bush Lied so that Casey Died!” comes back. If not that then Chile, Iran, Cuba and other now infamous Cold War hot spots.
Now all of a sudden the DNC and its propaganda arm wants the American population to accept the totally truth that the Intelligence Community is the smartest things since Steve Job or Bill Gates created computers, that they aren’t being politicized by anyone here (note as a commentator above has brought up the story about who created the infamous dossier, http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-sordid-history-of-the-firm-behind-the-trump-russia-dossier/article/2006254) and that they are true red, white, blue Americans that love apple pie and baseball and mom. Well, as we have seen and some of the more honest conservative op-eds have mentioned in the hot wash that was the 2016 election cycle, the American population has absolutely 0, zero, nada, zilch, etc. faith in the Media (both right wing and left) to present the “truth” or just the facts and no spin. So here is potentially one of the biggest stories in the 21st century if not at least the last century, and the capital the media is depending on to get folks to accept this is not even in IOU status, more like parent viewing lying 4yr old status. The end game is that the population doesn’t know who to believe.
To add into all of this, remember that only three months ago, the DNC and its propaganda arm was trashing Comey (whose agency is responsible for internal anti-spy efforts). So the DNC has, IMHO, cried wolf so many times about the evils of government and that they are mean to “real Americans and the freedoms in the Constitution” that now there is a chance a wolf has gotten in and guess what? The population doesn’t care. There is no way, Patterico that you can make them care either. All that political and social capital was lighted on fire.
PS: For those that are interested, a good primer on the Intelligence Community and how they are supposed to work within the US laws and regulations is here: http://tinyurl.com/primeronintelligenceagency. It is a well written book that isn’t very dry and references some real world examples that are up to date in the now 6th edition.
Charles (24e862) — 1/12/2017 @ 9:30 pmThis is exhibit A of why and how propaganda works. It’s gratifying to see the many who recognize it and disappointing to see the few who don’t.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/12/2017 @ 9:47 pmThe Chargers moving to LA is a new one on me.
To get out of earshot of the Wall construction maybe?
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/12/2017 @ 9:55 pmThe two things that are important are the truth and fidelity to the oaths we take. The unnamed officials who keep blabbing about the contents of classifie Presidential briefings are all kinds of wrong. The stor(ies) about Trump are either true or not. Having been in possession of them for months Clapper et al should know by now whether they are or not. If false, then they need to clean up the mess they’ve made and say so. If true, they need to say so and let the chips fall as they may. This is happening because the President and others want it to. It’s impossible to believe otherwise.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/12/2017 @ 10:13 pmObama and Biden are the new arbiters of truth?
Wow. That happened fast.
Must be something to do with the medals they keep awarding themselves.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/12/2017 @ 10:36 pmhttp://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/04/president-obama-awards-himself-distinguished-public-service-medal/
Kind of shakey, but apparently sturdy enough to outweigh jailing a Coptic Christian in Southern California as the culprit in the murder of Ambassador Stevens in Libya.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/12/2017 @ 10:45 pmJoe got one too!
http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/12/barack-obama-awards-joe-biden-with-a-presidential-medal-of-freedom-in-surprise-ceremony/
It’s the newest thing. Participation medals as parting gifts for Democrats sans actual accomplishments.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/12/2017 @ 10:51 pmSo, Patterico has completely jumped the shark. Good luck with your site, friendo, I’m off.
John (fa7cff) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:01 amHere it is. Sorry for the length:
The Host doubled-down in this post on the premise of his post yesterday, which he repeats here:
I think it’s a fair comment to say that the nature of Buzzfeed’s contribution to this “story” doesn’t necessarily make the CNN story garbage.
The problem with this defense is that the CNN story is garbage on its own merits – BUT I’m willing to acknowledge that print and video journalists on deadline are often in a position to “Go with what they have, not with what they know.” The problem here is that CNN didn’t know enough to back up the details in their story, and those unvalidated details are what gets the “camel’s nose under the tent” so that all the false salacious details spill into the public.
Basic set-up for the CNN story: Trump is briefed last week on the IC’s findings on claims about Russian efforts to influence the election in his favor. This happened on Friday of last week. The 4 IC chiefs – Comey FBI, Brennan CIA, Rogers NSA, and Clapper DNI.
Four days later CNN breaks its story about the memos, with a written piece on its website, and Tapper does a lengthy video piece on the subject with 4 guests.
Let’s consider the written piece first:
The headline is “Intel Chiefs Present Trump With Claims of Russian Efforts To Compromise Him.” Inside the story are the following factual statements:
So, the claim in the first paragraph is that “documents presented” to Trump included allegations, etc. Its sourced to “multiple” officials with “direct knowledge of the briefings.” I read that to be a representation that people IN THE ROOM were the sources for the story.
Next paragraph:
Let’s parse this out. First, the report says the allegations were “presented in a two page synopsis.” How do you read that other than to say Trump was given the two page document. How do you read this so far other than that persons in the room told CNN they saw the document given to Trump to review during the briefing?
In addition, the allegations are sourced to memos prepared by a former Brit Intel agent, who was considered credible. How do you read that other than to conclude that even though the memos weren’t yet verified, there were reasons to believe they were true? THAT IS WHAT CNN WAS COUNTING ON FOR ITS HOOK. But CNN also knew the memos were floating around for months, and no journalist other than Mother Jones had made use of them because some facts were objectively wrong, and most of the rest was not verifiable.
Next paragraph:
Again, the overt representation that Trump was given the document to review. But the language of the attribution changes significantly. First reference is to “multiple sources tell CNN”, then later its “several officials with knowledge of the briefings tell CNN”. Neither are attributed to people IN THE ROOM as earlier.
But, to stick the point in and break it off, they add to the reasoning for the 2 page synopsis that it was intended to show Trump that not only was this information floating around, but the Russians held back what they had on him in order to help him in winning the election.
That’s the “De-legitimize Trump” card (pardon the pun), and CNN put it right out there.
WHAT DID THE RUSSIANS HOLD BACK????????? Not the memos – those were from a Brit Intel guy.
According to the IC, as reported by CNN, the Russians HELD BACK VIDEOS AND AUDIOS of Trump paying prostitutes to pee in a bed slept in by the Obamas!!!! That’s what the IC wanted Trump to know – according to CNN. That the Russians had this kind of “KOMPRODAT”, but didn’t release it to Wikileaks. That’s why the IC knows the Russians interfered to help Trump. They know it because the Russians have videos and they didn’t leak them.
So, IT IS THE TRUTH OF THE CONTENT OF THE MEMOS THAT CNN WAS WANTING VIEWERS TO TAKE AWAY FROM THEIR REPORT. The IC wrote down what the memos said, and told Trump the Russians favored him because they didn’t release what the memos say they have. And they are so certain of this they briefed Obama and Trump on the memos. That was CNN’s hook to run the story.
But within hours, after Buzzfeed posted the memos, almost everyone agreed the memos were unverifiable, mostly second and third hand hearsay, and absolutely not anything that any reputable intelligence agency would put out or rely upon for any reason.
CNN circled to the backdoor validation of the memos later by writing:
These now discredited memos, which have been floating around for months, and which were discredited the moment Buzzfeed put them out, are dressed by CNN as coming from an Brit intel agent AND HIS SOURCES who are both deemed credible enough.
His sources on these memos, or his sources in past work done by him?????? If you don’t know who his sources were for these memos, how can you view them as credible? Just because he has had credible sources in the past, who might be completely different people, doesn’t mean the sources he used for these memos are credible. And CNN already writes earlier that the FBI has not been able to validate the contents of the memos though they have had them for months.
CNN relies on this circular logic for its backdoor validation to clear the low bar of its journalist requirements: “There are memos from a guy who has provided good info in the past, we don’t know anything about where he got the info in the memos, and the FBI hasn’t tracked anything down but the IC told the Pres and Pres Elect, so that’s good enough to guess that the memos and the guy’s sources are probably credible enough for the editorial policy of the place we work.”
So now let’s go to the video: Tapper (who I like, wrote a great book called “The Outpost” which I would recommend to anyone here — in an interview I heard, he said that coming from a non-military family, his involvement with the Army vets of Afghan in writing that book changed his life), Jim Sciutto, Evan Perez, and Carl Bernstein. First problem is too many contributors, too many sources, and like too many chefs in a kitchen you end up with a stew that tastes like crap when you try to blend and make sense of info coming from multiple leakers.
But watch the whole video, and note the “urgency” and “breathlessness” in their voices the they discuss the memos and that the IC Cheifs felt compelled to brief Trump on them. Even though they never discuss the contents, just like in the written piece, they refer again and again that the memos reflect efforts by the Russians to “compromise” Trump, and its ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THEY THINK THE MEMOS ARE FACTUALLY TRUE!!!
Tapper turns to Scuitto and says “Jim, tell me what we’ve learned.” In a LOL moment, Scuitto says “Well, to be very precise….” Pretty much all that follows is anything but precise, unless it’s the old “precise but inaccurate.” Dan Rather would know about that.
The demeanor of all 3 guys on the set is just dripping with a belief that the allegations of the memos are true. They are just certain that there is evidence in the hands of the Russians which compromises PE Trump, and that’s why the Russians worked so hard to help get him elected.
They mention a couple times that the info in the 2 page synopsis was so sensitive that it wasn’t included in the broader report on Russian efforts to influence the election, but was only made an “annex” (?) to the Russian report. WRONG.
It wasn’t made part of the report because it wasn’t a product of the US Intel Community. It was merely a summary of information found in the 35 pages of memos from a person outside the US IC. It was uncorroborated and unvalidated. It would never be included in an IC report. But as explained below, the IC Chiefs KNEW they had to get this info before Trump, they wanted to do it together, and this was their one chance.
So what is the substance of the new info about Comey that has come out late on Thursday that supposedly rehabs CNN’s original story according to the Host’s Second post on the topic?
It seems well established that Comey personally briefed Trump on the allegations in a one-on-one meeting AFTER the Intel Briefing.
That’s EXACTLY what Trump said in his Press Conference. When the CNN report came up at the Press Conference, he said he was not briefed on the two page synopsis during the IC briefing, he was made aware of it afterwards without specifying when and by whom. It was on that basis that he labeled the CNN report on the subject “Fake News”.
I certainly see a distinction between a report on a formal briefing by the 4 IC Chiefs, where the intel briefing documents are said to contain potentially explosive allegations of personal and financial misconduct possessed by a foreign power, and the actual facts which appear to be a one-on-one conversation with 1 IC Chief who lets the PE know of the existence of the memos, where the originated, efforts made to confirm/deny their accuracy, etc. I think its quite fair to label the prior fictional account of actual events as “Fake News” that got pedaled to CNN by IC leakers with an agenda.
When CNN runs its original piece, the sourcing is all from people who were NOT IN THE ROOM, but knew the 2 page synopsis went into the room, and presumed it was discussed during the IC Briefing. But CNN’s sources are WRONG. They are leaking like a boat about what they THINK happened, but they didn’t know that the IC Chiefs who did the briefing did not cover the contents of the 2 page synopsis during the briefing. Why? Not known, but my guess is Trump told the 4 IC Chiefs he accepted the conclusion that the Russians were behind the DNC and Podesta hacks, and leaked the info to Wikileaks. He might have cut short the conversation on the topic – he’s the PE afterall – and the IC Chiefs never got to it. Just my guess. I’ve had enough meetings with bosses to know that when they say they agree with you it means further discussion on the subject is a waste of their time, so move on or leave. Trump strikes me as that kind of boss.
So after the briefing is over, Comey askes for a one-on-one session. Why? Because the FBI months ago came into possession of the memos from 2 sources – from the former Brit intel guy who passed them to a former FBI colleague in Rome, and from McCain who got them from a former Brit ambassador to Russia. The FBI has been investigating them. Some members of Congress were being briefed on them that same night. A whole group of people were going to know on the morning of the 7th – but not Trump if Comey didn’t tell him.
IMO, that’s the reason why the 2 page synopsis was put together in the first place, and why it was going into the meeting. Trump is the fooking Pres. Elect, and the IC Chiefs knew it was way past time to get ahead of this problem, and get on the record with Trump that they had the info, they’ve had the info for a while, they’ve tried to investigate the info without much success, and they wanted him to know it was out there – because they are investigating him and are suspicious of him but he’s about to become their boss.
This is ASS COVERING at the highest levels of government service. And the ASS COVERING was spun to CNN as a “Look, the Russians are really trying to compromise Trump and we’re just trying to make sure he understands that. We really have his best interests at the forefront of our efforts. Really.”
And the CNN folks get a bunch of woodies thinking they are first on a story that might end up with clandestine audios and videos of Trump with Russian Hookers in Moscow hotel rooms. Carl Bernstein looks more alive than he has in 25 years.
Finally, about Clapper’s statement as commented on by Jay Caruso at RedState, and linked in the Host’s post.
Patrick has now changed that link in his original post, replacing the original link to Caruso’s post about Clapper, with a link to a Caruso post about Biden. The linked Caruso post about Clapper’s statement is laughably wrong. From Clapper’s statement Caruso concludes:
Uhhh, no Jay.
The meeting with the IC Chiefs was on Friday, January 6. Clapper’s statement was issued on January 11, after all the controversy broke. Clapper’s statement says “This evening I had the opportunity to speak with President Elect Trump to discuss recent media reports about our briefing last Friday.” The phone call was in the evening on January 11, not January 6.
“I expressed my profound dismay at the leaks that have been appearing in the press, and we both agreed that they are extremely corrosive and damaging to our national security. We also discussed the private security company document …”
So Jay, the discussion of the memos was on Nov. 11, not Nov. 6. It does not undercut the NBC News report that it wasn’t discussed during the Intel Briefing.
In fact, it supports it AND undercuts the new reports out today suggesting that CNN was right.
Why? Well, consider this question:
Why would Clapper need to discuss the memos with Trump on the 11th after the controversy arose, and assure him they were not the product of the US IC if those memos had been discussed during the Intel Briefing on the 6th with the 4 IC Chiefs??????? If they had been discussed, there was no need for Clapper to raise it again.
Clapper needed to discuss them with Trump because Clapper now knows that Comey met with Trump after the briefing and told him about the memos, as Trump explained in this press conference on the 11th. Trump stated that he was not told about the memos during the briefing, he found out about them later. That’s why Trump was so agitated over CNN’s reporting that the 4 IC Chiefs had discussed the memos and 2 page synopsis with him.
After the Presser, Clapper knew someone had told Trump, so Clapper needed to discuss the memos with Trump on the 11th to assure him they were not from the US IC.
Sounds like NBC was right, and CNN still can’t be defended.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 1:02 amCORRECTION — Patrick did not change the Caruso link.
There are 2 links to Caruso RedState posts — one on Clapper’s statement and one on Biden’s stastement. I looked at one the first time, and the other one the second time, without realizing there were 2 different links I was looking at in the post.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 1:17 amIf I plagiarize you guys on this subject, I am going to flunk out.
steveg (5508fb) — 1/13/2017 @ 3:13 amMy opinion is that Jake Tapper should forget about jumping the shark and instead jump over to the dark side at Fox.
CNN is being dismantled and soon will only be on tv at the airport and dentist office, repeating stories about what Trump did today that they crib from CBS or Fox.
good work Mr. crew
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:07 amFour days later CNN breaks its story about the memos, with a written piece on its website, and Tapper does a lengthy video piece on the subject with 4 guests.
Not quite but you’re on track. Several news outlets were aware of the content for months but unable to run it to ground. But it’s the CNN suits who decided on the eve of Trump’s presser to go to air with it, hype it as ‘breaking news’ with banner headlines (we sat watching it all spill out through the day/night cycle BTW) have the on air talent repeatedly refer to it as a ‘potential bombshell’– then say, in effect, they had a hot story but wouldn’t release the particulars because they had not verified content. And they ran with it, hour after hour, hyping it through peak viewing hours into the morning presser.
That was not ‘breaking news.’ It should never have gone to air as it was. It was sensationalism, not journalism. Hype. Infotainment, to draw audience.
And if you know how CNN is structured, the on air talent has input with the bureau managing editors but in the end, the MEs have the final say of what goes to air. And yes, Bernstein thought he was reliving a Nixon moment. But if Bradlee was alive and his editor, he’d have nixed this going to air as it was.
This was a CNN suits decision. And a lousy one. It had little to do with actual ‘news’ and everything to do with creating hype to build a television audience. Television execs know exactly what CNN was doing. And it wasn’t reporting ‘breaking news.’ As much as it’s hard to accept, Trump know how the media operates- from the inside out– and knows how to play them and how to chide them. He’s been at it in the toughest and most competitive media market for 35 years.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:18 amI’ve lost track of what the big story is supposed to be here.
What we are left with right now is that Comey talked to Trump about a fake dossier that exists. That’s the big scoop, which isn’t so big. CNN needs to take a step back and figure out what *their* story is.
The real story is that someone (the WH or the Intel community) wanted it to seem like they were so concerned about Russian ties they confronted Trump. But that doesn’t seem to have happened.
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:38 amThe other real story is Obama’s FBI tried (and perhaps succeeded) to get a FISA warrant agains his political opponent’s campaign team.
I can tell you what the big story is. Don’t believe anyone in government. Take care of your square. Buy ammo it is the currency of the future.
SD Harms (c7dded) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:44 amYes, exactly what Shipwrecked Crew said. Great job walking through the story.
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:47 am“But, to stick the point in and break it off, they add to the reasoning for the 2 page synopsis that it was intended to show Trump that not only was this information floating around, but the Russians held back what they had on him in order to help him in winning the election.
That’s the “De-legitimize Trump” card (pardon the pun), and CNN put it right out there.”
Yes, that was what the story was supposed to be.
Patterico said : but no matter how you slice it, the fact that the intelligence community chose to brief Trump and Obama on these issues is a legitimate story.
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:59 amI’m genuinely curious about why you think it’s a legitimate story that the IC chose to brief Trump and Obama on these issues. I’m assuming (and I heard a Congressman say this yesterday) that it’s a pretty common thing for subjects of reports like this to be briefed on them. We rarely hear about the content of presidential briefs. They are supposed to be the most confidential communications. I remember when Trump first started receiving the PDB, the buzz was that we couldn’t trust *him* because he would leak the sacred information. We keep being told the IC and POTUS need to trust each other. Yet here we are hearing about this one. I think that’s the story.
And fusion gf’s the ones that commissioned this report specialize in dumpster diving, the fact that this trash and not a detailed analysis of the malware that Robert m lee rises to the top of the heap, shows a total failure of intelligence vetting.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:09 amEven David ignatius seems to have caught half a clue.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:19 am@Patterico: Comey briefed Trump in a one-on-one conversation.
The leakers we were talking about the last couple of days were talking about last Friday’s intelligence meeting, which it was illegal for them to talk about.
In your rush to indict Trump, you are not paying close attention to what these stories are saying.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:19 amLet me put an asterisk on this: Comey briefed Trump in a one-on-one conversation.*
Because our information is, as usual, from criminals who broke their oaths to reveal that.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:22 amI love Patterico’s site and have been coming here for years but it’s troubling that he could not see the breathless, ecstatic way that the CNN panel presented the briefing story as Russians having legitimate dirt on both candidates but only choosing to expose Clinton. Go to any web forum in the aftermath and that meme is running viral, all referring to both CNN and Buzzfeed and pleading for the inauguration to be stopped.
Waiting for the next yellow square of high voltage condescension and hate struggling with reason.
Harkin (a9a478) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:22 amThe discussion was described by the sources as cordial.
The FBI declined to comment on this account.
If it was one-on-one, how did these “multiple sources” know that?
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:23 amForgot to add: terrific job Crew
Harkin (a9a478) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:24 amSad that Biden and Obama are voices of reason here:
Biden’s office also said the vice president told reporters that intelligence leaders felt obligated to tell Obama because they were planning on informing Trump. Biden also said he read the entire 35-page report.
Biden’s office also confirmed that Obama, according to the vice president, asked, “What does this have to do with anything?”
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:24 amIt came with an extra jar of paste.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:27 amTrump said in his press conference that he “saw” the information, and that he “read” the information outside the meeting. And that he was not supposed to discuss what happened at the meeting.
I don’t have any quotes from his transition team.
And you know at this point I am not trusting anyone’s paraphrases. Too much conflation going on.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:30 amWondering how “multiple” sources can confirm the content of a one-on-one pull-aside conversation.
Either they are describing something they don’t know about
or
The conversation was not one on one
or
One of the participants leaked to “multiple sources” about the conversation, and we’re getting it third-hand.
Disgusting. People are breaking the law and their oaths over gossip.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:32 amMaryBee,
The big story is that the Putins tried to influence the election. The DNC and its propaganda arm have spun that to mean they attacked the means and methods of vote counting and voting. That is why you hear “hacked” when the media reports this. While the general population assumes that hacked means that votes where changed and something that the intelligence communityhas strongly denied. That the Putins did not actively change votes, rather they waged an effective psychological operation that has called into question how our political system and elections operate. In effect the Putins have delegitmitzed our form of government. This has only been helped by mistakes made when leaks about the Vermont Power grid were supposedly hacked, which they weren’t but the WAPO repeated breathlessly a report from the Obama administration and didn’t call the company affected. Which if that had been contacted they would have found out only one computer had been attacked by malware, malware that seems to point to similar products used by the Putins Cyber Forces and by Slavic crime elements.
The most recent story that is that the incoming Trump administration was briefed on the PysOp campaign has been drowned out by the information about the fake dossier addendum that Buzzfeed ran with, as well as the potential damaging information that the same “private” intelligence organization who gave the dossier to McCain and the media; this organization was responsible for the discredit attack against the planned parent videos from the last year and a disinformation campaign against Romney in 2012. Which basically means that the intelligence community has been discredited and it’s influence damaged both with the people and with the incoming administration.
The tl;Dr version is that the big story is the Putins ran a disinformation campaign which has forced the American people to question all layers of the government. That the DNC and GOP and Media reactions to said campaign have only feed the campaign to levels unheard of by most folks who study intelligence operations.
Charles (e6c86c) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:33 amThe tl;Dr version is that the big story is the Putins ran a disinformation campaign which has forced the American people to question all layers of the government. That the DNC and GOP and Media reactions to said campaign have only feed the campaign to levels unheard of by most folks who study intelligence operations.
Yeah, that’s what’s weird to me.
If we are supposed to be upset about Russia undermining our democracy, it seems we should also take note that, as Gabriel Hanna said, the IC is leaking like a sieve to undermine our President-Elect using disinformation.
I mean, look at this tweet from a CNN reporter:
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:46 amFormer Clinton spox Brian Fallon on @CNN: “Every day there are new developments…that call into question the legitimacy of [Trump’s] win.”
Brian Fallon the piano player in the establishment, lol.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:49 amMaryBee,
That the intelligence operatives who might be affected by the “drain the swamp” attitude of the incoming administration or were diehard DNC members and now fearful for their jobs are that one’s that I suspect at leaking the material. On top of that we have media which has been in nuclear meltdown since the night of 09NOV2016. They can’t wait to delegitmitzed Trump because they still can’t accept the results of the election. Therefore, just like we saw with the 2000 election fallout, anything for the media to say the election wasn’t legal or legitimate per their poor understanding of the Constitution; will give the media crate blance to now treat him or the administration with the respect that is deserved for the office.
Charles (e6c86c) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:00 amThanks, Charles.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:29 amAnd as I said on the other thread,
Thanks SWC for going beyond the call of duty.
I agree. I suspect that, for some, that their motivation is to punish Trump for questioning them. They are trying to show who’s really boss. For others, maybe they’re worried it’s true and trying to sound the alarm. Likely, it’s a mix of both.
Interesting how that one “senior official” (whose anonymous BS everyone was citing) turns out to have lied his ass off to NBC — apparently to try to maintain the credibility of his agency? I think scrutinizing his motivation is also called for. Perhaps I’m alone on that. Indeed, if he lied, I think he should be outed.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:36 amI’m short on time, so I can’t discuss this at length, but I can’t imagine how it couldn’t be a big story if true.
Try this exercise. Literally humor me and actually try it. Take a second to formulate the lede as if you were writing copy for a network news anchor. Don’t use names, just titles. Create a one-sentence lede.
Then forget about Trump, and say your lede out loud, two or three times.
Then ask yourself if, one year ago, someone had said that sentence to you, it would have sounded like a big story.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:42 amOh no, not Haiku, he added so much substance…
Leviticus (efada1) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:43 amOK, I just saw (for the first time) that SWC comment MD in Philly mentioned, and I don’t have time to read it now. Understand my most recent comments are not informed by that comment. I’ll read it tonight.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:43 amI muted him last night, but have unmoderated him this morning. If we read more “jumped the shark” trolling I will react accordingly, later.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:44 amPatterico- I agree completely with 83.
I think it was 20Committee on Twitter who basically said, you don’t question the CIA because they can ruin you.
I also wonder if the CIA is up to something they don’t want an outsider to get in the way of. I think there’s a lot going on, but I think the dossier and whether it was read or reported to Trump is the least important aspect. And in some ways, Trump is the least interesting subject in the whole story.
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:46 amThen ask yourself if, one year ago, someone had said that sentence to you, it would have sounded like a big story.
No, it doesn’t. As I said, I’ve assumed that Presidents (and Congressmen) hear about the disinformation (and information) going around about them all the time.
I mean, we bugged Merkel’s personal cell phone. I’m assuming other countries do something similar to us. And I’m assuming the CIA/FBI tell the President what they are hearing others are saying about them, both the legit stuff and the rumors. I would assume these are pretty standard in the briefings.
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:49 amDo you think those are incorrect assumptions?
Among many of the charges against hoover was the rumint *n his files, are we back to this now, intelligence should details that can be verified.
The fact that the crowdstrike report didn’t bother to identify the original source of the malware
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:57 amAnd I have to say what really surprises me is if this 35 page dossier was floating around the press and the FBI for months, that nobody actually asked Michael Cohen or Trump if it was true. Nobody asked them for comment on it. Nobody told them it existed?
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:57 amGeneral Lynn probably had hints about it, remember how he was dismissive of many of the briefings
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:00 am@Patterico:Interesting how that one “senior official” (whose anonymous BS everyone was citing) turns out to have lied his ass off to NBC
As SWC points out, CNN’s new story is closer to the NBC version than the original CNN version. NBC said the briefing on the memo was completely oral:
“While multiple officials say the summary was included in the material prepared for the briefers, the senior official told NBC News that the briefing was oral and no actual documents were left with the Trump team in New York. During the briefing, the president-elect was not briefed on the contents of the summary.”
A one-on-one pull-aside from Comey might, or might not, be considered a formal part of the briefing.
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:09 amSince it was a one-on-one conversation, according to all these other leakers, it is possible the “senior official” leaker is Comey himself.
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:10 amAnd why is Biden talking about it?
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:12 amI trust you will let me know when you’ll begin charging rent for occupancy in your head, Leviticus.
All of this will be given the attention it deserves. We all know the media has proven trustworthy, along with the entrenched bureaucracy. It’s all good.
Colonel Haiku (6c3d91) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:13 amRemoving all doubt as is his habit, remember he opposed the raid on abbotabaf, overruled petraeus and mccrystal on afghanistan
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:15 amTrump knows what he (and presumably his people) did or didn’t do. He also must have known about the gossipy oppo research that was shopped around long enough and widely enough that eventually the FBI decided to look into it. @58 shipwreckedcrew’s comprehensive analysis explains how CNN’s breaking news coverage started the fire that was fed by all the subsequent leaks and more leaks that all lend legitimacy to a poorly sourced report that is only supported by the fact that “everybody heard it.”
The disinformation campaign we should be concerned about is the one being run by people on the govt payroll to cast a cloud over the election and Trump. Whether we like him or not, this is no way to run the country.
Finally isn’t it interesting that the FBI Director who tipped Trump on the gossipy stuff that the IC views as supportive of Russian attempts to interfere in Hillary’s coronation now finds himself under investigation.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:19 amIf Trump presents a challenge to fit within the constraints of existing proscriptions for ethics in government… whoops, just threw up in my mouth… hang on… okay, better now… then tweak to modify and do it pretty damned skippy. This brouhaha about hookers pissing on the bed that George Washington slept in and such… if not true, it may be advisable that it’s called what it is and allow the new administration to tackle all that Obama left in the wake of his skinny behind.
Now… tiburon, por favor…
Colonel Haiku (6c3d91) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:24 amHeck were are in those repurposed corman films, coronello
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:29 am22. nk (dbc370) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:59 pm
They didn’t say that.
They didn’t say Putin (people whom it is safe to assume were acting on his behalf, that is) was the source, although, if you find out a few details about this story, that has to be true.
Christopher Steele did not invent this, either on his own or because Fusion GPS told him to, because he’s never invented things before, and he went out of his way to tell people and that had to be because he believed it, or he gave all signs of believing it, because of the way he told people.
They did’t even say it was false. They still are not saying flatly that this is all false. Just that it is not a product of U.S. intelligence (it came from Christopher Steele) and that it is unverified.
It’s not just the sexual allegations, and the co-ordination allegation. There were also financial allegations – that Russia was funnelling money into the election, or maybe that they were doing business deals with Trump.
And some of these financial allegation were investigated by the FBI. According to a BBC reporter who was on NPR last night, the FBI in June – this was turned over to the FBI – sought a FISA warrant from a court in June. Donald Trump would not have been the target of the FISA warrant because a FISA warrant is never used to target U.S. citizens, but it targeted some Russian banks and so on. They were turned down flat by a judge. They went back in July with a narrower warrant. They were turned down again. Then in October – October 15 – they made another application in front of a different judge and they got it. This was possibly the investgation Harry Reid was talking about.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/harry-reid-letter-fbi-james-comey-clinton-emails-trump-russia-ties-hatch-act/
By Reena Flores/ CBS News/ October 30, 2016, 6:38 PM/
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:31 amMa,while were lifting sanctions s on the Sudan, darfur is forgiven apparently, maybe reward for giving up fezzani
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:36 amDonald Trump has another issue:
Why was this dossier, and the fact that it was given by officials to Trump, leaked? While the dossier was in the possession of many reporters since maybe October, or at least the parts that had been written by October, it was publicized in connection with the fact that Trump was briefed about it.
Who told anybody that?
Trump doesn’t think his own people did.
The regular leaks about the fact that a briefing had taken place – just the fact that on a certain day he had received an intelligence briefing – didn’t come from his own people, he thinks, because one time, he says, he arranged to get a briefing and didn’t tell anyone on hs staff
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/trump-press-conference-transcript.html
And yet:
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:39 amTrue that, narciso. Watching all of these ponces rendering garments as they mince around like they are in occupied France is entertaining for a while, but it has gotten a bit tedious.
You place your trust in the “news” you get from CNN, NBC, etc., you are being played 10 ways from Sunday.
Colonel Haiku (6c3d91) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:50 am@98 Well according to some of more liberal pundits Comey was a disgrace and shameful for reopening the supposedly “closed” investigation into HRC. Now all of a sudden he I shameful to the DJT crowd because he didn’t do more to squash this conflating intelligence report.
Charles (e6c86c) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:55 amTrump tried to claim yesterday that James Clapper said the material was false:
But Clapper didn’t go so far:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-clapper-idUSKBN14W1R8
He only said he was dismayed at the leaks, and that he didn’t believe anyone n the intelligence community had leaked “the private security company document” and said he emphasized to Trump that it was not a U.S. Intelligence Community product, and that they had not made any judgment that the information in that document is reliable.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4Y837sSaIuoJ:https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/224-press-releases-2017/1469-dni-clapper-statement-on-conversation-with-president-elect-trump%2Bclapper+whether+reliable+document&hl=en&gbv=2&ct=clnk
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:57 amGabriel,
Isn’t interesting though that for a year we have heard nothing about hown DC and the federal government is supposed to work short off from leakers. How many stories were in the right wing sphere that said, any day HRC would perp walk or that there was civil war in the DoJ about her need to perp walk?
I also find it funny that the left is all up in arms about the Putins interference when just a few years ago , they were slavishly applying kisses to what appears to be a Putins operative by the name of Snowden. The spin from the irony is so forceful that you can probably get energy out of it to light up half of LA.
Charles (e6c86c) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:03 amCharles (e6c86c) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:55 am
Now there’s also an investigation by the Justice Department’s Inspector General into Comey, but it is not why he was so against Hillary, but somewhat the other way.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/politics/james-comey-fbi-inspector-general-hillary-clinton.html
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:03 amSammy, Clapper appears to be saying it wasn’t us so it must have been somebody else like IDK wink, wink Comey.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:05 am“THE SPY LEFT OUT IN THE COLD: UK PM May says Trump dossier author has not worked for Britain for years.”
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/254461/
Colonel Haiku (6c3d91) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:06 amAnd seeing his product, you[ can see why, its like Mr. Bean over there, or that terrible baron Cohen film.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:09 amOne more irony filled thing. I am old enough to remember when FISA was a big, bad thing and needed to be reigned in. Now it has been reigned in by the court of public opinion and bam, the folks who were bad mouthing it now all of sudden are pissed off it wasn’t working to catch DJT and the Putins. Again, the irony is thick as a brick.
Charles (e6c86c) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:22 amWe know through defector reports that assets in east Germany and Cuba were honeycombed with double agents satter notes how this fits old kompromat measures, in several ways, like undermining confidence in institutions, but also in the special relationship.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:29 am“And why is Biden talking about it?”
MayBee,
He understands and supports the propaganda objective of CNN (as outlined by DCSCA above). It’s one team and he’s performing his role. There still doesn’t seem to be a coherent strategy among the propaganda organs but the limited objective of driving down approval ratings to the lowest in history for a President-elect has already been achieved.
The party organs accidentally put him where he is and now they are going to try and rectify their error.
Rick Ballard (1c290b) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:29 amI am linking to an article– a very long article–which I found adds even more layers of complexity and insight to the Russia was for Trump hype. Putin was not the only one working behind the scenes to possibly influence or at least disrupt the election. Ukraine was too, working for Hillary, and apparently somewhat openly although that did not seem to make the news. It’s almost impossible not to conclude that this Ukraine operation coupled with the current Russia-Ukraine antagonism and power struggle in their part of the world isn’t intertwined and also part of the puzzle of intrigue involving the American IC that we were discussing here last night and again today. Also fascinating is the apparent finger-pointing going on among Ukraine’s leadership and Ukraine’s desperate need for rapprochement with the new administration after betting on the wrong horse.
The link is from Politico but I am linking it because its revelations are very timely and interesting to contemplate and Patterico has seemingly lessened his ban of Politico content by mentioning Politico as a source in his original post of the Buzzfeed- CNN saga.
Here is the article:
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
I know people are busy but I hope a few of you intrepid souls are willing to take the time to read it and I mean read it as opposed to skimming it. (As always this comes with the caveat that anything read, including this article, should be consumed with a degree of caution or skepticism.) Thanks.
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:31 amIt’s not a mystery whose side the United States should be on, if the choices are Russian and Ukraine.
Leviticus (efada1) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:32 am==And I have to say what really surprises me is if this 35 page dossier was floating around the press and the FBI for months, that nobody actually asked Michael Cohen or Trump if it was true. Nobody asked them for comment on it. Nobody told them it existed?==
Hi Maybee,
With it floating around I think it must have been a fun game for the reporters to be sneeringly envisioning him watching the prostitutes pee every time they engaged Trump in a debate or in a Q and A session. It’s impossible to even imagine or to weigh the degree to which this “dirty secret” colored their coverage of him.
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:42 amThe sacking of manafort seemed to have been a part of this, as well, ironically it brought Conway to the for, so it wee an ironic turn of events.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:46 am==The sacking of manafort seemed to have been a part of this, as well, ironically it brought Conway to the for(e), so it wee(was) an ironic turn of events.==
Very good observation, narciso. The purposeful “take down” of Manafort ended up giving PEOTUS the campaign’s most lethal weapon/warrior–Kellyanne. Politics is rife with unintended consequences.
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:58 amLeviticus,
What’s the argument re Ukrainian oligarchs moral superiority over Russian oligarchs? The Ukrainian oligarchs despoiled the country to the point where it could not pay it’s Gazprom bill and Russia secured collateral to offset the gas bill as well as loans extended. Ukraine has the same demographic problem as Russia with a much higher subsidy requirement.
I sincerely doubt Ukraine Spring would last any longer than the Arab Spring in Egypt.
Rick Ballard (1c290b) — 1/13/2017 @ 11:03 amTrue that. Conway also highlights the hypocrisy of the left’s alledged embrace of the power of women… SOME womyn…
Colonel Haiku (6c3d91) — 1/13/2017 @ 11:05 am91. MayBee (a7822d) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:57 am
==And I have to say what really surprises me is if this 35 page dossier was floating around the press and the FBI for months, that nobody actually asked Michael Cohen or Trump if it was true. Nobody asked them for comment on it. Nobody told them it existed?==
It’s quite possible that this didn’t really start to get out until October. You know, you have to read these stories carefully.
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 1/13/2017 @ 11:28 amThe power exercised by the powerful woman, Christine Lagarde, as head of the IMF when the decision to seize the assets of Russian oligarchs deposited in Cypriot banks is applauded. The fact the seizure was the trigger for Russia to examine the collateral situation in Ukraine, especially wrt Lagarde directed IMF loans to Kolomoyskyi goes entirely unremarked.
Putin is a murdering thug but he is not particularly unpredictable. He’s not one to submit to IMF theft in support of maintaining the EU fantasy.
Rick Ballard (1c290b) — 1/13/2017 @ 11:42 amSenator John McCain didn’t get ahold of this dossier until November – I guess after the election. He was at some conference in Canada – the Halifax International Security Forum – and he was told about this by a former British ambassador to Russia. (Sir Andrew Wood, Ambassador from 1995 to 2000) McCain had no idea that this had been handed out to some reporters in Washington, D.C. by the political research firm that commissioned it, Fusion GPS.
Wood maybe told McCain that the Russians had tape of Trump in a hotel or other things. He’d seen the dossier, because Christopher Steele had told some important people in the U.K. Wood thought that Steele was reliable, possibly because he’d worked under him. McCain had someone = probably David J. Kramer, a former top State Department official who works for the McCain Institute at Arizona State University, fly across the Atlantic to get it. He was told he should look for someone reading the Financial Times, and that way he could recognize who he was supposed to meet.
The contact took him to his home, handed him a copy, and McCain’s emissary flew back across the Atlantic, and gave it to McCain, who held it for a day and then personally handed it over to FBI Director James Comey.
McCain says he pondered if whether someone would think this was revenge for Trump implying he wasn’t really a hero because he was captured, but decided to disregard that.
Comey may not have told him he already had it, and the FBI was investigating some of the allegations.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/11/trump-russia-report-opposition-research-john-mccain
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 1/13/2017 @ 11:49 am63.I’ve lost track of what the big story is supposed to be here.
Depends on which McGuffin piques your curiosity; the memo trail or the methods and motives of a global news media operation.
The memos are superfluous to me and simply another episode of a bureaucracy at odds with an incoming administration, chipping away at a president-elect they seek to delegitimize from the get-go.
The ‘big story’ for me is the management, motives and methods increasingly used by CNN management to draw audiences. There’s a problem there with how the suits decided to ‘break’ this as ‘news’ when it was clearly hype. TV execs know what they were doing, the general public just tuning in for ‘news’ for an hour, for the most part, doesn’t. Back when that Access Hollywood tape broke, CNN literally looped their rolling coverage for nearly four days straight, anchoring it with scowling female on air talent to enhance disapproval. The messaging was pretty blatant. The suits at CNN have an agenda– and increasingly of late, it isn’t to deliver ‘news’ but generate an audience.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:21 pm115. elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:31 am
So it wasn’t only Vladimir Putin who thought that Hillary was pro-Ukrainian independence. The Ukrainians thought so, too.
They probably got the idea directly or indirectly from Putin, because people who had helped Yanukovych and were tied to pro-Russian people, were working for Trump, and Putin might have had something to do with that.
From the link @115:
In other words, it was probably first that Putin was for Trump, and only later did Ukrainians go on the other side.
All this probably ultimately based on the idea that Victoria Nuland was one of Hillary’s women.
Meanwhile, the “intelligence community” is miles behind us.
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:22 pm@DCSCA:The ‘big story’ for me is the management, motives and methods increasingly used by CNN management to draw audiences.
For me the big story is for what trivial reasons the American intelligence community will break the laws and their oaths regarding classified material.
Hillary’s server is actually pretty small potatoes compared to what these “intelligence officials” are doing right now. And no one (except Glen Greenwald and his sockpuppets) seems to care.
What other classified information will they release when it suits them?
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:24 pm@110. Johnny English?! Certainly not Maxwell Smart.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:25 pm@127- Yes, agree. The leaks are a disturbing issue to be sure.
But how it’s revealed/reported to the public is increasingly becoming a warped exercise if carnival hype. I’m a media person by professional experience, so what CNN is up to is increasingly alarming to me. It’s an accelerated spiral down and far from what Turner intended it to be. It’s what the film, ‘Network’ was all about- the competition for audience share and revenue by broadcasting a three ring circus as news — infotainment. And the more they do it, the more comfortable people become in accepting it as ‘truth.’
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:43 pmEven worse they appear to be running an “influence operation” of their own to undermine the incoming administration. Like the proverbial wife-beating accusation, once accused no matter how innocent one may be it is impossible to ever escape the accusation. Political opponents couldn’t get any traction with the story and Mother Jones couldn’t get any traction with it. It only got traction when CNN launched the breathless huuuge story we can only hint about because it’s super-classified and we can’t independently corroborate it after months of investigation.
The avalanche of leaks are being driven by the fact that the incoming president is fighting back. Truth is the antidote to the poison of disinformation. Trump’s acting like a guy comfortable with the truth, but the suits and spooks are acting like people more comfortable with keeping the innuendo alive than revealing the truth.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:45 pm@crazy:Trump’s acting like a guy comfortable with the truth
I personally think that Trump is utterly indifferent to truth. That said, there’s nothing in that dossier that has ever been confirmed despite months of effort by journalists with every motive to do so and so I don’t imagine he could be too worried about it.
This thing is the opposite of Monica Lewinsky where at first only Drudge would go with it, or National Enquirer with John Edwards. This is everyone raring to go with it but not able to–until our criminal and oath-breaking intelligence officers gave them cover.
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:51 pmOh we’re not saying any of it is true. We’re just reporting the controversy.
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:52 pm@127. Postscript. Another small, but revealing fragment of hype as news at work. Again last evening, CNN’s Lemon referred to this mess as a ‘potential bombshell’ as a clock counting down to an interview with Michael Moore ticked away on screen which had been up on air for hours. And during the actual one on one with Moore, he inadvertently revealed his agent had negotiated with CNN suits that the countdown clock to his appearance be placed on screen as hype to draw an audience. It’s beyond promotion– it’s manipulation.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 12:57 pmPolitical opponents couldn’t get any traction with the story and Mother Jones couldn’t get any traction with it. It only got traction when CNN launched the breathless huuuge story we can only hint about because it’s super-classified and we can’t independently corroborate it after months of investigation.
Exactly.
And that was a decision by CNN management. The suits and managing editors. It was hype. Not news. And experienced TV execs know exactly what they were up to.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 1:02 pm@132. Yep. CNN is the exlax in this– moving it through The Beast as fast as possible.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 1:05 pm@131. Like clicking on a nude picture of some starlet that launches a trojan payload the people pushing this did all they could to launch this story without success until CNN’s govt source gave them the tip that Trump was told about the story that could sink his presidency before it starts.
Some would have us believe that the Russians are ultimately behind this (and maybe they are) but additional reporting by the brits and even Politico are beginning to expose Clinton connections just as the exposure of leaked/phished DNC emails exposed the incestuous Clinton-DNC-media-administration connections that control the swamp.
Russians don’t make this stuff public to blackmail the target – democrats do. So do the math.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/13/2017 @ 1:21 pmSammy at 106 — your argument is inapposite.
Trump’s tweet says that Clapper called him to denouce the false reports being circulated.
Clapper’s statement only refers to the subjects they discussed, not the substance of those discussions.
It might very well be true that in the course of the conversation Trapper did tell Trump that he thought the memos were bogus.
Just because Clapper didn’t include any such comment in his written statement doesn’t mean that Clapper didn’t make such a comment during the conversation.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 1:30 pmThe DOJ IG investigation is one of those “less than meets the eye” issues.
The IG is actually a watchdog of Congress, not the Admin.
If the investigation here was being done by OPR — Office of Professional Responsibility — then the “Smoke” of concern would be darker. OPR has disciplinary authority, and can use that authority to compel people to cooperate with its investigations. IIRC, the IG does not. Generally, the IG just gathers whatever information is available to it, does voluntary interviews, and issues a report to Congress.
And I think I read some reporting yesterday that the IG’s investigation is going to not be just of Comey, but many of the other more curious aspects of the decision making process, including the involvment of the FBI No. 2 whose wife received large campaign contributions from McAullife while running for office in Virginia.
And, the circumstances surrounding Lynch’s visit with Bill Clinton a week before Comey’s announcement that he would not refer the matter to DOJ for prosecution.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 1:34 pmi’d bet you a whole Five-Layer Martin Luther King Cream Cake that pervy Mitt Romney bankrolled the pee pee report on Mr. Trump
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 2:16 pmThis would make a pretty good topic for a post and discussion about politics.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4114716/Extraordinary-details-ordinary-citizen-John-McCain-actually-dispatched-trusted-aide-Atlantic-dirty-dossier-ex-spy.html#ixzz4Vb1q6XPo
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 2:41 pmYou should write a post and ask Patterico to post it as a guest blog. I bet he would.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 2:58 pmMcCain is such a snot that I could see him switching to Dem, knowing he’s got the full term in front of him. Lindsey at least did a photo op with Cruz to cosponsor the no UN funding without pulling back the antiIsraeli settlements proclomation.
urbanleftbehind (378525) — 1/13/2017 @ 3:01 pmmccain’s demented and sleazy
but then his whole family is trashy
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 3:23 pmWhen I wrote my long comment late last night, I hadn’t seen the Anderson Cooper broadcast where they tried to do a little “two-step” around the original report from the previous night, with a bit of sleight-of-hand to get out from under the details in their original report, and shout “We Were Basically Right Event If Our Details Were Wrong” when they got their head above water.
Original Report — as noted in my long comment: ALL FOUR IC CHIEFS Briefed Trump on the 2 page synopsis, in order to make him understand that Russia did attempt to influence the election in his favor by releasing info to hurt HRC but not release INFO THEY HAVE that would hurt Trump. The 2 Page synopsis, not part of the Russian Influence Report, was appended to the report, and the Briefing Docs were given to Trump.
The Clear IMPORT of the CNN story being “IC Chief’s are so confident that Russia has KOMPRODAT (“Compromising Data”) they felt duty-bound to inform Trump, Obama, and Sen. Cong. Leadership/Intell Comm Chairs/Ranking Members, and info supports claim that Trump was their preferred candidate.”
Last night Cooper, Tapper, Sciutto and Evans tried to equate the revelation that Comey briefed Trump one-on-one AFTER the briefing by the 4 IC Chiefs as confirmation of their original report.
Ummmmm, No Anderson, that’s not what Tapper reported on the 11th.
Cooper then goes to the statement released by Clapper — just as Caruso did (now I know where he gets his stuff) — and quotes the following passage:
“However, part of our obligation is to ensure that policymakers are provided with the fullest possible picture of any matters that might affect national security.”
From this quote, Cooper claims that Clapper’s statement confirms that Trump was told about the synopsis just as CNN as reported — but remember that what they reported was that the 4 IC Chiefs briefed Trump, and the document was among the briefing papers he was provided.
The truth is that the subject did not come up during the briefing, Comey addressed it later in a one-on-one session, and that briefing was oral and the briefing documents were not left with Trump.
Clapper talked with Trump about the memos — “Private Security Company document” he called it — during the telephone call on the 11th.
NOTHING IN CLAPPER’s STATEMENT confirms that Clapper or the other Chiefs discussed the memos and 2 page synopsis with Trump during the Briefing — and that was CNN’s original claim.
I saw a report in a CNN article somewhere — WITH NO ATTRIBUTION — that the 4 Chiefs decided in advance that Comey would address the sensitive topic alone with Trump, and that’s how the one-on-one session came to be.
But this would CONTRADICT ALL CNN’S NUMEROUS SOURCES in the first story that Trump was told by the 4 IC Chiefs in the briefing, and was given the briefing documents, including the 2 page synopsis.
My supposition for why the one-on-one came to be is different. The IC Chiefs had the 2 page document, but Trump cut-off the need to discuss it when he said he believed the briefing that the Russians were behind the DNC and Podesta hacks.
CONTRARY TO CNN’s FIRST REPORT, there is NOTHING supporting their claim via “Sources” that Trump was told in the briefing by the 4 Chiefs that the failure of Russia to release the KOMPRODAT was proof that Russia wanted him to win the election.
Since they didn’t even know about Comey session, they can’t know glom on to that and say “What we meant to say was that Comey told him after the briefing that he was Russia’s preferred winner because of all this stuff in these memos from a Brit guy.”
If the subject wasn’t discussed while the 4 IC Chiefs did the briefing, then how is it that it was explained to him that it was proof he was the Russian’s preferred candidate???
Go back and compare the video of Tapper and the others from Wed night, and then juxtapose what they said against the now established fact that only Comey talked to him, that talk happened after the briefing, Comey briefed him orally on the subject, and Comey did not leave him any documents following their meeting.
How, under those facts, is CNN’s original report accurate as Cooper claims????
Again, I think the whole effort to get the 2 page document into the briefing was a single-minded exercise in “Cover Your Ass” because in a week Trump was going to know that the IC had been investigating whether he has recently been rolling around hotel suites with Russian hookers in Moscow, and whether any 8 figure payments had made their way to him from Russian banks during the campaign.
If they hadn’t come clean to him that the IC had been doing this during the campaign season, there was going to be a blood bath after Jan 20. There still may be.
Why do you suppose James Clapper tendered his resignation to Obama on November 17, 2016, effective January 20, 2017???
I’m a big Mike Pompeo fan. Heck, I’d like to go to work for him right now.
Its going to be quite a show.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 3:42 pmAll of it is a concerted effort to delegitimize the incoming president. Shame on all who stoke the fires.
And a solid kick in the ‘nads to 0bama for selling out the Cuban people. Totally in character for the Narcissist-in-Chief.
Colonel Haiku (6c3d91) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:00 pmI hope you find your way to a Pompeo job, shipwreckedcrew. Your clarity of thought reminds me of Herb Meyer.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:03 pmGreat detective work and exposition shipwreckedcrew both in your earlier long post and just now. I wonder if in their little chat Comey felt obligated to mention John McCain’s part in all of this to the President-elect or if Trump already knew that.
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:05 pmWell one can consider the jones memo as prologue.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:08 pmTrump should invade Cuba, declare it “West Israel”, and invite any Jews in Israel to relocate.
And deport the Cuban communists to Gaza and the West Bank.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:08 pmAfter all, Hyman Roth loved Cuba.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:09 pm“More evidence
Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:10 pmCNNNBC was right”Oh goodness, no, DRJ@ 2:58. The last thing I need is to get involved with the behind the scenes politics of this blog.
I mentioned the Daily Mail article as a potential blog topic only because the minute I saw it I thought, oh, this is exactly the kind of thing we all used to have so much fun discussing and dissecting and arguing and philosophizing about and it doesn’t need much set-up–just the article itself– as a jumping off place.
I can see it all now: Some commenters (hf) would probably go right after McCain and call him names, some would wonder aloud how he continues to get re-elected, some would zero in on the timeline and wonder what all else was going on at the same time period, some would wonder about the ethics of a senator becoming an amateur spy and that would prompt somebody to being up Charlie Wilson’s War. Somebody would probably suggest that if it had NOT been McCain it wouldn’t bother them so much. Some commenter might point out that if it were not so obviously a fake and hoaxy dossier but something really awful, McCain might be considered a hero or a patriot to do what he did. I can see a few people getting into the weeds on the British spy system. Somebody (probably me) would ask if anybody could name a name in the political left who would do what McCain did to ostensibly protect America from a duly elected menace (real or imagined) from their own party. And since McCain apparently pushed the story both at the media and to the FBI will the real Michael D. Cohen (Trump’s lawyer who has never been to Prague) have cause against McCain in addition to Buzzfeed? Some lawyer/commenters might discuss whether Cohen and other aggrieved parties might have any cause against individuals in the American IC and what historical roots there are for this. It would be a rip roaring discussion I think.
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:15 pmhe’s a pooper!
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:20 pm@144. The CNN suits are locked into this. Their credibility is in play. The on air talent can toss all the chaff they want but execs in the industry knows what they did– and why.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:21 pmElissa — not sure if you were here, but about 6-7 years ago I was doing what DRJ does — putting up posts as a Guest Blogger.
It was a lot of fun. But my family got bigger (more kids), and older, and I just didn’t have the time necessary to be real thorough in putting together the posts.
Patrick is a great guy, very dedicated to his POV, and we had some great exchanges both in email and on the phone about things we had in common.
Don’t mistake the fact that he and I can got head-to-head at times as any indication of a lack of respect for him and what he’s accomplished in building this community. My appearances as a guest commentator made way for some introductions to very high profile conservatives, who I now count as friends as well. Would never have happened without Patrick giving me the platform — and thank’s to Beldar too who arranged the first intro for me that has led to a great friendship with a national radio host.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:21 pm145.All of it is a concerted effort to delegitimize the incoming president. Shame on all who stoke the fires.
Yep. Step back from this burning tree and you can see where the forest is aflame.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:24 pmPatrick –I know from some of your posts the last 24 hours that it hasn’t been a lot of fun for you the last couple days.
Buck up, just about everyone here values what you do and what you’ve built, even when there are topics upon which we disagree.
I was gone for a long time simply because I wasn’t online as much — now with 5 kids — but since I came back about 3 months ago, I remember how much fun it was to go through the comments, look at the posts, and fire away.
Frankly, I’m spending WAY TOO much time doing it, but oh well.
Ride it out, its a great forum.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:25 pmArticle at Investors Business Daily (via Drudge)
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:26 pmAT&T is even sleazier than CNN
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:29 pmhave you ever tried canceling u-verse
god bless america
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:29 pmSWC @ 157,
Thats’s a mighty nice comment of encouragement for our host. And although many commenters may feel likewise, it’s good of you to say it.
Dana (023079) — 1/13/2017 @ 4:54 pmAnd why would the head of ATT want to meet with the President Elect? Or the President Elect want to meet with ATT?
A true Byzantine would point out how this inoculates Trump from future accusations of Russian influence, and gives further justification for an ideological purge of government agencies. But I am no Byzantine.
Kishnevi (1a529d) — 1/13/2017 @ 5:09 pmThanks, shipwreckedcrew.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 5:15 pmOT
Kishnevi (1a529d) — 1/13/2017 @ 5:25 pmhttp://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/01/13/youtube-removes-influential-conservative-websites-channel.html
However, either YouTube reinstated the account without the the video to which MLA objected, or the report is wrong, and only the video was deleted. At any rate, LI’s YouTube seems to be up now, but without any sign of the MLA video I can see.
elissa,
I’ve told you before that I think you would be a good blogger, but it’s your call. I think Patterico would post it. Of course, it takes more time than it seems but it would only be once, unless you get the blogging bug.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 5:38 pmSWC should consider submitting a guest post, too.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 5:39 pmThat ca me oUT wrong. I meant that I hope SWC will consider submitting a guest post. Didn’t you like blogging, swc?
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 5:43 pmI am starting to read through the long comment by shipwreckedcrew that many people are applauding in this comment thread. I was following along and appreciating the quotes, but then I got hung up here:
All of a sudden there is no quote from the CNN piece — and I cannot find anything in the CNN piece that says that (as swc puts it) “the Russians HELD BACK VIDEOS AND AUDIOS of Trump paying prostitutes to pee in a bed slept in by the Obamas!” (Sorry, I put only one of the four exclamation points inside the quotation marks.) I don’t think CNN said anything of the sort, which is (I suspect) why this is the first assertion in the comment not supported by a quote.
Any clarification would be appreciated. I’ll keep reading, but that’s a major roadblock for me.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 5:43 pmExcept they are still chasing the Russian rabbit, of they were so diligent with say the folks that gave up putayev the fellow who gave us the Chapman ring.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 5:44 pmI think SWC has done the difficult work of clearing the fog around this entire disinformation campaign and he deserves our thanks for having done so.
These will be difficult times for the foreseeable future… leftwing hissy fits and denial of reality will entertain as it further cements their quest for a few decades spent in the political wilderness.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/13/2017 @ 5:48 pmHaiku,
Maybe you can help swc find a link for his claim re withheld video and audio.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:01 pmThe only reference to the audio/video story I’ve found is from Raw Story, but it has been republished by IBT, Yahoo and others.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:06 pmThe Raw Story report was time-stamped 1/11/2017 at 11:02 ET.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:08 pmWell the report is about all that, and as with crowdstrike as Jeffrey Carr points it’s very underwhelming.
Now I don’t buy kasparov’s great ghoul or voordoolak theory about putin, but politicians raised enough questions about serial incompetence from the subway bombings yo beslan, to raise some doubts.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:09 pmThe video SWC discusses is here.
People can make up their own minds about the truth of SWC’s claim that “The demeanor of all 3 guys on the set is just dripping with a belief that the allegations of the memos are true.” I personally don’t see that at all in their demeanor. I leave it to the reader to decide.
As for the breathless, all-caps, bolded, followed-by-several-exclamation-points claims that these guys clearly demonstrated their belief that the allegations are true, I offer this evidence from the video that undercuts that argument. At about 2:58 in, Tapper says: “We know that the intelligence community and the FBI, they are still trying to vet these allegations. They found the individual — the former British intelligence official — they found him credible and his sources credible . . . the allegations, they weren’t so sure.”
Tapper emphasizes the italicized words, to make clear the difference between the intelligence official and his sources being seen as credible, while the allegations were less clear. He makes that distinction yet again around 9:20.
On the other hand, around 6 minutes in, Tapper notes that these allegations have been floating around Washington for months, but that two facts make them “more credible” — one, that the FBI had vetted the agent and his sources, and two, that the IC bothered to put them in the briefing. The first point seems fair. The second, less so, in my opinion, since the main reason they were presenting this material to Trump was to let him know that it was floating out there. I’ll fault Tapper for that, and I thank SWC for spurring me to watch the video to notice it.
At about 7:12, one of the reporters repeats that the IC and other people who have seen the allegations have not verified them.
These are some major holes in SWC’s analysis. There are more to come.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:12 pmUm raw story, you know our hosts opinion of them, but them again it’s a gonzo time
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:12 pmSorry, DRJ. I take my marching orders from only one woman.
But I will if time permits…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:16 pmall the Russians ever do is withhold audio and video
be honest how much of it have you ever heard or seen
like maybe that one tatu video?
they keep that crap close to the vest
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:17 pmWhat is it were talking about, I think fusion gfs which stinks of rotgut and wolfsbane commissioned this report, and them stiffed it with assorted odds and ends, which don’t pass muster.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:17 pmSWC:
I assume “Nov.” in the last paragraph is meant to be “Jan.” In any event, SWC misses the point entirely about the nature of Clapper’s confirmation.
The point was not that Clapper subsequently had a discussion with Trump. Allahpundit quotes this portion of Clapper’s statement, and the bolding is Allahpundit’s:
Allahpundit concludes:
This, and not the statement that Clapper discussed the situation with Trump 5 days later, was why I said in the post that Clapper’s statement “tended to support the CNN report that the intelligence community had briefed Donald Trump about allegations that the Russians had gathered compromising information about Trump.” (I am bolding the first three words in this comment to emphasize that I said this was not a slam-dunk by itself. Jay Caruso, in the post I linked, bolded the same language, and similarly said it “appears to confirm” the nature of the briefing.
SWC simply didn’t understand the nature of the argument I was making. Once again, his comment is off base, in yet another respect.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:19 pmhttp://occupydemocrats.com/2017/01/11/us-intel-just-reported-trump-hired-russian-prostitutes-pee-obamas-bed/
https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/01/11/russia-might-have-a-videotape-of-trumps-prostitute-pee-play-unsubstantiated-report-claims/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:22 pmNever mind that it was a different hotel in a different city, did they pay for this report by the word.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:26 pmhttps://out.reddit.com/t3_5n8lw6?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailybeast.com%2Fcheats%2F2017%2F01%2F10%2Fbuzzfeed-trump-caught-in-perverted-sex.html&token=AQAAIZp5WIf6EdzQ-c9JE4k5Pm_tlbnSRqxqedK9Rg8sD-lS10i7&app_name=reddit.com
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:26 pmMy innernets mad skillz work are dun
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:27 pmWhen do we finally admit there is an attempt at a soft coup occurring in the United States?
Rev. Hoagie® (785e38) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:34 pmthe jake tapper pee pee report is for me not a good report
he didn’t even track down the prostitutes
tapperpoodle’s CNN colleague Elliot Spitzer’s prostitutes, they were tracked down
now all of a sudden we lower the bar and nobody’s even trying to find the prostitutes
I don’t get how that’s ok
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:34 pmI feel like I’ve found the one person outside of Democratic Underground, Daily Beast, Media Matters and Huff Po that still finds CNN to be a credible news organization.
FYI, “This is CNN” has been an irreverent disparagement for a long, long time.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:34 pmWell they are only good for Nelson muntz treatment, they still think it’s 1990.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:36 pmPatrick, you either don’t grasp or won’t accept what was going on there at CNN.
That was not ‘breaking news.’
It was an exercise in trafficking innuendo and hype. It was an infotainment tease to hook in an audience while helping legitimize a story full of holes. And it was used by CNN in rolling coverage for twelve hours before Trump’s presser. They knew what they were doing. Journalist colleagues in the industry, on camera at other news organizations, visibly recoiled and shifted in their chairs when word of this being aired by CNN reached them. Because they had the same information for months and didn’t go with it.
This was a television gimmick by CNN. A piece of hype. Personally, I don’t fault the on air talent too much (aside from Bernstein’s giddy antics) as the final decision to go with this rested with the MEs at CNN. But this was a suits ploy all the way to draw eyes and seasoned TV execs know the game they were playing.
SWC has this pretty well pegged, but it is a matter of deciding which element is the ‘big story’ to you– the trail of the memo leaks or the sensationalism that’s being peddled as journalism by CNN.
For me, it’s the behavior of CNN management. This is becoming a chronic problem w/CNN not just on this, but other ‘stories’ as well. For me, the final straw was their New Year’s programming fiasco all but ignoring an international terrorist attack– coverage of which was once their strength.
The CNN suits clearly have an agenda– and at the top of it is not reporting news, but getting an audience.
Diana Christensen would be oh so proud.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:40 pmthese pee pee ones are probably those prostitutes what charge an extra $1.50 for a fried egg on top
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:41 pmoh wait that’s korean bbq
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:41 pmthe MSM sent an army of reporters to wasilla, alaska to research which videos todd palin had rented from blockbuster
but they can’t find barack’s college transcripts or anyone who attended poli sci classes with him at Columbia University
and they can’t find these russian prostitutes either
fail
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:52 pmAside from the fact that there is no such report, and you know there isn’t, and you’re lying about the nature of the report, the idea that you don’t like a news story that is not necessarily favorable to your man-crush is not a big surprise.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:54 pmI would like to try to communicate something without making things worse.
As I said once before, I considered this to be a bit of a community. P was the host and it was up to him how to direct things,
but the rest of us were contributors to the discussion, not simply consumers of what was presented.
Presuming myself to be a contributor and member of the community, I thought it was reasonable, and perhaps even necessary, to voice an opinion that I thought was for the good of the blog and for the good of our host as well.
My attempts were taken as being hostile and “no longer standing” with our host.
As far as I am concerned (for the umpteenth time) if pat leads the way in getting trump impeached or forced into resignation for just cause that would make me delighted,
I am tired of being accused of wanting nothing but fluff for Trump and the suggestion that I would rather have Pat lie to cover for him.
All that I ever intended to communicate was that at times it appears our host has a bitterness and vindictiveness against Trump and Trump supporters that does not look becoming, and that I would ask a bit of self-reflection. (Not that I ever worded anything that clearly or directly).
What SWC has been attempting to do above is what we are used to seeing here, and it has been wonderful.
As I said, nail Trump to the wall and get him impeached if you can,
but what we are seeing now seems to me (and I think others) is a whole lot of chaos trying to undermine any legitimate political process at all, dependent on unverifiable claims.
As far as I can tell, what we are usually limited to is carefully dissecting what has been presented, and seeing where the narrative is not consistent to throw it in doubt.
The Huffington post, NYT, WSJ, and NRO, for that matter, could all give us a story quoting a CIA bureau chief by name, copies of documents that are from (allegedly) CIA archives, that demonstrates Trump and Putin smeared pin pricks of blood on a signed document swearing allegiance to each other at an undisclosed site in the Ural Mountains.
And what would we know for sure from that? how would we know it is not a disinformation campaign?
Now, if you want to say that I am getting to the point of throwing up my hands and saying “why bother”,
I’ll say, “Exactly!” if you are talking about anything that is supposed to come from “intel sources”.
Fer cryin out loud, Cronkite could give nothing but facts about the Tet offensive, but by withholding other facts and word selection and tone of voice,
give a totally false impression.
Today I heard an opening line read from one of the major newspapers, (I forget which one), but it talked about Trump’s nominees being “reviled”, as if it was a factual descriptor such as “are all tall”.
We know that the Dems and the media want to undermine and de-legitimize trump and conservatives (yes, two different things), as well as whites, men, Christians, heterosexuals, people who support Israel’s right to exist, people who don’t like Obama, women who are not the right kind of feminist, etc.;
and Russia and other enemies abroad would love to destabilize us with all of the useful idiots they can recruit.
All I asked was to do things carefully and as the dust can settle, as SWC is doing above.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:55 pmThe streetwise professor notes some equally implausible yet less lurid parts of the dossier, re sechin and ivanov.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 6:59 pmOK,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:00 pmI see SWC’s efforts have been judged erroneous and off base.
I guess that means any positive reference to his efforts make me off base as well.
It appears my efforts to communicate and not make something worse have failed.
Good night.
Were my responses wonderful too?
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:02 pmI pointed out some facts to refute several of his points. Either we’re interested in close analysis of this, based on the facts, or we’re not. But somehow, my pointing out holes in his analysis makes you sad.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:05 pmOne is assuming more internal logic to this dossier than it’s warranted, it’s not meant to be analyzed but brandished like medusas head or some other mythical horror, to look for a pony in this offal is besidecthevpoint.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:06 pmyes yes i like the favorable ones
it’s time to look on the bright side and just enjoy our deliverance from food stamp
if it’s but a respite than all the more let’s avail ourselves of it
Mr. Trump, his back is strong
let’s let him carry the weight for awhile
all too soon the days of toil and hardship will be upon us
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:07 pmoops *then* all the more i mean
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:07 pmEnter Richard burr, stalking horse for the medici, e.g. the freedom act,
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:10 pmAs I recall, it seemed that it used to be a collaborative project to figure things out,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:16 pmnot a battle to prove who was right.
maybe I just don’t remember well.
Good night for reals.
So Trump is in his hotel room in Moscow, when in walks a gorgeous, scantily-clad woman. She says, “Donald Fredovich, Vladimir Vladimirovich sent me to give you super sex.” And Trump says, “I’ll take the soup. And did you bring crackers too?”
nk (dbc370) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:22 pmThere wasn’t this much concern in the intelligentsia, over the broken and gasping body of an ambasssador, but this phishing handshake deal is supposed to bedefcon 3. I don’t get what (@!:;#!) matters in dc,because isn’t matters of life and death.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:26 pmMD I see nothing wrong with the questions raised by P and will address them a bit later. On my phone now and where I’m at have other obligations to attend to. Will respond in substance later and the DEBATE can continue. That’s all it is.
Shipwreckedcrew (923521) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:35 pmCan anyone imagine if America elected a President who launched his first political campaign from the living room of two known anti-American terrorists? And can anyone imagine if America elected a President whose anti-American mentor and spiritual advisor is on videotape saying that America deserved the 9/11 attacks?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:40 pmWow, I bet the media would have a field day with those revelations! They would probably make such a big deal about it, that such a President might ultimately feel the need to withdraw his candidacy for re-election to a second term a la Lyndon Johnson!(LOL)
That wasn’t an order, Haiku. Why would you think that? I thought you might want to help swc since you are so impressed with his efforts.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:50 pmThe press see nothing wrong with that cs, in fact they agree with Ayers Dr jure not Dr facto, ted Kennedy did try to work with andropov and chernenko, tunney was his go between
narciso (d1f714) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:51 pmI can’t escape the perception that:
* The exercise by SWC of trying to poke holes in Patterico’s analysis is awesome and wonderful, while
* The exercise by Patterico of trying to poke holes in SWC’s analysis is a sad reflection of how Patterico just wants to prove people wrong, meaning he is undermining the collaborative spirit that used to make this blog great but look at what it has become now.
Whereas I see it as:
* SWC trying to poke holes in my argument and
* Me responding.
I like you, MD from Philly. You have a long history here and you are a valued commenter. I don’t mean to denigrate you.
I am just saying that constant criticism from all corners tends to wear on a person.
Patterico (115b1f) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:52 pmSWC-
Thanks for the encouragement, but I am tired of this, to tell you the truth,
especially, since in some ways I see this as being beside the point.
I don’t mind questions being raised, questions being raised sounds like, “But what about this?”
“Once again, his comment is off base”, sounds like debate, as you say.
From what little I have witnessed first hand in courtrooms, lawyers seem to be able to scrap like cats and dogs one minute and ask where are you going for lunch the next.
I can’t do that. I try to work together to understand a problem and find a solution,
if someone tries to defeat me in a debate so they can say they win,
well, let them win, unless someone else’s life is one the line.
Isn’t this the kind of stuff that got Libby convicted,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:54 pmwhile things of importance were neglected?
It’s so weird that I had to find out from Eddie Bravo that Anderson Cooper interned for the CIA when he was in college.
I wonder if they installed a back door? Maybe Trump wasn’t the only one who got pegged.
Pinandpuller (8cdfc4) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:57 pmHaiku,
Am I misreading your links? They say the Russian audio and video claims come from the Buzzfeed report. Do you think swc’s comment was based on the Buzzfeed report?
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:59 pmBarack’s been giving America golden showers for the past eight years yet the MSM didn’t even report on it! (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/13/2017 @ 7:59 pmPat,
maybe I am totally wrong,
but it seems often your posts start out as of late
sometimes literally,
as a challenge,
like you are d*** sure you are right,
and you dare someone to disagree with you.
Yes, I am sure criticism from all sides wears on a person.
What I have tried to do at times is not criticize you, but give feedback as an ally,
and it is taken as being mean spirited, ungrateful, and no longer being supportive,
and then we are off to the escalation races.
I have spent much more time here the last 2 days than I can afford to. I need to step back.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:00 pm#212 Pinandpuller, OUCH! (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:01 pmPat,
We cross-posted.
It looks like my perception matches your perception of my perception,
which is different from your perception.
As I said, I need to step back.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:07 pmMD,
You’ve made up your mind but please understand that lawyers can debate and still be friends because they understand that debate is a way to test ideas and decide what makes sense. It is not a duel with lunch afterwards. It’s a proven method at trying to find the truth between competing ideas.
I understand it makes you uncomfortable but it works, and that is more important.
Similarly, medicine has a proven method of finding answers called the scientific method. I could throw stones at it, calling it heartless for experimenting on people who are suffering, but that wouldn’t be fair. I would be focusing on the pain and suffering without giving credit for why it makes sense.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:10 pmAll I’m saying is, the CIA to CNN pipeline runs right through Anderson Cooper.
Pinandpuller (8cdfc4) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:16 pmAlso, MD, I think Patterico wants people to understand what he is saying, but I don’t think they always do. For instance, his initial point was that the CNN report was different from the Buzzfeed report, but several commenters have said things that show they do not see a difference. That is a basic point he tried to communicate that some have failed to understand or don’t care to understand.
Similarly, it astounded me to see people call CNN a media devil while using NBC as the media truthteller because the CNN report was bad for Trump and NBC’s initial report (since revised) was good. NBC AS THE GOOD GUY? Does anyone else see the irony of NBC being viewed as a Republican supporter?
It’s fine if people don’t understand something P says but ask him to explain it. Don’t act like he is the one who is confused.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:20 pmPinandpuller, keep in mind, Barack still gives orders to the black helicopters for the next week! (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:22 pmIf I read MD’s comment correctly 217, then he thinks this is a true statement:
If our smart, kind friend MD really thinks this, it’s hopeless.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:29 pmSpeaking of Russian audio
Boney M
Pinandpuller (8cdfc4) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:29 pmDRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:29 pm
I agree, DRJ, but let’s hear from MD, first.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:32 pmYes, I hope I misunderstood his comment. I don’t think I did.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:33 pmThat is, to say, “his response, from afar.”
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:34 pmI am just saying that constant criticism from all corners tends to wear on a person.
Really? Do tell…
On this forum, been there, done that.
Others have endured it as well for a long time. Don’t take it personally. This too shall pass.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:35 pm==I understand it makes you uncomfortable but it works, and that is more important.==
I guess she told you, MD in Philly.
See, apparently only lawyers are smart enough and trained enough to participate in debate, understand the nuances of argument hole poking, and follow what’s really going on here– and that’s what’s important.
What a crock of self serving condescension. Many of us see what you see and know it most certainly is not working. You did not deserve that, MD. God bless.
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:36 pm@221 CS
I look at the helicopters as half white bro.
Pinandpuller (8cdfc4) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:36 pmDCSCA,
I think the difference is that blogging isn’t as easy as commenting. Bloggers pay for the forum, pay for and maintain the website, do the myriad of tasks that make it perform well, research and write the posts — sometimes a post can take hours, days or weeks to prepare — and supplement the post and respond to comments.
Granted, it’s no fun to be in a one-sided debate in the comments and you’ve done that several times. But you come and go as you please, and writing a comment is typically spontaneous. You put some of yourself into each comment but blogging is a much bigger personal investment.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:43 pm@220 DRJ
I love it when Rush does his media montages. Like when 18 different shows used the term “gravitas” to describe Cheney, for instance.
Are they going to start thinking independently under Trump? Or is it the web vs network?
Pinandpuller (8cdfc4) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:44 pmElissa, I am not so sure that MD took the same offense (or any) as did you (if you did,on his behalf), – Am I being too clever, by half?
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:44 pmNo, elissa. Everyone can debate, not just lawyers. But I think it may be true that only lawyers think debate is important.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:44 pm#229 Pinandpuller, but Barack’s black helicopters will look at you as full honkey!
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:47 pmelissa,
Do you agree with this?
It sounds like you might when you say “Many of us see what you see and know it most certainly is not working.”
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:48 pmOMG, DRJ. (sotto voce) Here we go.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:49 pmI was debating whether to watch Captain America: Civil War, but now I think I’ll just hang around here.
Anybody seen the new Alice Through the Looking Glass? Any good? It’s got Johnny Depp but it’s missing both Tim Burton and Helena Bonham Carter.
nk (dbc370) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:50 pmI enjoyed that, too. I don’t know if Rush will do that with Trump. Maybe, but I doubt he would do it with any Republican President. What do you think?
DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:51 pmnk, Helena is not missing (she has a credit), but I viewed both CA:CW and Alice I prefer Captain America. I hate spoilers, so I will not air my disappointment in Alice.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:55 pmYMMV, of course.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:58 pmI wonder how the Fusion/GPS contracted dossier of Trump’s Russian entanglements escaped the notice of great publications like the National Enquirer during the months it was being shopped with no media takers? They’re usually the launchpad for this kind of stuff.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:59 pmThank you, felipe.
nk (dbc370) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:00 pmcrazy, think price tag.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:00 pmYW, nk.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:01 pmprice tag? I’m sorry I don’t understand
crazy (d3b449) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:03 pmThese are MD’s own words. If it’s OK I’ll let them stand on their own and assume that’s what he meant rather than conjecture about what he might have meant or felt. I thought in this comment he expressed himself clearly, in a heartfelt and sincere way and spoke for the way at least some others view the situation here of late, too.
Pat,
maybe I am totally wrong,
but it seems often your posts start out as of late
sometimes literally,
as a challenge,
like you are d*** sure you are right,
and you dare someone to disagree with you.
Yes, I am sure criticism from all sides wears on a person.
What I have tried to do at times is not criticize you, but give feedback as an ally,
and it is taken as being mean spirited, ungrateful, and no longer being supportive,
and then we are off to the escalation races.
I have spent much more time here the last 2 days than I can afford to. I need to step back.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:00 pm
elissa (27bbc2) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:05 pmIt was above their “pay-grade.” is perhaps a better way to put it.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:07 pmThank you, Elissa, you do me a service.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:10 pmnk, as Johnny Depp ages, I think he better take it easy on the partying, otherwise he’s eventually going to look like Keith Richards’ father rather than Keith Richards’ son. (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:13 pmThe redditters are calling this “Golden-gate” .
Good luck with that catching on.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:26 pmI’m out for the weekend. There is no reason to subject myself to this.
Patterico (a4a3d0) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:26 pmCruz Supporter
As Ron Silver said during the first Clinton Inauguration, “Those are our [helicopters] now.”
Pinandpuller (8cdfc4) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:43 pmTim Burton is overrated. A real loser.
Pinandpuller (8cdfc4) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:45 pm@238 DRJ
With all of the liberals melting down I’m not sure that three hours a day, minus commercials, will give Rush any time to talk about Trump.
Be that as it may, I don’t think he’s going to go hard at Trump. That’s what Samantha Bee and Trevor Noah are for, to the 80 people who watch their show.
Pinandpuller (8cdfc4) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:55 pm#253 Pinandpuller, yes, Burton is overrated. And in my somewhat humble opinion I would add Tarantino and the Coen Brothers to a list of overrated directors currently making films. Of course, art is subjective to taste, but I think too many people conflate edgy violence and overall weirdness with being interesting. The few Coen Brothers films I’ve seen have inevitably devolved into an unhinged dystopian fantasy by the end of the film. Tarantino can write entertaining dialogue, but he essentially makes the same violent film over and over again.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:02 pmMeans all of those Wikileaks have been authenticated. Given the once over by four intelligence agencies and stamped 100% pure grade A beef.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:03 pmThey’ve started forcing the Samantha Bee on me at YouTube as the obligatory commercial.
papertiger (c8116c) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:06 pmPETER OBORNE: Why I fear Britain will pay a lethal price if MI6’s meddling with Donald Trump backfires
Interesting POv from the DailyMail (UK)
crazy (d3b449) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:36 pmAll of the entertainment industry — Hollywood, TV, theatre, directors, screenwriters, actors, singers, dancers — is overrated. Being overrated is part of the job description and the more overrated they are the more successful they are.
nk (dbc370) — 1/13/2017 @ 10:40 pmResponding one at a time:
Re 168:
What I wrote at the juncture you refer to was my own conclusion about what CNN was inviting viewers/readers to take away from the story, and it was that aspect that rendered the story garbage . The invitation was to take away from the story that the salacious aspects they wouldn’t report on – wink wink, nod nod — were true, and Russia had succeeded in helping elect a President they could attempt to compromise.
The CNN headline says that the “Intel Chiefs Present Trump With Claims of Russian Efforts To Compromise Him.”
The headline doesn’t focus on the efforts to influence the campaign, but rather the claim that Russia has KOMPROMAT – I think I wrote KOMPRODAT a couple times, but I’m pretty sure its “MAT” for “Materials”.
So, the setup from the headline for the written piece is “What Does Russia Have?” — it wasn’t “What Did Russia Do”.
Next you add that the CNN crew put inside the story the claim that because the Russians released information to damage HRC, but did not release information to damage Trump, the IC suspects the Russians had Trump as their preferred candidate. This is the famous Sherlock Holmes conclusion “The Dog That Did Not Bark” — what you don’t hear or see can carry great meaning.
“Augmented”?? Maybe they shouldn’t use words they don’t understand. “Augmented” means to serve to bolster something else – but there is no other evidence the Russian efforts were intended to help Trump.
“THAT RUSSIA HAD COMPILED INFORMATION POTENTIALLY HARMFUL” — right there is a claim by CNN that the IC believed the compromising material described in the 35 pages of memos from the MI6 guy actually existed.
CNN didn’t describe the “potentially harmful” material – wink wink, nod nod, but Google is your Friend if you really want to find out.
Russia loves Trump and hates Hillary.
Russia has Podesta’s embarrassing emails, and videos of Trump with hookers.
Russia wanted Trump to beat Hillary.
We know that because Russia released the emails but not the videos.
To me it’s no vaccination for CNN that they didn’t describe the contents of the 35 pages of memos. They reported that the 4 IC Chiefs briefed Trump on the subject because of the nature of the potential compromising information, showed him the 2 page synopsis of the contents of the memos, claimed they did so to help him understand why they believe Russia favored him over Clinton since they didn’t release the materials described in the memos, and did so knowing that the memos were floating around DC newsrooms.
Show me a CNN executive willing to say “We never imagined someone would use our reporting as an excuse to publish the memos”, and I’ll show you a liar.
Buzzfeed did their dirty work, and in doing so completed the story for them.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:08 am@230- But you come and go as you please, and writing a comment is typically spontaneous. You put some of yourself into each comment but blogging is a much bigger personal investment.
There is merit to your POV and I do honestly appreciate it.
However it’s a bit short-sighted to assume responses are merely spontaneous, not given careful thought when crafted or have time invested in responding. ‘Course I can only speak for my own. I may not spell check as much as I should but I do think about content. My time in participating is valuable, too. A host can come and go as well, invite guests to post and so forth. (Even I had one a very, very long time ago.) I’ve sent Patterico personal notes in admiration– and in apology- in the past and posted same on other threads to be read. I admire a person’s dedication to a POV even if I oppose it. And ‘regulars’ are aware of the real world hassles he has endured at professional and personal expense for expressing his POV.
The jousting is healthy for the most part, I believe he welcomes the discourse. An an echo chamber would be pretty useless.
But in this recent environment, our host, I sense, (IMO), is just a bit battered if not genuinely surprised at the ferocity and passion in the content and pushback of the opposition banter– particularly from long time regulars usually in agreement. To the point where they bark ‘be with me or I’ll leave.’ That is their loss. And some real world issues may be in play as well.
Personally, I don’t take it all too seriously. That is not healthy. Besides, DRJ, conservative ideologues are supposed to be hard edged and dispassionate, void of emotional vulnerabilities common to bleeding heart leftists, aren’t they? 😉 [You realize I’m kidding.]
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:11 am259.All of the entertainment industry — Hollywood, TV, theatre, directors, screenwriters, actors, singers, dancers — is overrated. Being overrated is part of the job description and the more overrated they are the more successful they are.
That’s a myth. And it’s overrated.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:48 amRe 175:
I agree that what one takes away from the video in terms of the demeanor of Tapper and others is somewhat in the eye of the beholder. Everyone can form their own views.
I concluded from watching and listening to them that the story that had been leaked to them had them convinced that the IC believed there was factual accuracy in the memos – maybe not all, but certainly some. Look again that the time you noted with Tapper – and again, I’m a Tapper fan, I think he’s one of the best guys in the business in DC – and his exchange with Perez, where Perez explains what they were told about why the IC included the 2 page synopsis as an addendum to the IC report on Russian interference:
“To make the PE aware that these allegations involving him are circulating among intelligence agencies, senior members of Congress, and other government officials in Washington …. The information was also included in part to demonstrate that Russia had compiled information potentially harmful to both political parties, but had only released information damaging to Hillary Clinton and Democrats.”
Again, CNN goes all-in on the idea that the material described in the 35 pages of memos does actually exist and Russia chose to hold it back. That’s the only import of the words spoken — it would be nonsensical to make that claim if the view of the memos was that they were unverifiable and their content was dubious.
This makes all the talk about “credibility” and the FBI having vetted the MI6 guy and his sources but not the allegations, and no verification by the IC mere sophistry. They are reporting in substance as a fact that the IC believes the Russians held back damaging material, which was described for Trump in a 2 page synopsis of the 35 pages of memos.
“For a better description of the hooker pee party, we go now to our partner in propaganda, Buzzfeed.”
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:56 am@263 I agree that what one takes away from the video in terms of the demeanor of Tapper and others is somewhat in the eye of the beholder.
You can take the character of that ‘clip’ and extrapolate it through the rest of their rolling coverage– that’s pretty much the way it was. They were pitching hype. It was not ‘breaking news.’
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:07 amFinally for tonight, the question of Clapper’s statement, and the import that can be gleaned from the portion that you have made bold. That’s the same portion made bold by Anderson Cooper and Jay Caruso.
I just don’t see how all of you are reading into Clapper’s words what you are suggesting:
Again, what Tapper, Cooper, Caruso, and Patterico are putting on the back of these words is the claim that it supports the original CNN report that the 4 IC Chiefs briefed Trump on the content of the memos and gave him a 2 page synopsis.
We know pretty definitely that the meeting and discussion did not take place as CNN originally reported. And it was Trump taking issue at the presser with CNN’s original report that kicked off this whole fiasco.
I acknowledge that there are limits on just how much Clapper is going to be able to say in a published statement about any interactions between the IC Chiefs and the Pres. Elect. He had a bit more freedom in describing his telephone call on the 11th.
But even trying to read between the lines in his cryptic comment that is bolded, I can’t come to the conclusion that it supports the claim that Trump was briefed in the manner described by CNN. And that’s the purpose for which the language was quoted by Anderson, Caruso, and Patrick.
But, your response doesn’t address my original point which was that Clapper’s statement of the 11th about the phone call says explicitly that Clapper and Trump discussed the “Private Security Company document.” The point I made was that if, as CNN had claimed originally, Clapper and the other Chiefs had discussed the memos with Trump on the 6th, why would the document need to be discussed by telephone with Trump again on the 11th??
If fact, Clapper’s comment supports the conclusion that Trump and Clapper had not discussed the document on the 6th as CNN had originally reported, and that would support NBC’s report that the 4 IC Chiefs had not briefed Trump on the 35 pages of memos during the Russian briefing. Clapper’s first conversation with Trump about the memos — at least so far as Clapper EXPLICITLY acknowledges, was on the 11th.
It now seems accepted by all sides that Comey spoke with Trump after the intel briefing — just as Trump claimed in the presser. And the reports I have read say that Comey didn’t show him the 2 page synopsis, and no documents were left with Trump.
Now I expect the response by defenders of CNN to be “Comey briefing Trump was the functional equivalent of what CNN reported”. But that’s not what CNN reported, and the details of the substance of the briefing are now COMPLETELY unresolved, since all the sources with “direct knowledge” and “familiar with the breifing” were all talking out of their ass because the briefing was Trump and Comey.
CNN’s sources are torched on the questions of who briefed Trump and on what was the substance of the briefing,.
Other than that, I guess CNN’s story checks out.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:33 amOne more, but not in response to anyone.
Donald Trump won the election for the Presidency on November 8.
On January 6, the 4 IC Chiefs felt the need to brief him on the existence of memos from a Brit Intel guy claiming the Russians had compromising material on him, including allegations of audio and video tapes of him with Russian prostitutes, as well as financial improprieties.
For what purpose under the wide blue sky did these folks think waiting 60 days after the election, and only 14 days prior to the inauguration, was the right way to handle this issue?
There is no good way they can spin their decision to delay telling him.
There is no way to explain away the delay in the face of an allegation that they did so for partisan reasons, and in the interim they were working to determine just how effective the Russians hand been in their efforts to influence the election, and whether or not the information in the memos was actually true.
Both efforts would now be viewed, in the face of the delay, as being Anti-Trump, and intended to assist partisan efforts to somehow throw the outcome of the election in doubt.
Its Trump’s MO to see enemies in his midst, and then dispatch them.
He has named a world class smart guy and strategist as his new CIA Chief, and Mike Pence’s political mentor as his new Dir. of National Intelligence.
I expect the functional equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition in the top echelons of the IC community starting on January 21. Even among career spooks and diplomats, political affiliation is going to cost a lot of people their jobs.
Anyone in a senior position who has even a hint of democrat party political activity in their background is going to be viewed with suspicion, and run out of their agency. There will be no decision makers whose loyalty is open to question.
And I don’t think this is an unreasonable approach. It’s not just a question of being disloyal to Trump — I think a good case can be made that to the extent senior IC officials in the various agencies have participated in efforts to validate the Russian aspects of this fiasco — while choosing to hold back from the PE the existence of the allegations and the investigation into them — exposed themselves to the charge that they were being disloyal to the Office of the Presidency, and disloyal to the Presidential election process enshrined in the Constitution, and they did so because their preferred candidate lost the election in a result that was shocking to them.
“SIR ILYN — BRING ME THEIR HEADS!!!!!” — metaphorically speaking, of course.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:55 amThink about the idea again that the IC Chiefs included the 2 page synopsis in support of their contention that they “augmented” the evidence that the Russians wanted him to win:
Sort of a crude — but accurate — caricature of what they’ve functionally pulled off.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:08 amThank you, Shipwerdcrew. I hope Patterico sees this in his weekend off.
You see the CNN report as I do, and the timing of reporting to Trump and the subsequent leaks in the same way I do.
I’m happy I’ve seen you and Patterico discuss this. It’s been clarifying.
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:44 amWhat SWC said. The timing of all this is despicable. To believe that so much of this is coincidence or that none of this could have been brought out months ago is naive. It couldn’t be brought out months ago because much of it didn’t exist until the election and certain forces started scrambling to save their careers. This is high stakes poker and both sides are doubling down. When you look at which actors have the most to lose, I know which way I would bet.
Has anyone else who follows the Google News feeds noticed how incredibly more biased the wording of stories from WP, NYT, CNN, etc. in the last month or two? It’s like they’ve turned the knob way past it’s usual 11.
WTP (094b61) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:21 amCivil war was good, there’s even an implicit acknowledge that the paen to snowden in the last one was wrong, stark is usually right, but he makes a major mistake this time.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:57 amThere was nothing to this story, then or now, specially nothing that concerned an intelligence briefing,
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:06 amSo fusion GPS was also running interference against the magnitsky law, per the daily called.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:24 amBloomberg yesterday on “corporate” intelligence:
For Spies Inc., $1,200 an Hour Buys Dirt on the Likes of Trump
crazy (d3b449) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:49 amelissa,
I think you misunderstood my comment to MD. My point was that sometimes things make us uncomfortable but still be worth doing.
For example, doctors can cause pain when they treat us to try to make us well. Pain can be part of gathering information to solve the illness,but it isn’t the point. Similarly, public debate can be uncomfortable but it can be worth it if it promotes the sharing of important ideas, helps identify and clarify problems, and leads to answers.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:09 amTrump’s ability to redefine politics must amaze even Obama. He has given hope to Americans beleagered by 8 years of Bill, 8 years of Obama, and the prospect of 4-8 more years of Hillary. I hope Trump will do everything his supporters want from him, but it’s still legitimate to criticize Trump. He’s the world’s biggest celebrity and will be the most powerful person in the world.
Criticism is part of politics but I think years of fawning media attention to Democratic politicians, coupled with incessant criticism of Republican politicians, has taken a toll. To see Trump win and then be criticized by Patterico — for whom most here have genuine respect and admiration — must seem like friendly fire. It may even feel like a betrayal. It isn’t, of course, but nothing will change that feeling at this point.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:12 amSwc, 266: that is what will likely happen, and maybe it should happen. Hopefully it does not turn into a force and expertise multiplier for the other side.
urbanleftbehind (378525) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:28 amAnd thus dossier has ludicrous claims about sechin and ivanov, for those with even a smidgen of understanding.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:35 amIt’s a distraction and a concerted, full-blown effort to delegitimize the incoming administration. If one values fair play, one should not have anything to do with it.
CNN? They can go sh*t in their hats. Same goes for NBC. I watched NBC’s talking head squad on the night of the election. They were crestfallen, in shock and near tears. I haven’t looked to ANY of the alphabet networks for ANYTHING other than a laugh for several years now. On what evidence should anyone other than a lefty do so?
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:37 amThe left’s version of bipartisan is that you think, support and do what they want you to do. No thanks.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:41 amDescribing the last several months as “criticism” is like calling the bombing of Dresden an “airdrop of leaflets”.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:47 amExactly when has nbc been right on purpose, not by accident,
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:47 amHaving said that, if I were a criminal in LA, I’d hate to have Patterico on my case. He’s tenacious.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:51 amThere’s is no doubt of that, coronello,
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:52 amThey sent a Russian expert (so-called) that didnt know the significance of crimes, that’s mcfail right there.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:05 amIn my line of work – project management and delivery of technology developments – one needs to recognize priorities, lead teams composed of engineers, operating systems SMEs, documentation developers, advanced technical support, etc., and focus their efforts to deliver deployable technology in a timely manner. Technologies that produce revenue and reduce cost out of the business. Coordinate and track all team activities and resolve issues as they arise.
One must deal with and constructively engage a variety of personalities, behaviors and temperments to keep projects moving forward. There will be occasions where one must say what amounts to “okay… let’s cut the crap and let’s get this thing done!”
This is one of those occasions. There’s much to be done. Let’s help get ‘er done.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:10 am@255 Cruz Supporter
Tarantino is my “must watch when it comes out on HBO” director.
This may not be the venue (though these devolve into weekend open threads) but I have been developing a system for watching QT movies involving the n***** to f*** ratio.
Hateful Eight seemed to be about 8 to 1 so it was kind of weak. Pulp Fiction was just about perfect.
If you like quirky movies with just the right amount of violence may I suggest Miss Meadows with Katie Holmes?
Pinandpuller (16b0b5) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:16 amThe problem with Tarantino is you can’t do noir when every thing is pitch black, hammett had some understanding that you needed to sympathize with at least one character, Rodriguez doesn’t understand that either
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:23 amDavid Corn’s Oct 31 story in Mother Jones about a veteran spy’s reports and Harry Reid’s public demands for the FBI to release the “explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government” the FBI possessed told US more about the purported Trump-Russia ties a week before the election than CNN’s report a week before the inauguration.
Corn’s followup yesterday The Spy Who Wrote the Trump-Russia Memos: It Was “Hair-Raising” Stuff fills in some of the details of how this story came to be: “”The story has to come out.”
I continue to believe in the ability of the FBI and IC to assess the validity and significance of walk-in reports like this in a timely fashion which is why it puzzles me why the reported leaks from senior officials leave the clear impression that they can’t corroborate or dismiss them 6 months or so after their discovery. Why?
crazy (d3b449) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:30 amAh David corn, remember it turms out he lied about who shot the 47% tape, from creamers confession. Of course there was nothing to this story, unlike the yellowcake reports, bow you would think supplying Iran with 10 bombs worth of uranium would be worth a note.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:35 amIt’s troubling to see commenters assume that any criticism, examination, analysis and disagreement about Trump is nothing more than distractions and/or a concerted, full-blown effort to delegitimize the incoming administration. Balderdash! That is dangerously close to believing that, if I, a non-Trumper, were to accuse you who enthusiastically support him, as being nothing more than blind sycophants. No default reaction is a good reaction because it negates doing the hard work of thinking critically and dispassionately through the issue. These default reactions are emotionally driven, rather than objective examinations of the facts (as we know them). IOW, it immediately stifles discourse. And it seems to me, these days, that is the goal. To all speech loving people, that should be a Giant Red Flag of warning. And given the venue we in which we are participating, how bitterly ironic.
By assuming my criticisms and critiques are nothing but efforts to delegitimize Trump’s presidency assumes the worst of me – a concerned citizen who loves my country and want the best for all of us. What’s worse is, this default dismissal of criticism resembles the standard operating procedure of the Left and their constant effort to shame and shut down critical speech against any of their pets (Clinton) and pet causes (which we are now nearly required to buy into if we want to prove that we are open-minded, non-bigoted Americans). That this tone is now coming from the Right should be continually pointed out, and not be ignored.
I don’t hate Trump nor want to see any of his policies that are in the best interest of America to fail. And I resent the immature implications, heck, accusations that if any do criticize him, it is by default, little more than an effort to delegitimize his presidency. What an absurd load of childish bullshit. This rendering of one’s garments is going to prevent we the people from holding our new president accountable. And whether Trump supporters or not, as Americans, efforts to hold our president accountable should be a top priority given what we know about human nature, the fallibility of man, and the intoxicating compulsion for more power that such a position can evoke. We should do no less to try to hold Trump accountable than we did with Obama because both are fallen men sitting in the highest seat of power and subject to all manner of corruptibility. To not do so is to be foolish and blind, and hypocritically partisan.
I do value fair play, and that is why I believe we should be able to equally exercise our free speech, whether enthusiastically supporting the president or criticizing the president without it automatically being assumed that we must either be mindless sycophants with blind loyalty or naysaying delegitimizers.
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:35 am@259 nk
Just think if all government subsidies for The Arts went away?
People might have to use their imagination and Harrison Ford can start working for an air ambulance company or renovate kitchens in Jackson Hole.
Pinandpuller (16b0b5) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:37 amI like nk’s old school version of entertainers as prostitutes. Let Meryl Streep go stroll in front of a theater like barkers do at comedy clubs or Motley Crue did passing out flyers down at The Whiskey.
Pinandpuller (16b0b5) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:43 am@ Col. Haiku,
I’m familiar with this reality in the workplace. However, this is not the workplace, and not a situation where one group gets to set the timetable of expectation and demands of others. There is no penalty given if such deadlines of expectation of others aren’t met. There is no performance review we must face if we fail to get on board when you say, because it is us, the American people who decide what and when and how we want to see things done. All of us have an equal say as well as equal opportunity to voice our concerns, and hopefully be “constructively engaged” with by our peers. There is no “boss” who gets to make the timetable of demand. We are the boss, and it is the president who serves the nation. Likewise, there is no group here that has authority over dissenting views and voices. In addition, I think this demand to move forward and get this done should always, always be tempered by a look at whether it is good for our country or not.
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:48 amThere is 1) honest criticism, analysis, disagreement, etc., and there’s 2) picking up ridiculously trite, tedious, slanderous, tendentious, fever-swamp rumors, throwing them against the wall to see if they stick.
We need more of number 1 and much less of number 2. We always will. I guess that’s all I want to say.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:54 amHollywood loves them that big beautiful wall built by dead white males, known as “Copyright”.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:58 amNo download is illegal!
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:01 amIn this, we can agree, but we also both know that you have just acknowledged nothing about the concerns about the efforts to stifle unwelcome/unwanted speech of others.
🙂
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:02 am292… Dana, to your last five sentences… Yes, when we get to that point. We are not there yet, the PEOTUS hasn’t been sworn in. He’s sworn in, it begins. Up until that point, it’s some criticism or praise of cabinet picks, comments, tweets, and statements and much hand-wringing, score-settling and other wankery.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:04 am@ DRJ,
I have to disagree with this. Anyone who has been successfully married for any length of time has learned the value of debate, and understand its importance.
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:07 am“Wankery, in the pursuit of commentary, is no virtue.”
— Barely HoldMudder
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:08 am@ Col. Haiku,
I know, right?! Just imagine how stifled we will be when he is officially the president! If we can’t criticize, critique and point out where we think he’s a screwy-louie now, what happens then??
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:10 amIt won’t be me doing teh stifling, Dana. All bets are off then. That’s when teh “Sh*t just got real” begins. Fair game. I look forward to the further emasculation of the Left (is it possible?), their wailing, garment-rendering, #tagging, acting out, and much-deserved wandering in the political wilderness.
And the work to mitigate the damage done over the last 10 years.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:25 amPatterico is in charge of his blog and is entitled to his opinions and POV on issues galore. He is also entitled (if he somehow believes that it serves his larger purposes in persuasion) to call some of his longtime fans and readers “chumps” and suggest they are sheep blinded by partisanship and disloyal friends if they see reason to argue with him on points of controversy. He is most certainly also due basic respect and is entitled to feel battered and have hurt feelings if he feels disrespected. I thought DCSA analyzed and diagnosed the current situation pretty closely @261. But only Patterico knows if that is an accurate assessment.
But what is dangerous, and not OK, and disturbing (IMO) at this particular point in time is the host’s seeming willingness (via such threads as this one) to provide cover, or aid and comfort (whether it is intentional or just unknowingly misguided) to unelected people and powerful organizations which are very obviously attempting to de-legitimize an American Presidential election in which there is no evidence whatsoever that voting machines were hacked or that there was voter fraud in the President -elect’s favor or that the PE has been compromised by a foreign power. Even unintentionally helping to spread and propagate an effort of innuendo to convince some gullible American people that the election was illegitimate is antithetical to the Constitution, to American history and to the tradition of peaceful transfer of power after the voters have spoken. There is always a winner and a loser. There are always ways of reigning in a bad president, but an attempt at a palace coup before an inauguration has taken place should shock every sentient being whether they voted for the man or not. Shipwreckedcrew has laid out the bones of this deep state betrayal and we should thank him. This is not a trivial matter.
elissa (23a154) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:34 am@ Col. Haiku,
But considering that, since Trump was nominated (and even before), you have been making efforts to do just that (either through the default accusation of delegitimizing Trump, mockery, sneering, or a flat-out dismissiveness), what’s to assure me that you won’t make an even greater effort to curb speech after he officially becomes the president??
As a guest contributor, commenter and lover of speech, when you make comments like: “picking up ridiculously trite, tedious, slanderous, tendentious, fever-swamp rumors, throwing them against the wall to see if they stick,” or make the now-default accusation that criticism of Trump equals an effort to delegitimize his presidency, it makes me hesitant to believe your claim that you will not be the one doing the stifling.
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:36 amTrump’s followers are as thin-skinned as He Who Is Orange.
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:42 am@Dana:It’s troubling to see commenters assume that any criticism, examination, analysis and disagreement about Trump is nothing more than distractions and/or a concerted, full-blown effort to delegitimize the incoming administration. Balderdash!
It is balderdash because most of the people commenting here are not saying any such thing. This is a strawman. Are there pro-Trump commenters here who fit this description? A few, and we know who they are.
If you really believe this is the case, things are not going to get better here.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:44 amWell, Dana, stay tuned… And re-read Ecclesiastes 3:2.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:46 am@Dana:you won’t make an even greater effort to curb speech after he officially becomes the president??
How is Colonel Haiku curbing speech?
He is exercising his speech here. He has no power to stifle anyone’s speech here or anyone else.
This is a very tendentious description, to accompany your other that commenters here tolerate no criticism of Trump.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:47 amCoronello was speaking of the silly walks ministry which is focused on this minutae when bodies are falling from ft Lauderdale to western Washington.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:49 amA number of the #NeverTrumpers are actually the ones who’ve called for Patterico to ban this person or that person.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:49 amDana if you honestly think that no criticism of Trump is what the commenters here are looking for, and that they are trying to stifle speech, if you honestly think that then you are not paying close attention to what they are saying, but instead you have crafted a narrative to yourself that keeps you from the seeing the picture.
If you do not honestly think so, but says so anyway… well, enough said.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:49 am@274 DRJ
I think any commenter here can give a well reasoned criticism of Trump.
Most of us think the fight starts when the bell rings. Others want to see a brawl at the weigh in.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:49 am@Cruz Supporter:A number of the #NeverTrumpers are actually the ones who’ve called for Patterico to ban this person or that person.
I know, our curiously selective tone police.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:50 amelissa, one of the reasons I read this blog is that the commenters provide a lot content. In this case, I questioned Patterico’s assumptions in lending credence to these phony stories, and sure enough, SWC has provided detailed information that supports my initial concern. I wonder whether Patterico’s animus to Trump contributed to his decision to post this topic, but it really doesn’t matter. The topic is important in that it shows just how deep the rot has spread. Which isn’t to say that Patterico is part of the rot. He’s just a victim of the disinformation.
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:50 amSo glennfine ran interference for razorback and was always attacking w, just as Michael Horowitz does now, it’s funny how igs ensure democratic unaccontability isn’t it?
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:52 amCruz Supporter, Rev Hoagie, myself, any number of commenters here, are, were and have been critics of Trump, before and the after the primaries.
This is simply not in dispute if you review older comments to older posts.
What I object to is poorly sourced, irrelevant criticism of Trump that just follows the media line du jour. Others can speak for themselves.
There might be five regular commenters who puch back on any and all criticism of Trump.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:53 amAnyone who has been successfully married for any length of time has learned the value of debate, and understand its importance.
Yes, dear.
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:57 amGabriel Hanna,
It would be helpful for you to go back and review the comment sections on any number of posts regarding the primaries, Trump, the run-up to the election and subsequent period afterward.
I do agree that the Col. is, and has been exercising his right to speech. I should have been more accurate and said that he, and others, have been making efforts to delegitimize the speech of those criticizing Trump.
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:00 amMr. Trump’s a bad mama jama
he’s built!
he’s stacked!
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:00 amSo it really is striking how fusion has been a tool of the Kremlin against browser and the magnitsky act
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:03 amExcept when one accidentally target’s one of the select, as in the americorps case, then he has to be crazy or senile.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:15 amThat’s not debate nk, that’s surrender.
Rev. Hoagie® (785e38) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:16 amThe former came from mccarthy, the latter from Chuck Ross.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:18 am“I do agree that the Col. is, and has been exercising his right to speech. I should have been more accurate and said that he, and others, have been making efforts to delegitimize the speech of those criticizing Trump.”
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:00 am
Criticize away. Express any political criticism you want. Truth is good. Banning is what the other side does. But be mindful of who you are helping. If you’re cool with it, that’s your right.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:25 amCriticism should have plausible roots, material that the national enquired would find beyond the pale, doesn’t fall in that category.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:25 amThere’s a huge gulf between Americans and the media. There’s a reason for that. Don’t add to the crazy.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:27 amGabriel Hanna, yes, I’m in the same boat as you guys. I too can pull up comments I made critcizing Trump during the primaries.
We’re told we’re stupid for supporting Trump, then when we push back, we get scolded for violating the established tone of discourse. (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:30 amWho looks foolish, mi 6 for having hired this turkey, the foreign office the cia, the dni and the fbi
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:33 amAs Peter oborne, miss mays govt is as apoplectic as with other scandals that pouted out of the cold
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:37 amI am no longer commenting on this thread,
except to address a conversation concerning me.
I have had enough interaction with DRJ directly by email to trust her concern and lack of animus toward me,
Otoh, if DRJ’s post came from someone I didn’t know, I would have found it condescending,
And here is why:
If by “debate” you mean an exchange of information and ideas in an attempt to clarify the truth,
I am all for it,
And I consider it about as insulting as possible to suggest otherwise
Even when it was my friend and mentor of many decades who inferred it in a discussion.
If by debate you mean verbal bouting to defeat, yeah, even humiliate an opponent if possible,
I am all against it.
Even when I have a 3ft piece of steel in my hand in a duel, I try to have the attitude of forcing my opponent to fence to the best of their ability in combat with me
(not that I always succeed).
I try to save my defeat and crush instinct for literal life and death,
Like I had yesterday, where life won…
Since I don’t like to swear, and if I did it would lose its effect,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:40 amThis is how I feel every time someone insinuates I don’t want Trump criticized:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=18AxBV2uDB0
Narciso
I’m sure most guys can sympathize with Tim Robbins dividing his marital assets in Short Cuts.
I’m kind of surprised that the Russians and ILM haven’t shopped Trump’s head on Huey Lewis’ body speaking of…
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:40 amI’ve had enough experience on this board to realize what the broadsheets blast 24/7 isn’t nearly the story.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:43 amFor instance o’keefe wasn’t wiretapping landrieu’s office, but checking why the Cajun caid was listening to constituents
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:47 amLet’s hope the PEOTUS is able to harness his theatrical/half-a-buffoon side for good, listens to and acts upon good advice and wise counsel from his cabinet and close advisors and leave the Democrats and Democrats-with-bylines to their dreams of President Beyoncé.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:53 amDoes that video make my point???
I think the issue is at least as much about the tone of discussion as it is the content,
And everytime our host makes comments about people being against criticizing Trump,
It is like baiting that emotional reaction.
Whether he means to or not, whether anyone else feels that way or not,
That is what it makes me feel.
The point is made repeatedly that people are not / do not listen to Pat’s point.
I’m just saying it goes both ways, that I feel most of us are repeatedly lumped together into a category of people who don’t want to hear anything said negative about Trump.
So when our host begins a post with something to the effect,
“He said something bad about Trump. Swarm him.”
I feel like throwing chairs,
With the obscenity if that is what it takes.
I am not going to comment anymore on any current posts. I will see what comes in the future and try to be circumspect in any comments I make.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:53 amI will check back to see if I need to clarify anything about these last two posts,
As well as the one Elissa quoted.
Have a good day all, seriously.
@Dana:It would be helpful for you to go back and review the comment sections on any number of posts regarding the primaries, Trump, the run-up to the election and subsequent period afterward.
I have, and your characterization of the commenters here is not accurate. Either because you have a false impression, or because you had chosen not to describe them accurately.
For example, I refer you to Patterico’s excellent post on Trump’s jobs destroying infrastructure program. Not only are my comments critical but so are ThOR’s:
Obama pumped a trillion into worthless infrastructure expenditures with no effect on the economy and now Trump will double-down on the same programs. But why should this come as any surprise? Trump’s record tells us exactly who his is: a big spending liberal.
Also, hot off the internet is news that Trump is backing down on dismantling Obamacare and will not try to make Mexico pay for the fence. And we are only three days in. It is going to be a long four years.
I also refer you to my describing Trump as a “chump” not three days ago on this very topic.
I refer you to Cruz Supporter’s handle.
Etc.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:57 amshipwreckedcrew has provided a lengthy analysis to support his contentions. Several commenters have welcomed his analysis because they say it makes sense to them and/or confirms their initial opinions. Those are good reasons but real debate is more than when one person states his opinion, one person responds, and everyone votes who won. Debate involves back and forth and testing statements for accuracy, and lasts more than one round.
Patterico has expressed his opinions in posts and swc responded in a number of comments, but there was criticism when Patterico responded to the content of swc’s comments with specific questions and rebuttals. As swc has acknowledged, there is nothing wrong with Patterico doing this. This give-and-take is the debate process and how the strength of an argument is tested and weighed.
Finally, to pinandpuller and others who think the Inauguration date matters: I acknowledge the reasoning behind this (including but not limited to the concern for fairness to Trump in the face of media attacks), but I respectfully disagree. Did anyone here argue we should not criticize or ask questions about Obama before he took office — that we should ignore everything he said and did up to then but, instead, wait and see what he would do as President? I doubt it. Further, whether this debate happens in November, December or early January vs late January or February shouldn’t make a difference. We are citizens. This is what we should be doing all the time.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:01 amMD, I’ll see that and raise you https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5PnCyPpS4XI
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:02 amThe real link to my “chump” comment is here, sorry.
Protip: Ctrl-A before Ctrl-C on a long hyperlink.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:04 am@DRJ: Did anyone here argue we should not criticize or ask questions
More strawmen. Can you cite a commenter here saying “we should not criticize or ask questions” abotut Trump? No. That is your tendentious interpretation of what they actually did say–and many of these commenters are on record themselves criticizing Trump, including myself.
If you cannot restate our claims in a way we agree is fair, then no progress is possible.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:06 amWhich comment of mine did you find condescending, MD, the one Elissa complained about?
That would be ironic because I made a special effort to reach out to you in a way that I intended as respectful. I tried very hard to present my views about debate — which to me are about communicating ideas, not humiliation or being hurtful — clearly and with an analogy about medicine that I hoped would resonate specifically with you.
And now you tell me that if you didn’t know me from emails, you would think I was being condescending. So this is truly hopeless.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:08 am@266 SWC
“Once again, things that could have been brought to my attention YESTERDAY!”
Adam Sandler The Wedding Singer
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:09 amGabriel,
First, it woild be helpful if you would not edit my statements in ways that make them misleading. Second, my point was not a strawman. For instance, pinandpuller believes the criticism should wait until Trump is inaugurated, and that’s what I was addressing.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:13 am@DRJnot edit my statements in ways that make them misleading.
Did no such thing. I did not cite the full sentence, true, by summary is NOT misleading. And you’ve said it more than once, we’re only asking questions, we’re only criticizing, and those Trumpkins object to that. That is not true.
I will cite your full sentence here:
Did anyone here argue we should not criticize or ask questions about Obama before he took office — that we should ignore everything he said and did up to then but, instead, wait and see what he would do as President? I doubt it. Further, whether this debate happens in November, December or early January vs late January or February shouldn’t make a difference. We are citizens. This is what we should be doing all the time.
My objection is not a false reading of what you said and you confirmed it when you said
pinandpuller believes the criticism should wait until Trump is inaugurated, and that’s what I was addressing.
But that is not what he said:
I think any commenter here can give a well reasoned criticism of Trump.
Most of us think the fight starts when the bell rings. Others want to see a brawl at the weigh in..
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:18 amThat’s a phrase you’ve used in discussions with me. I hope you aren’t referring to me this time because I don’t advocate banning commenters. I have only asked Patterico to moderate (not ban) one commenter in over a decade of commenting, and I have specifically asked him not to ban people when it involved me.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:20 am@DRJ: You had to make some interpretations of pinpuller’s comments to get that he objects to ANY criticism, ANY questioning before the inauguration. You do no even know that he included himself in “most of us” and not “others”.
He himself said “any commenter here can give a well reasoned criticism of Trump.”
You give yourself a lot of license to interpret comments and you criticize others for doing less tea-leaf reading.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:21 amsome people, they do not have love in their hearts
Mr. Trump can’t even handle these people, they are so cold, they are so sad inside
open your heart to trump baby he holds the lock and you hold the key
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:22 am@DRJ:I hope you aren’t referring to me this time because I don’t advocate banning commenters.
“Tone police” is not identical with “people who advocate bannination”. Again, your license to interpret my comment and simultaneously criticize me for the same thing.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:22 amThat is what I think Pinandpuller meant by his comment, Gabriel. The nice thing about disvusdions is thst perhaps he will clarify it for us both.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:22 amnarciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:23 am
Exactly.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:22 am@DRJ:That is what I think Pinandpuller meant by his comment, Gabriel.
I actually quoted your words and you accused me of misleading people. You paraphased pinpuller with a lot of specifics: that he objects to ALL criticism before the inauguration, and you get a pass because that’s what you think? Then why do I deserve an accusation?
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:25 amGabriel,
Your comment about tone police was in response to a Cruz Supporter comment about banning, but if I apologize if I misunderstood what you were saying. Please help me understand your point.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:26 amThere’s an extra “if” in my last comment. The first one shouldn’t be there.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:27 am@DRJ:Please help me understand your point.
Draw a circle. That’s “tone police”. They want to criticize you for how you say it, or how they think you feel about what you say.
Draw a second circle, overlapping the first circle. This circle is “people here who think some commenters should be banned”.
There are some people who fit into both groups but they are not identical.
I think Patterico was right to ban the Nazi troll he had a few months ago, but not because of his tone.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:28 amThank you.
Who are in the tone police circle here?
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:30 amWhat I am looking forward to in the Trump Era is the next 99 Luftbaloons, Land of Confusion or Rocking in the Free World.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:30 am@DRJ:Who are in the tone police circle here?
People have to decide for themselves, by reading what is written, who is engaging in that behavior and decide for themselves what they think about that. There are days I might be “tone police”, and if so I would like to be told so I can stop doing it.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:32 amOk. What do you mean by tone?
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:35 amNarciso,
The lack of attention by the propaganda organs as to what Clinton maneuvers motivated Putin to become so strongly #NeverClinton is rather blindingly obvious. It’s almost as humorous to watch the attempt to turn #NeverClinton into pro-Trump as it is to see the IC tarred as #NeverTrump when McCullough’s letters were the basis for Lock ‘er Up blather.
I sure hope Tapper enjoys his parting gift from Obama/Biden as he takes his seat between Farenthold and Harwood in the press peanut gallery.
Rick Ballard (1c290b) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:35 am@DRJ: In other words I am not the “tone police” police. I prefer to respond to the person I believe to be doing as and when I see it. I prefer not to make a blanket statement about specific commenters that would felt as a personal attack.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:35 amTo DRJ’s point on the back and forth — its an important part of this community.
In some measure I signed on this morning to look at what has been said in response to my 5 late night posts.
While I appreciate the kind words, the fact that nobody took me on means I’ve got nothing more to write on the topic.
I was disappointed yesterday when Patrick said he was going to take the weekend off because I knew that meant no back and forth between the two of us, and for me that’s an enjoyable exercise.
For me its stimulating and rewarding when someone says in response to one of my posts, “Yeah, but what about XYZ, and did you consider 123. Doesn’t that lead to a conclusion different from what you are stating?
That forces me to examine my own thinking, defend what I posted, or make adjustments. All are learning experiences.
Not sure how many were here, but I was a huge contrarian on the case involving the federal prosecution of the two Border Patrol agents who shot the illegal alien who was holding only a cell phone. In that back and forth I think I was pretty much were Patrick feels like he is right now — making a one man stand.
But I was confident then that based on what was being made public about the case in terms of the evidence, and what I understood about the law and procedure involved in the investigation, that the prosecution was warranted and that both Agents had committed acts that were crimes.
I just occurred to me that that was at the end of the Bush Admin. because part of the debate was about whether Bush should commute their sentences before leaving office.
Just reminds me that I’ve been around this site for a long long time.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:36 amI ask because I don’t recall Patterico ever banning someone because of their tone, as I would define that word. I define it as attitude and I haven’t seen him ban people over that.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:38 amGreat comment, swc. Those were good times, and I agree completely about debate.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:39 am@DRJ:What do you mean by tone?
I already explained. This is too far off topic now.
I think it would be fair for you, or Dana, or anyone else saying that the commenters here will brook no criticism or questioning of Trump, to acknowledge that most of us doing that do not feel it is a fair characterization of our views, and that some of are indeed critical of Trump ourselves.
The first step to making progress is that we can fairly articulate each other’s views. Much of the rancor around here would dissipate if we consciously did this.
There are people here who accuse me of habitually and deliberately mischaracterizing the views of others. I do not believe that is fair to what I have actually said, but whether I am guilty of it myself or not, my point stands that we all need to better at this. And I will work to explicitly say “I am restating your view, is this fair”? And I hope by so doing, perhaps I can do my bit to make things a little bit better.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:41 am@swc:I was a huge contrarian on the case involving the federal prosecution of the two Border Patrol agents who shot the illegal alien who was holding only a cell phone. In that back and forth I think I was pretty much were Patrick feels like he is right now — making a one man stand.
That happens to me on climate. And sometimes on free trade.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:42 amThat’s also why I’m sad SPQR left. He corrected me in his last conversation and he was right. I’m glad I acknowledged his correction and thanked him before he left. But the bottom line is that he won’t be here to help me again and it’s a loss.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:43 amGabriel,
Comment threads go off-topic all the time, but that’s fine. I have other things to do this weekend anyway.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:45 amDana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:35 am
Well said.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:47 amPinandpuller (16b0b5) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:43 am
You and me both. On this matter, nk sees clearly.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:49 amI join felipe in commending Dana for comment 289. Well done, Dana.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:52 amelissa (23a154) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:34 am
Elissa is firing on all cylinders. I like this morning’s tenor. I hope it contiues in this direction of collegiality.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/14/2017 @ 11:58 amshipwreckedcrew–I see you are back again smoothly trying to tamp down some of the tension. That is appreciated and sorely needed perspective. 🙂
Now, to the specific issue under the microscope: There is room to continue to quibble on the minutiae of the timeline of this story with Patterico perhaps. But as long as one of the two of you master debaters views the IC leaks and maneuvering as weaponized politics and troubling on a grand scale, not to mention that journalism’s role in this past week’s fiasco shows coordinated perfidy designed to de-legitimatize the recent election– while the other one of you doesn’t seem to see those elements much at all–then the point of continued debate about the small stuff seems almost silly.
But to the big stuff, I suspect you still have plenty more to say on this topic and I hope you will do so.
elissa (23a154) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:13 pmIts amusing up to a point, up until the ministry of silly walks takes it seriously, this bit of rubbish should have been deleted, and the culprit sent back to ft monkton (their version of the farm)
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:15 pmI know I said this already but was it on this thread or another?
This British guy was not getting paid for accurate intelligence, he was being paid for dirt. Accurate intelligence is what you want so you send your cruise missile to an arms depot and not an abandoned camel corral. Dirt does not need to be accurate. It just needs some way for you to get away with it.
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:23 pm@elissa:then the point of continued debate about the small stuff seems almost silly.
I don’t know if it’s psychological or not. But in my experience argument over small details is frequently used to impeach a larger argument that does not actually depend on those details. Sometimes this approach is justified, and sometimes not.
In this case CNN’s criminal leakers said one thing to CNN, and NBC’s criminal leakers said a different thing to NBC. CNN followed up with more illegal leaks from more criminals, which (in my opinion) supports NBC’s version of events.
But as you say, this is not the real. The real issue is, intelligence officials broke the law and their oaths in order to give CNN and NBC cover to report on bogus allegations that were known to them for months, and which they knew could be confirmed because they’d been trying for months to confirm them.
So CNN and NBC could not report on this, until intelligence officers a) presented it, or discussed it, or mentioned it, or whatever, at or near or around or immediately before or after, whichever, a secret and classified intelligence briefing which it was illegal and immoral for them to discuss with the media, and b) leaked the salacious part of the content of that meeting to CNN and NBC.
So CNN and NBC now have cover. There’s these allegations, so bad we can’t talk about them because they haven’t been confirmed, but the intelligence community illegally told us that they are taking it very seriously and Top Men are on the case.
Did they cook this oh-we’re-just-reporting-the-controversy game with these leakers in advance? Don’t know, no evidence.
But we do know that the leakers broke the law and their oaths to help the media peddle gossip that was already known to be baseless. If they take the law and their oaths so lightly, what else might they do?
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:25 pmThere are people here who accuse me of habitually and deliberately mischaracterizing the views of others. I do not believe that is fair to what I have actually said, but whether I am guilty of it myself or not, my point stands that we all need to better at this. And I will work to explicitly say “I am restating your view, is this fair”? And I hope by so doing, perhaps I can do my bit to make things a little bit better.
Gee, I feel the same way. And I think a restating of one’s views for clarification is healthy to a conversation. It’s certainly bound to be more productive than cherry picking comments to support one’s view, throwing out accusations of “straw men” and being tendentious in comments.
With that, I would suggest retiring the accusation that one’s criticism of Trump is just an effort at “delegitimizing Trump’s presidency”. As I stated above, any default reaction to either side, plays like the left, is emotionalism, and avoids addressing the gut of the issue in an honest manner. It also assumes the worst about commenters who are on the same side of the aisle, and hopefully, fighting the same enemy.
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:27 pmAnd to top it all off, President Obama, that notorious pro-Trump shill, said “What does any of this have to do with anything” when he saw it. Well, he said that according to another notorious pro-Trump shill, Vice-President Biden.
Which sounds to me like they didn’t help cook this up, at least.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:29 pm@Dana: I would suggest retiring the accusation that one’s criticism of Trump is just an effort at “delegitimizing Trump’s presidency”
You mean against other commenters here, or against everybody, like CNN or NBC or Merril Streep?
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:31 pm@Dana: And what if we can support the allegation with evidence, okay to do that or not, in that case?
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:32 pm@Dana: I hasten to add I am not making this accusation against one here. Just asking, in general, if you feel that such an argument is always inappropriate no matter to whom it is directed and no matter the evidence, or what?
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:33 pmColonel,
I’m not sure you got the right link,
not quite what I thought I communicated.
DRJ,
we are not hopeless as long as we respect each other and remain in communication,
but we are continuing to be ships crossing paths in the night and not communicating.
Let me try again.
You were suggested, as I understand it, that lawyers are trained and acclimated to a debate process different from that of others, such as physicians.
This suggests, at least at the surface and from additional things that were said, that physicians such as myself and others are not used to logical thought and reasoning that compares data and reasoning and comes to a conclusion.
That I find condescending because it suggests non-lawyers are either not interested in determining the truth or cannot engage in a dialogue seeking to understand truth.
If, on the other hand, you said,
“Lawyers are trained in verbal sparing and bickering and learning to impress a jury and win an argument, who the h*** cares what the truth is,
and non-lawyers are not trained in such verbal blood-letting.”
I would have said, “Yes, you are correct”.
But I imagine you find that offensive, because ideally, that is not what lawyers aspire to,
but simply what they commonly descend to in our system of adversarial positioning.
Let me try again to communicate my observation of what seems to me to be happening in this and other Trump related recent threads:
(Italics are editorial additions describing what this person, perhaps alone, perceives as tone).
Pat says “A”.
Others say “We disagree with A, Pat.”
Pat comes back and says, “See, I told you that A was right, you just don’t want to hear criticism of Trump, so there, idiot!!”
Others, such as SWC, noting the degree of defiance, say, “Not so bleeping fast, a-hole”!!!!
and Pat says, “Who you calling a-hole, you f’ing a-hole!?!?!? If you don’t like it, leave, it’s my site”!!!!
Now, as that is how it “feels” and “seems” to me, whether it is in any sense “objectively true” or not,
I think it is best for me to bow out.
I am not addressing any other issues except my perceptions in discussion with DRJ.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:34 pm“Which sounds to me like they didn’t help cook this up, at least.”
Or cover for cooking it up. The initial CNN report cited “multiple US officials with direct knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.” which would include Obama, Biden and any Executive staff present. The IC gains nothing of value any more than Putin does by a public unveiling of the horse’s head. The timing of the revelation reeks more of a political ploy by Obama/Biden than it does of an IC maneuver.
Rick Ballard (1c290b) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:40 pmMD… I see your chair throwin’ and raise you a dance-off!
Keep teh Peace!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:40 pmExcept the horse is from the merrygoround around the corner, but they keep brandishing and yelling new like the black knight, have I mangled enough metaphors
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:46 pmYes, elissa! I echo felipe’s sentiments!
“And whether Trump supporters or not, as Americans, efforts to hold our president accountable should be a top priority given what we know about human nature, the fallibility of man, and the intoxicating compulsion for more power that such a position can evoke. We should do no less to try to hold Trump accountable than we did with Obama because both are fallen men sitting in the highest seat of power and subject to all manner of corruptibility. To not do so is to be foolish and blind, and hypocritically partisan.
I do value fair play, and that is why I believe we should be able to equally exercise our free speech, whether enthusiastically supporting the president or criticizing the president without it automatically being assumed that we must either be mindless sycophants with blind loyalty or naysaying delegitimizers.”
Yes, on Monday, January 20, 2017, after being sworn in, the stuff gets real. Trump becomes President Trump.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/14/2017 @ 12:52 pmMD- I was actually just in the process of crafting a comment responding to DRJ’s #340 where she asked about, expressed shock and made a defense of the offending “condescending” piece. I was going to say some similar things as you just did, but I am glad you came online to speak for yourself. That’s always best. And I am so proud of myself for (for once) actually refreshing the page and seeing yours before I hit submit!
elissa (23a154) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:00 pmGabriel Hanna,
I think that, no matter. Our disagreements, we can both heartily agree that there is a genuine effort being made by the usual suspects (Democrats, Hollywood, MSM) to delegitimitize Trump’s presidency. That, however, is not the case in this community. While the accusation have been made, there has been no evidence to support the claim. (Note: Anger, or any negative emotional and personal reaction to having one’s favored candidate for president, or simply the new president criticized is not evidence to support the accusation).
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:04 pmP.s. Oh dear, my comment @386 is choppy. I blame the IPad.
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:07 pm@Dana: I believe that I understand you.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:09 pmNo, MD, I was not saying any of those things. My point was that lawyers are taught to think a specific way and doctors are taught to think a different way. Both methods are right for those professions, but they go about finding answers in different ways. Lawyers find answers through questioning and debate. Doctors find answers using the scientific method.
Thus, when I try to debate people here, I am not trying to be rude or disrespectful or to make other people uncomfortable. I am trying to identify issues, find common ground, and look for answers using the debate methods I was taught in school and as a lawyer. My goal is not to make people uncomfortable, even though that can happen when we debate because sometimes it is hard to have our ideas probed and scrutinized.
In addition, I tried to provide an analogy that I thought would speak to you. Doctors have a method to identify and diagnose disease that works well. The process may make their patients uncomfortable but that isn’t the point. Doctors aren’t trying to hurt anyone; They are trying to find answers to help their patients.
I’m sorry this has troubled or offended you. That was the opposite of my intention.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:16 pmFurther, MD, I am not saying someone has to debate to understand logic. I think your example is more about logic.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:21 pmMy point was simply that understanding things can be a difficult and even uncomfortable process, but being uncomfortable is not a reason to avoid doing something.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:26 pmThis is pointless.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:29 pm@DRJ:being uncomfortable is not a reason to avoid doing something.
What is it that you thought MD was avoiding doing? Understanding?
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:30 pm=yawn= CNN used a TV gimmick familiar to seasoned TV execs timed to mainstream and sensationalize a non-story based on uncorroborated information other news organizations had for months. It was a calculated decision by CNN management to generate an audience, NOT to report breaking news.
The results, whether intended or not, feed a delegitimization campaign at work by liberal and conservative ideologues and like minded associates to degrade the in coming administration.
Today it’s ‘icon’ John Lewis crowing ‘delegitimate’ president. He represents the Georgia’s 5th district… chiefly Atlanta… headquarters for… CNN.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:30 pmDRJ, I had to chuckle, your comments about bloggers brought to mind my mother from decades ago who’d lament:
“I slaved all day making this great dinner for you kids, and now you won’t eat it??? Now finish that cabbage, clean your plates or they will be no TV for you tonight!”
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:36 pmNo, Gabriel, MD knows a lot more than I ever will.
Recently, there has been several comments here about heightened tensions, and about being collegial and collaborative. My statements were addressed to that. We should always be civil and polite but we can’t always get along when we don’t agree.
Dealing with difficult issues, in law or medicine or engineering or any area of life, can cause discomfort as we work through problems. Thus, to me, a little discomfort is not a good reason to shut down a discussion in a forum like this. That was my point which I clearly did not express well because no one understood. My inability to effectively communicate ideas is why it’s pointless for me to discuss things here.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:50 pmMD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:40 am
HA! Great vid, MD. It says it all. This is why I am still a member of the MD Fan Club.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:51 pmCNN’s media man Brian ‘Seltzer’ just today: “CNN is ‘fake news’- which is untrue… We’re not working for ourselves, we’re working for the viewers.”
Rubbish.
Hours of Anthony Bourdain talking noodles in Vietnam is not news.
Piercing prime time anchor Don Lemon’s ear live on air is not news.
Televising reporters drinking and dancing and doing comedy schtick is not news.
Creating faux game show programming with news readers as ‘contestants’ is not news.
Hours and hours broadcasting decades-old, repackaged B-roll footage from other networks is not news.
The list goes on and on and on…
CNN is working for itself and it’s stock holders– to generate an audience to sell advertising time to make money. They are not a loss leader operating as a public service.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:00 pm@DRJ:My inability to effectively communicate ideas is why it’s pointless for me to discuss things here.
If you really feel that way it is unfortunate but I doubt many here would say your participation is pointless, for what it’s worth. I certainly do not think it is.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:07 pmDRJ,
I know that you were not trying to say things the nasty way.
Here is the basic thing that is irreconcilable as long as it exists:
Pat thinks his dealing with Trump is reasonable,
People “defending” Pat agree.
Others think Pat is going out of his way to denigrate Trump,
and anyone who disagrees with him is a shill for Trump.
I think it is that simple, and nothing will change.
I disagree that lawyers are taught to approach problems differently from a thought process than anyone else,
What lawyers are taught to do that is different
From this non-lawyer point of view
Lawyers are taught to reason according to principles made up by other people,
Not facts of the physical universe or rules of logic,
And the goal is not finding truth,
But winning your case or getting the best deal for your client.
It is the difference between a legal system and a justice system.
A justice system aims for justice,
a legal system works by laws,
Hoping that in general following the law ends up in an approximation of justice.
Like I said, imo,
Pat is vindictive against Trump and Trump supporters, and it spills out onto others,
Pat says that to give that opinion is crazy and Trump derangement syndrome.
So there is the impasse.
MD in Philly (78e2df) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:08 pmOthers can comment on that as they wish, I may be wrong,
But that is how it seems to me, and I have nothing more to say.
@270.There was nothing to this story, then or now, specially nothing that concerned an intelligence briefing.
Exactly.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:09 pm==My inability to effectively communicate ideas is why it’s pointless for me to discuss things here.==
I wouldn’t go that far. But positing the “uncomfortable” argument again, and repeating most of the same lawyer- doctor analogy a second time that he already said he found condescending the first time –and apparently repeating them because he must not have understood it all the first time or he wouldn’t have been offended, did make me chuckle a little bit.
elissa (23a154) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:15 pmI readily admit that I could be dead wrong about not going at Trump at T minus seven days.
It’s just my personal preference not to do so because I’m a wait and see kind of guy.
I’m also following Bill Burr’s advice to structure my life to where the president doesn’t really…”MATTAH!!!”
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:24 pmDRJ, what Patterico does is express his opinion here– and as he says, it’s a labor of love for him- selectively engage (and I do believe he enjoys reading other lines of thought) dismiss, occasionally seasoned with witty snark, and ignore the few who disagree. Can’t spend all his time on this for sure. But when the few who disagree become the many, he leaves– or retreats– to RedState, where the commonality of the patter is a comfort. Nobody enjoys being on the losing side of an argument.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:25 pmPS to #405… Nobody likes to be on the losing side of an argument— and still have to pick up the check.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:34 pmThat being said, most all of us have some stake in whether Trump succeeds or fails. Not our reputations or sacred honor. Mostly just not living in Durkadurkastan Marque Dos para ingleis.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:52 pmelissa, we can find common ground. I hurt MD’s feelings so I deserve the fact that you are enjoying my discomfort.
DCSCA, this is Patterico’s website but I’m sure he will be back. I think he’s disappointed at the degree of anger directed at him over politics.
DRJ (15874d) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:55 pmIt turns out? According to the independent, Steele was sliming for free at the end, which was what his info was worth at the end.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 2:58 pmIf I was not interested in the success of this website and its host, I would not bother saying these things.
I may be all wrong, and Pat and others can disagree and even dismiss what I say, that is fine, Pat and ya’ll need to do what you think best.
Again, to try to clarify for DRJ,
I think the form of debate is combative and begs for more of the same,
it perhaps is like two brothers who start out “play fighting” and then turns into the wrong thing.
Again, those are my opinions, if they are helpful, very good, if not, I am sorry.
MD in Philly (78e2df) — 1/14/2017 @ 3:02 pm@408. I think he’s disappointed at the degree of anger directed at him over politics.
Nobody disputes it’s his party and he picks up the tab, DRJ. But as I said in #227, ‘Do tell…’ so we’ve come full circle, and funding an echo chamber serves little purpose.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 3:14 pmDRJ, my issue in this discusiion isn’t w/the memo trail. Or P. Factions in bureaucracies at war with incoming administrations is nothing new. My focus and alarm is with the management and motives of a global news outlet: CNN. And I’ve expressed that in several postings above. That’s about as far as this goes for me. How P runs his shop is his business and none of mine, for sure.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 3:20 pmDRJ,
No, you did not hurt my feelings,
I know you weren’t trying to do that and you didn’t,
So don’t worry about that.
I do not know what the issue is,
literally, maybe it is in the spiritual realm,
people are going nuts and losing perspective over Trump every where
I am not mad at Pat, really, I do get chair throwing angry, though, when I get accused of wanting to give Trump a pass,
MD in Philly (78e2df) — 1/14/2017 @ 3:26 pmBecause I don’t
But if that is assumed up front,
Then nothing we say is being heard.
Since this thing is unfettered and a lot of smart people read here I have a question about a sign I just saw.
“Fresh Alkaline Water Sold Here”
What’s up with that?
If it makes any difference this is in a high diabetes zone, if you know what I am saying.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 3:29 pmA technique used in difficult communication situations,
Imagine a ball
The person with the ball gets to talk
until they are finished
then they toss the ball to the other person.
The person with the ball now needs to first feed back what they think they just heard.
Slows things down,
Prevents misunderstanding,
So at least it is clear where the differences are.
Fwiw
MD in Philly (78e2df) — 1/14/2017 @ 3:32 pmI don’t care what any of you call me on this blog but if you don’t use your turn signals at least 97% of the time IRL I hate you and hope you get a real bad paper cut that really hurts. A lot.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:07 pm@409 Isn’t it interesting that Mr Steele feels the need to hide but not the need to stop talking. If we ever learn the truth about this it should be interesting.
Meanwhile US intel sources warn Israel against sharing secrets with Trump administration. So I wonder if Clapper and company also told Trump they were advising Israel that American intelligence “recommend(s) that until it is made clear that Trump is not inappropriately connected to Russia and is not being extorted – Israel should avoid revealing sensitive sources to administration officials for fear the information would reach the Iranians.”
@416 Hate me if you must. I can live with that…
crazy (d3b449) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:13 pmMD — I’m not intending to be condescending or demeaning, but let me add something to what DRJ has said during your back and forth.
I understand your POV that the “justice system” doesn’t do “justice”, and that too often it looks like lawyers are battling just for the sake of winning, and not for the sake of doing “justice.”
From a lawyer’s perspective, as one who has spent his legal career in courtrooms, in front of judges and juries (a very small percentage of lawyers actually do this), we participate in what is designed to be an “adversarial” system. It is supposed to involved a conflict and clash of views. It is not designed to be a collaborative search for the “truth.”
The system involves the government wanting to deprive a citizen of their liberty. The government has the burden of proving its reasons beyond a reasonable doubt. The “combative” nature of the courtroom proceedings is not simply because its an effort by both sides to “win”, the combative nature is designed to test the strength of the government’s case. It must stand up to scrutiny, and that’s why defense attorneys get away with a lot of what might seem to be questionable tactics. The government’s case must withstand the assault, before the government is allowed to send someone to jail.
What I appreciate now more than I did as a prosecutor, is that the cards are stacked against the defense. The prosecutor has the whole apparatus of the law enforcement community behind his efforts. A defendant has one person – his attorney – stress testing the government’s efforts.
Given the imbalance of resources, I understand much better now why defense attorneys resort to such combative tactics. If we didn’t, the entire system would list over to one side, and “testing” of the government’s case would become a sham exercise.
So, when two lawyers like Patrick and I go at it here, we are acting out the roles that we play in the adversarial system — we are not engaging in a collaborative effort to enlighten.
I certainly understand why other professions that don’t operate on that kind of dynamic are sometimes put-off by what they see as a “win at all costs” mentality.
But i will defend the Justice System of the US against all criticism on the basis of one primary fact — there has never been any place in the world that has developed or operated a better system.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:13 pmcrazy — from waht I understand in the reporting, there are two or three levels of analysis that are behind this warning to Israel to be cautious in sharing intel with the Trump admin.
The argument goes that Trump is in bed with Russia, and anything Israel shares is at risk of getting passed on even if its not for the benefit of Israel.
Next, since Russia is supporter of the Mullahs regime in Iran, Russia will likely pass along any Israeli intelligence to the Iranians which they think will be of use to the Iranians in their efforts to undermine the existence of a Jewish State.
This supposed “warning” is just dumbfounding coming from an Admin. that has sold out the Israeli state on an existential basis with its Iran nuke deal, and which recently sold out the current Israeli government by exposing them to potential claims in international court, including for potential war crimes charges in the International Criminal Court, on the basis that the UN has now been allowed to pass a resolution declaring the continued occupation of the West Bank to be in violation of international law.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:22 pm@shipwreckedcrew:This supposed “warning” is just dumbfounding coming from an Admin. that has sold out the Israeli state on an existential basis
I’m sure Israel can figure out who its friends are.
And I’m gobsmacked at the pettiness, and depth, of the corruption of the intelligence agencies, if this is true, that they would tell a friendly government not to share intelligence with the US so they can keep it away from Trump.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:27 pmIt reminds me of the Praetorian Guard that, for a while, considered that it had the power to make and unmake Emperors. Who the hell voted for anyone at those agencies? Why do they get a veto over the election? Who said they could have that?
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:29 pmSWC,
What a clarifying comment. If one operates under a dynamic in their professional life that is based more upon the inter-personal relationships and collaborative efforts in order to find answers, and find themselves in a debate situation where their opponent (for lack of a better word) operates in the fact-driven and impersonal adversarial setting, there is a far greater chance that the one who operates in a collaborative mode will likely take rebuttals and refutations as personal attacks, rather than as a dispassionate examination of the argument before them and simply going where the facts lead.
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:34 pmshipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 1:33 am
Because Trump was complainig about what was being said about it. Clapper emphasized “this was not an intelligence community product” and they never said it was reliable – Trump tried to claim he said it was false and fictitious – and that they had never relied on it on making any of their conclusions.
Here, somebody put a picture of Clapper’s sattement on Twitter:
https://mobile.twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/819520828505202688/photo/1 (It’s Trump :23 AM – 12 Jan 2017 tweet and then two tweets by Jordan Uhl the next minute or two.
Now Trump, seeking proof that people in the intelligence community do not believe this, has said something else about this:
https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/820257714362314753?p=v
This has brought reponses saying MAYBE IF WE DO MORE CAPS LOCK PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE YOU and that he seems to be the most triggered snowflake of all.
That doesn’t follow. But what does seem to be the truth is that only Comey discussed this on Jan. 6, and did it outside te briefing, which was, after all, about the hacking, not reports about him, and at that time may have said very little.
What’s bothering me is that Trump seems to be defaulting to the notion that political opponents made it up. I don’t think that’s how that happened. Russia made it up. Remember, they didn’t know that Christopher Steele was working for any Americans.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:36 pmAnd I would add to #422, that such a reaction would be reasonable, given the particulars. The key is being able to thoughtfully adjust the argument to reach said opponent (again, for lack of a better term ) and persuade to the point of agreement , or at the very least, an understanding. As soon as there is any bite involved,it becomes personal and the subject of the debate gets lost in the wound.
Dana (023079) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:41 pmThis is unclear. But Trump said, or seemed to say, he saw it before Buzzfeed published it. Biden also seems to have confirmed this, because it was mentioned or shown or given to Obama, Biden, Trump and Pence at least. Priebus did not see it.
Comey was one of the intelligence chiefs at the January 6 briefing. Trump said January 11 that he saw it outside of the briefing. But it cculd have been as or when the meeting was breaking up, or a separate meeting he requested..
Donald Trump sees this thing as a political hit job probably organized by somebody in the intelligence community. That person may have at least known about the fact a 2-page memo was produced about the dossier with the intention of showing it to Trump and Pence, but maybe didn’t gte right as to how it was comminucated. This production and handing over of the 2-page memo – maybe also the 35 pages – was the hook used to get the whole thing out in public.
It also came out with an implication that the material was true, or was very possibly true. What kind of promos did CNN use?
Ben Smith, the editor in Chief of BuzzFeed on Jan. 10, said “there is serious reason to doubt the allegations” and that’s what they said in their story. Did CNN do that? Or did they beat the drums for it? Trump could have real complaints against CNN. Or against whoever leked and spun it to CNN.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:47 pm414. http://www.livestrong.com/article/498701-what-are-the-benefits-of-drinking-alkaline-water/
Alkaline water has a pH between 7 and 9.5. The idea is that water has a Ph near 7, but blood plasma has a pH of approximately 7.4 so that is better. One problem with this is that the stomach has a pH of 1.5 to 3.5. Of course some people sometimes may want to neutralize the acid in their stomach.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/14/2017 @ 4:54 pmBen Smith was the editorial of politico, and a major player in the journolist, ocasdionally they practice random acts of journalism as with Ben Carson and the primaries and the reality of the dhs report (they didn’t examine the servers)
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:00 pm@419. Thank you shipwreckedcrew. My faith remains strong in the rank and file but I keep posting this stuff because I keep looking for information that implicates Trump and I keep finding things that appear to implicate the beltway leadership in a campaign of way more than dirty politics. This is a pretty low blow for any administration. This is a time for truth not smear and fear.
BTW, I meant it earlier when I noted you’d be great at filling the role Herb Meyer did for Bill Casey and Reagan.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:07 pmCome on guise, even levelheaded fellas like Kasey Kasem and Buddy Rich had the occasional outburst.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:18 pmNot to mention Mel torme, although my view of him was shaped by night court
narciso (d1f714) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:26 pmEvery fourth episode of The Big Valley, Heath would knock a guy away from alkali water.
The dudes with the funny glasses and bowties selling newspapers by the fresh alkaline water outlet must not be big fans of Lee Majors.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:27 pmshipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/13/2017 @ 1:30 pm
Trump said that was the (main) purpose of the call and he also said Clapper denounced “false and fictitious report that was illegally circulated”
Clapper’s failure to comment about the validity of it in his written statement means at least that doesn’t want to take a stand in public. It’s carefully written to avoid saying anything about its credibility. That can only be so as not to be arguing with some people – theer an be several different guesses as to who – who might maintain it possibly was true, or contained some truth. Did he then privately say to Trump that it was false? That’s almost double dealing.
It’s possible maybe that, under questioning, Clapper did reluctantly say to Trump that he personally thought it was false (without wanting to put his name, or the authority of IC, behind that opinion) and Trump then ran with it, and we do have to keep that possibility in mind.
.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:31 pm220. DRJ (15874d) — 1/13/2017 @ 8:20 pm
I think the CNN report was worse than the BuzzFeed report, because the BuzzFeed report said there is serious reason to doubt the allegations, but CNN said, as Shipwrecked said at #58
The import was that the Russians actually had blackmail material.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:32 pm@Dana: there is a far greater chance that the one who operates in a collaborative mode will likely take rebuttals and refutations as personal attacks, rather than as a dispassionate examination of the argument before them and simply going where the facts lead.
That may be the case, but it is also the case that sweeping statements mischaracterizing the views of most of them will be seen as personal attacks, and those sweeping statements then being described as reasoned rebuttal and dispassionate examination will be seen as a refusal to engage in good faith.
Just sayin’.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:34 pm@Dana: For example, what our esteemed host did twice in the last few days, where he posted a bunch of defenses, declared them all illegitimate, and dared his commenters to espouse one or more for his lulz, that was not “a dispassionate examination of the argument before them and simply going where the facts lead.” Or when he said “he criticized Trump, swarm him”. Or when he said he’s going to post nothing here but “Trump is awesome” and save his real posts for RedState.
That’s trolling one’s own commenters, pretty much. This is not Patterico’s usual mode and which is why I expressed concern for him and encoruaged him to rethink what it is he wants this blog to be. But whats it is not is rebuttal or refutation or passionate examination.
You’ve tarred us all with one brush too.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:38 pmOne problem with this is that the stomach has a pH of 1.5 to 3.5. Of course some people sometimes may want to neutralize the acid in their stomach
I read long ago that the best antacids are weak acids. They lower the overall acidity level. Adding alkalis reduces the volume of acid by combining with existing and producing a base: but the high Ph level of the remaining acid, and therefore the problem, is not changed.
Perhaps our doctor from Philly could comment.
Kishnevi (1a529d) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:43 pm@Kishnevi:Adding alkalis reduces the volume of acid by combining with existing and producing a base: but the high Ph level of the remaining acid, and therefore the problem, is not changed.
That’s not really true. The alkali will legitimately lower the pH but it will also produce gas of some kind.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:46 pmThe Western World In The 21st Century: Too many people, with too much disposable income, too much leisure time, and not enough sense.
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:49 pmThanks. I already have too much gas, don’t need more!
Kishnevi (1a529d) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:51 pm@Kishnevi: Even regular water might help. You can lower pH just through dilution.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:53 pmWell I guess you want to raise it! Either way, you’ll make it more neutral if you add enough water.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:53 pm@417 crazy
Do you drive a Beemer? I don’t think signals are a standard feature on them..
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:53 pm109. crazy (d3b449) — 1/13/2017 @ 9:05 am
IDK = I Don’t Know?
Which leaks are we talking about anyway? The 35 pages? Lots of people had that. BuzzFeed says that their Ken Bensinger got it. It doesn’t say when. BuzzFeed in fact, did not know that that was lay behind what Senate Harry Reid had claimed in October, and a report that intelligence agencies had delivered to the president and the president-elect. (which CNN had reported)
There’s another leak: About the report or briefing given to Obama and Trump (and some others) about the 35 pages. And then the spin it was given.
Shipwrecked described the (first?) CNN broadcast:
Shipwrecked states further:
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:54 pm433 — Sammy’s got it.
That’s the heart of my indictment of what CNN did in its report.
CNN took leaks on the “facts” involving Trump being briefed — many of which were wrong — and added to it that the motivation for telling Trump about the details of the 35 pages was to help him understand that by not releasing the videos during the campaign, the Russians showed their intention to help him get elected.
That claim includes an undeclared conclusion that the videos exist.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:57 pm@shipwreckedcrew:the Russians showed their intention to help him get elected.
If the Russians wanted to help him get elected, why did they tell all the lies to Steele in the first place? Wouldn’t Steele’s Russian contacts just not have said anything?
It doesn’t make sense even if you assume there is anything to it.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:59 pmWhat’s a little SO2 among friends?
Philadelphia Freedom was the name of Billie Jean King’s tennis team? DJ’s are a constant source of amazement.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:30 pm445 — Right now Gabriel I have no confidence in the claims with regard to where Steel got the info in his memos.
I’ve got a long long history of working in a field where much comes by way of “sources”. They all have motivations for wanting to tell what they claim to know, and the one overriding motive that applies in ALMOST every instance is a desire to disclose what it is they think the cop/agent/spy wants them to say. They are looking for the positive feedback and reinforcement, and affirmation of their importance.
That desire VERY OFTEN overrides any compunction they might feel for fudging or providing outright falsehoods.
When I see in writing something like “Well he’s had reliable sources in the past”, my reaction has always been, “I’m not working in the past, I want to know about the reliability of the source he’s proffering to me right now.”
Without solid information on the reliability of the sources that told Steel about the existence of videos, his memos are worthless. The historical evaluation of his sources in the past is meaningless unless its the same source.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:30 pmGowdy has been assigned as a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence in the new Congress.
elissa (23a154) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:44 pm@443. Sammy, it was an old television trick and seasoned TV execs know what CNN was up to. They’ve been using it for a while now– to build audiences. That video clip is just a microcosm of their rolling coverage through prime time and into the wee hours up to the Trump presser. (Unfortunately, our family was in situation tending to an elder relative where CNN was on in the room from start of this into the morning hours so we literally sat through the whole episode as background noise.) CNN’s on air talent mulled, conjectured and speculated over and over for hours into prime time and beyond… and it was all about hype. And the suits knew Trump would have to address their report. Instead, he literally boxed the ears of their reporter on global television, and put them on the defensive tossing chaff for days. This was not an episode ‘breaking news.’ It was an effort to build a television audience– and it’s a ‘MO’ CNN suits have been using now for a while. It’s infotainment; sensationalism, not journalism.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:44 pmI’ve heard that some MMA fighters drink distilled water to cut weight faster but that doesn’t sound like a good idea.
Pinandpuller (14dead) — 1/14/2017 @ 6:51 pmGabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 5:59 pm
Because they thought he was working for somebody British!
They wanted the British to distrust the Americans, just like some people now wanted the Israelis to.
That doesn’t mean these U.S. intel sources the Ynet story linked to by crazy @417 are working for the Russians. They are probably working for some other foreign entity that wants to split the U.S. away from Israel or they are just trying to make things not work during a Trump Administration.
Another possible reason for feeding Steele disinformation is that perhaps he had discovered something real, and they wanted to turn all his reporting into garbage.
It has also been offered as a reason that indeed Putin not trying to elect Trump, but rather just to divide people.
It has been said (by nk among others) that Steele wasn’t at all interested in the truth – he was being paid for dirt – but inventing it out of whle cloth is a whole other story. He was paying Russians but he wantes something that could stand up.
And he seems to have personally believed. To Steele, not so familiar with American media, maybe it sounded credible that Donald Trump so hated Barack Obama that he wanted to put urine on a bed that Obama had slept in (but unwilling to do so himself, had hired some prostitutes for that purpose)
although this may not have sounded so credible to the folks at Fusion GPS because they knew that Trump didn’t personally hate Obama that way, nor had ever done that in a hotel. You would also thik that Trump would expect a bill or a complaint. He’s not a spoiled Saudi Arabian prince.
Maybe they went to Harry Reid and aaked him what to do with it.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:19 pm@PinandpullerI’ve heard that some MMA fighters drink distilled water to cut weight faster but that doesn’t sound like a good idea.
Distilled water is cheap and boring but otherwise harmless. Don’t see how it would affect weight except maybe in the very short term.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:20 pm@Sammy:Because they thought he was working for somebody British!
And British people don’t talk to Americans? That’s kind of reaching, don’t you think?
If I want to conceal information, I don’t generally do so by TELLING EVERYONE.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:21 pmWe give distilled water to newborns.
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:36 pmGabriel: And British people don’t talk to Americans? That’s kind of reaching, don’t you think?
They would probably thoroughly digest it first, and even if some Americans were told, it would never become public and wouldn’t affect the election.
So both things – releasing anti-Hillary marerial to get Americans to vote for Trump, and convincing MI-6, or important British members of the Conservative Party, or whoever Steelews working for, that Trump could not be trusted, could be tried at the same time.
The second goal would only matter if the first was achieved. It didn’t really interfere with the first, and would make the election of a President Trump so much more valuable to Russia.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:36 pm@Sammy:it would never become public
Prostitutes peeing on Obama’s bed? People are going to keep that secret?
I think you are working to hard to see something in this.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:51 pmNor will adding alkalis change the underlying biological processes that created the high acidity in the first place. Whatever those processes were, they probably did not create the high acidity because the acidity was already high. Positive feedback like that, particularly in respect to such high acidity levels, would seem to be contrary to the preservation of life. However, lowering the pH might serve as a trigger for those processes to increase their activity. Just speculating. Don’t test my hypothesis at home. But don’t do something else contrary to these thoughts without understanding why they are inappropriate.
I’m on my third cardiologist, and I’m learning that what passes for modern medicine isn’t all that one might hope.
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:56 pmSWC
I appreciate your comments,
And I have great respect for good lawyers.
I believe the difference between a legal system and justice system is one I learned here, and I recall it being generally agreed upon at the time, maybe I am wrong.
Believe me, docs can get their egos involved and do nothing like what I described as the ideal. I once was in almost a yelling match with a boss in the middle of an ICU once.
I respect the lawyers here, and my oldest is a Philly detective, after going through the Philly police academy and being an officer on the street for several years.
That said, my personal experience with the legal system has been disappointing.
I was a juror once, the defense attorney lied during the trial, some of the jurors were strongly biased against the police and introduced racial tension into the proceedings.
I was a witness once in a mugging, where again I left with no respect for the defense lawyer.
I saw the lives of five innocent families put through h*** by multiple lawyers pressing a SLAPP suit, Including one family losing their house.
I watched the person who pressed the SLAPP suite wiggle out of a 50+ federal indictment that was brought because of what was exposed by those five families.
I watched my two sons be demeaned and intimidated in a local court for a bogus disorderly conduct charge, only to have the charges laughed out of court when it reached the county courthouse with an attorney representing them.
So, while I can believe the US has the best legal system in the world,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:57 pmI feel like David in the Psalms, that there is no one I can trust to defend me before my enemies other than the Lord. I do not have the money or connections that I have seen come to assist the guilty and wicked.
About alkaline water,
Living things have tremendous investment in maintaining body pH within a narrow range; enzyme function, i.e., everything your body “does”, is highly dependent on pH.
I have not looked into it, and do not intend to.
And yes, “lower pH” means more acidic. Alkali raises pH, lowers acidity.
And yes, as Bob says, changing one thing in a biological system and expecting the effect to be simple and direct, is more naive than thinking a tax hike will raise tax revenue and have no other impact on the economy.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:09 pmFair comment MD.
While I think its the best system ever created, I can’t argue the point that it has a ton of flaws, one of the most significant of which is that it allows way too much nonsense to go one without sanction.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:17 pmDoc, thank you for understanding what I was trying to say … and fixing it so it made sense. Dealing with symptoms without understanding the processes involved leads to leaches and bloodletting, in political … as well as biological … systems. As Mr. Lewis so clearly demonstrates.
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:22 pmOne small additional point to MD.
What I described in my message to you above was the way the “criminal” justice system works.
Many of your complaints — not all — but many are found within the “civil” justice system.
I’m much less proud of how the civil justice system functions. It tolerates far too much destructive behavior, and doesn’t punish malicious conduct of the litigants nearly often enough.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:23 pmI forgot to say,
the main weakness of the US judicial system is the same as with the rest of our government,
it was designed to work for a people with a sufficient amount of civic virtue, that the number of scoundrels would be few, and responsible self government would be the norm, not the exception.
If that is not the case, and government tries to/needs to do what culture should largely do,
we get chaos or tyranny or both.
Case in point, the amount of virtue and responsible self governance in our press is greatly wanting.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:25 pmMD, SWC, excellent exchanges. It is a pleasure to listen to the two of you.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:30 pmThank you for the exchange, SWC.
In some ways we should not need to have a system that assumes no one learned anything in kindergarten, like don’t take more than your fair share of cookies, and don’t tell lies, and don’t cheat and don’t take advantage of people under your control….
Well, that last one is a bit later than kindergarten,
Like first grade.my pleasure, bob.
Good night, moon.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:31 pmAnd DRJ, again, we’re fine.
edifying, even.
felipe (023cc9) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:31 pmThis, too, is edifying:
WESTMORELAND: O that we now had here
But one ten thousand of those men in England
That do no work to-day!
KING Harry: What’s he that wishes so?
felipe (023cc9) — 1/14/2017 @ 8:43 pmMy cousin, Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin;
If we are mark’d to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God’s will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England.
God’s peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more methinks would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man’s company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is call’d the feast of Crispian.
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam’d,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say “To-morrow is Saint Crispian.”
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say “These wounds I had on Crispin’s day.”
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he’ll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words—
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester—
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb’red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs’d they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.
Fair fa’ your honest, sonsie face,
Great chieftain o’ the pudding-race!
Aboon them a’ yet tak your place,
Painch, tripe, or thairm:
Weel are ye wordy o’a grace
As lang’s my arm.
The groaning trencher there ye fill,
Your hurdies like a distant hill,
Your pin was help to mend a mill
In time o’need,
While thro’ your pores the dews distil
Like amber bead.
His knife see rustic Labour dight,
An’ cut you up wi’ ready sleight,
Trenching your gushing entrails bright,
Like ony ditch;
And then, O what a glorious sight,
Warm-reekin’, rich!
Then, horn for horn, they stretch an’ strive:
Deil tak the hindmost! on they drive,
Till a’ their weel-swall’d kytes belyve
Are bent like drums;
Then auld Guidman, maist like to rive,
Bethankit! hums.
Is there that owre his French ragout
Or olio that wad staw a sow,
Or fricassee wad make her spew
Wi’ perfect sconner,
Looks down wi’ sneering, scornfu’ view
On sic a dinner?
Poor devil! see him owre his trash,
As feckles as wither’d rash,
His spindle shank, a guid whip-lash;
His nieve a nit;
Thro’ blody flood or field to dash,
O how unfit!
But mark the Rustic, haggis-fed,
The trembling earth resounds his tread.
Clap in his walie nieve a blade,
He’ll mak it whissle;
An’ legs an’ arms, an’ hands will sned,
Like taps o’ trissle.
Ye Pow’rs, wha mak mankind your care,
And dish them out their bill o’ fare,
Auld Scotland wants nae skinking ware
That jaups in luggies;
But, if ye wish her gratefu’ prayer
Gie her a haggis!
http://www.robertburns.org/works/147.shtml
nk (dbc370) — 1/14/2017 @ 9:53 pmNo link required. But what do I know?
felipe (023cc9) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:06 pm@454 nk
I was led to believe that Windex was your people’s go to liquid.
Pinandpuller (c215da) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:45 pmRick Ballard- regarding Obama supposedly dismissing the reports as cover.
Yeah, I’m with you on that. Obama’s MO throughout the transition seems to be: Public kindness and generosity toward Trump, behind the scenes doing things Obama’s always wanted to do (the UN vote on Israel, the change in Cuba policy, the ban on oil drilling, all the new regulations, etc).
Biden really shouldn’t be talking about the briefings at all, right? I thought that was the deal- these briefings are sacred and secret. Yet here is Biden just when the admin(and press) needs him, confirming what they got in the briefing and making themselves look magnanimous.
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/15/2017 @ 3:45 am@Sammy:it would never become public
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:51 pm
The British have an Official Secrets Act, and they may have bene led to beleive that Christopher steele still worked for the British government and was not a private eye.
Besides that, if it leaked, and was published in one of the British newspapers, it would not really be belived and would not impact the election.
I think this is much more likely than Steele, or the people who hired him, making it up, or getting it from sources who would not be in a position to know.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:05 amMD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/14/2017 @ 7:57 pm
He’s allowed to lie and mislead, but not to put a witness whose tetsimony he knows to be false on the stand (which is why it is almost a principle with them not to put defendants on the stand, which seems to carry over even when the defendant will tell the truth.
But some defense lawyers will put on false testimony anyway, but they are taking chances – maybe remote chances, but chances, with thousands and thousands of dollars at stake. The ones who put on false testimony probably do this a lot.
Here I would wonder if the juror was being paid off, or had some conflict of interest. If he was being paid off, the instructions to him, and any others seleceted for the case, would be not to be the only one(s) to vote not guilty, but they have to convince some real impartial ones.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:13 am@454 nk
I was led to believe that Windex was your people’s go to liquid.
Pinandpuller (c215da) — 1/14/2017 @ 10:45 pm
=======================================
Cheeseburger no coke, Pepsi!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:55 amMayBee,
Playing cui bono on this one is easier than Plame sending Wilson to Niger. The Chicago gutter trash floats out as he floated in.
Rick Ballard (1c290b) — 1/15/2017 @ 8:15 am#474
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/15/2017 @ 8:16 amWe dance!
One interesting thing about the disinformation is that it looks like it could have been designed to be taken back, in case it backfired.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/russians-named-in-trump-dossier-dismiss-claims-1484256122
The man named in the dossier as dossier as a “hacking expert, who had bene involved in plans to “transmit viruses, plant bugs, steal data and conduct ‘altering operations’ ” (nice technica vocabulary) whio had approval at the highest level, was Aleksej Gubarev, the chief executive of XBT Holding and an investor in Prisma, a smartphone application. He said he hasd not lived in Russia in 15 years. He now lives in Cyprus.
Another man, of whom it was said he facilitated contact between the Kremlin and a lawyer for Trump, Michael Cohen, in the Czech Republic last year, Konstantin Kosachev, is described as being a member of Russia’s lower house of parliament, when he’s actually a member of the Upper House.
Not to mention the “other” Michael Cohen, which, if it wasn’t just made up at the last minute, would indicate a defense in depth of its credibility.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 9:04 am“ANDREW KLAVAN’S STRANGE NEW TRUMPIAN GLEE:
Look, I don’t care if the Trump fan-bots rail against me, Trump is an unreliable chap, to put it mildly. He doesn’t know what he doesn’t know and he throws away his promises too easily and a lot of his instincts are leftist in the worst way. Everything he’s done so far could be scuttled on the rock of his personality.
But that hasn’t happened yet and every day is another day. And today, after eight years of a dishonest, undemocratic, anti-American scold in the White House, I am feeling gleeful. Almost pretty. Okay, gleeful.
He’s far from alone; the left’s psychotic post-election meltdown – after years of promising “a new civility” and demanding the same of Trump voters had Hillary won — has done much to remind reluctant Trump supporters why they voted for him.”
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/254604/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/15/2017 @ 9:34 amCan someone explain to me what the possible profssional reasons could be why this man’s girlfriend didn’t marry him (and they didn’t have children) until his conviction for illegal voting was overturned?
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/man-brooklyn-junk-justice-article-1.2946139
I knew that Hynes wa sno good ever since I read how he bungled, if that is the word, the prosecution of Lemrick Nelson for murdering Yankel Rosenbaum. (It was the proseuction who put on some lying witnesses, in addition to not exposing perjury on the other side.)
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 10:00 amI don’t think we’ve heard anything about the “other” Michael Cohen since Wednesday, nor has this been explained.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 10:23 amhttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/12/intelligence-sources-vouch-credibility-donald-trump-russia-dossier-author
Vladimir Putin and company could easily have thought he was still part of MI6, or doing work for them, and he might also have given that impression. This would mean it would not be passed on to any Americans, except by a decision made at the highest levels, because of the Official Secrets Act (which did not in fact apply, because he was NOT working for MI6.)
So he used the same sources he used when he was at MI6 – some of whom at least might have been turned. That this was MI6 asking would have bene a reasonable assumption for Putin to have.
Too many names and sources means it couldn’t just be made up, unless the whole thing was just made up, and means the disinformation had to come right from the top. but of course it could be (mostly) a disinformation exercise. But a well planned one.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 10:43 amSteele seems to have really beleived the aterial he had:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-russia-dossier-file-investigation-hacking-christopher-steele-mi6-a7526901.html
has he Independent forgotten tahtthe DNC said it was Russia. It was so public trump was asked about it.
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 11:01 amhttp://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ex-mi6-spy-troubed-findings-trump-worked-free-article-1.2946322
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 11:05 amUpdated: Saturday, January 14, 2017, 8:27 AM
NBC: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/christopher-steele-trump-dossier-author-real-life-james-bond-n706376
He seems to have defenders (or at least Nigel West) now claiming that he doesn’t necessarily believe that, but the favorable interpretation of his acts is that he did. Note that this article describes Litvinenko as a British agent. An informant maybe, and someone granted political asylum in Great Britain, but an agent??
There’s another thing. What is this that Trump says that Steele was afraid of being sued? What does hat mean and where does that come from?
Sammy Finkelman (8a20da) — 1/15/2017 @ 11:13 amBuzzfeed’s Editor confirms it was CNN’s handling of the claims in their reporting which Buzzfeed took as a foundation to publish the 35 pages of memos. ON Reliable Sources today, Buzzfeed’s Editor-In-Chief Ben Smith:
Gee, isn’t that exactly what SWC wrote about this whole affair 48 hours ago, in taking down CNN’s decision to run with the story???
Because CNN’s story included within it an unstated conclusion that the compromising material actually existed — even if they didn’t describe it — when that was not known to be factually accurate.
Other than that, and getting wrong who did the briefing and the circumstances, and other than what the content of the actual intel briefing by the 4 IC Chief’s involved, CNN NAILED IT!!!!!!
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/15/2017 @ 3:37 pmCan’t decide whether to shake my head in disgust, or have a good belly-laugh. Maybe both?
“THE MAN WHO LOST THE DEMOCRATS A THOUSAND ELECTIONS SAYS HIS WORK ISN’T FINISHED: Obama and His Movement Prepare to Challenge President Trump. And despite all the puffery packed into this NBC story, the conclusion is what matters: “The Democrats’ huge losses in terms of state legislative, gubernatorial and congressional seats during Obama’s eight years in office may reduce his credibility in telling party leaders what to do in the future.”
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/254632/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/15/2017 @ 4:05 pm
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/15/2017 @ 4:09 pmThisTHAT is CNNMy friend on the beltway notes how silly this while thing was,
narciso (d1f714) — 1/15/2017 @ 4:12 pmDonald Trump tweets today about this:
Bob Woodward said the way this should have been communicated (if it was decided to pass it on) is that it should have been handed to the White House counsel, who, in turn, should have turned it over to the person Donald Trump selects as his White Hu=ouse counsel. He said in 45 years he received things and this is a garbage document. He was talking about the 35 or 36 pages, I think, which may or may not have been handed to Donald Trump by the FBI. Comey may have left behind only the 2-page summary.
One response on Twitter to Trump noted that the only paper (not quite correct) to endorse him was known for journalistic excellence– THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER (And he took up that story about Ted Cruz’ father – only for one day, but he did)
It was some sort of private eye who chose his clients who came up with that one.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/15/2017 @ 5:58 pmLater:
John Brennan said that Donald Trump was not yet fully informed.
The obvious question is, isn’t he supposed to be briefing him, or trying to? Maybe he’s making up an excuse for Trump.
Anyway, Trump’s now focusing on Brennan as the possible leaker or spinner, maybe because he felt this comment was dishonest.
By the way, Trump seems to be showing better understanding of what Russia did than he has done I think, heretofore.
about that…Those Intelligence chiefs made a mistake here, & when people make mistakes, they should APOLOGIZE.” Media should also apologize
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:04 pm12:13 PM – 15 Jan 2017
There is this, as well:
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:08 pmhttp://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/01/dishonest-cia-director-rips-trump-trump-should-rip-him-back.php
Brennan is just another thronesniffer. Pompeo has his work cut out for him.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:09 pmI never realized John Brennan was such an idiot.
From his interview with Fox News Today:
ASSUME!?!?!?!?! You fooking moron — it was people from the IC that LEAKED THE STORY to CNN!!!!!!!
Alternatives:
1) Trump’s people leaked it. Only problem with that is Trump went to war with CNN over leak, and if Trump’s folks had leaked it, CNN would have probably defended itself differently.
2. IC people leaked it. In which case Brennan’s comment brands him a moron – not figuratively.
3. CNN made it up. Not ready just yet to fully dismiss the possibility.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:23 pmI forgot to consider one other alternative:
Brennan directed the leakers to give out bad information.
Not sure why he would, but abnormal brains do abnormal things.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:25 pmHe may not be able to tell the difference, that the best case scenario.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:31 pmCNN predicts they will get their asses kicked by Trump supporters. They are outraged!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a5b3Um5Ofs&ebc=ANyPxKrwrjKMyfMe3XPyaxFoV2aEAzX6LYUmhJ9k4u2QvylY-s3ZkFm_-76T8S47Y-IJgsqe4gKA
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:34 pmI didn’t even realize the sheer idiocy of his last comment from the quote:
“… to make sure that there was going to be no evaluation of it, but just making sure that the president-elect was aware that it was circulating.”
Huh???? You want to revise and extend your remarks??
What about:
1. Waiting 2 months just to advise him of it.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:36 pm2. Really had no intention to attempt to evalute the info???
3. I thought the fact that they didn’t release the info was evidence of Russian favoritism?
The guy’s background sort of shouts “Peter Principle”.
Was interested in a CIA career while at Fordham.
Learned Arabic and Middle Eastern Studies.
Took a CIA job as an analyst working on Middle Eastern and South Asian issues.
Rose to the level of being one of Clinton’s Daily Briefers.
In the late 90s he was promoted to Chief of Station, including in Saudi Arabia. Being a fluent Arabic speaker probably pushed his career along more than being bright about anything.
The drug up through the management ranks of the CIA by George Tenet.
I can’t find any indication of accomplishment in his career that would suggest he was really good at anything.
I blame Patreaus — if he could have kept his little head in his pants, he’d still be the CIA Director and much of this crap would not be happening.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:44 pmSWC,
Are you coming to the conclusion that all of this appears to be a calculated move by US Intel to undermine the president elect,
And may not only appear to be that,
But is?
I know long ago and far away Porter Gauss (sp?) was supposed to clean up the place,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:46 pmBut I guess gave up trying??? What happened there?
Well all the Sunday show hosts and guests managed to keep the whole sordid fake story in the news cycle for one more day. Winning!!!
elissa (7d8dcb) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:48 pmThey may have thought that, but it makes the ic look ridiculous and throws shade on the uk, so cui bono?
narciso (d1f714) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:51 pmSWC, Sammy does not attempt to relate written word to reality. It is both a strength, and a weakness. In court proceedings, the written word is, almost by definition, reality. Everywhere else it is just spin.
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:01 pmIn answer to your question, md, Goss was buried under a sea of leaks to all the usual suspect’s (mayer, priest, shane, braven)
narciso (d1f714) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:09 pmEveryone must do their part, elissa.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:12 pmSo, he lost in the power struggle to reform it?
In the short run it is so much easier to make an impact with lying and treachery,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:14 pmespecially when people want to enable it,
Where there is greed and selfish ambition every vile practice will follow.
Lots of serpents, not too much innocence.
Goss was of the old line brahmin caste, that believed in sportsmanship, you would think a decade in the cia would have dissabused him of that.
Pompeo is much more selfmade and as such owes no institutional ties.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:23 pmAs well documented, there is much that I dislike about Trump,
but as also well documented,
his general approach to never let others determine the narrative certainly has been fruitful.
I wonder if the new director of the CIA, etc., and Congressional committee members should start doing preemptive strikes against the people who are troublemakers,
or just go straight to the people and hammer on the truth,
say that while they do not meet the criteria for treason,
that in fact they are undermining the integrity of the government they had taken an oath to serve.
I guess that is what he has done already to some degree.
Question, I believe there are onerous regulations that would make it difficult to fire a lot of the entrenched workers in these various agencies who are more into serving themselves than the country and/or the president,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:26 pmcan such people just have all of their responsibilities be taken away and given to someone else and be given the same pay and benefits while assigned to some meaningless post in rural Mississippi, or Nome, Alaska?
I have no idea how grounded in reality this part of the story is, but in the movie “Wilberforce” one character says he learned how to “win like a lawyer”, and cheat, (or something like like, sorry and not to offend my lawyerly friends of virtue)
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:31 pmand then created a diversion to get many of the opposition parliament members out of town on a crucial vote on a motion that looked innocuous, but was really the beginning of the death of the slave trade.
Legalism is not as important as the goal.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/15/2017 @ 7:45 pm… or Jalalabad, Afghanistan.
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/15/2017 @ 8:23 pmOh good gravy the head of mi6 used info from that dossier, Mr beans starts to look plausible.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/15/2017 @ 8:26 pmSTELTER: — this was a topic briefed to the president-elect and that’s was the news was.
SMITH: The headline you put up was claims he was compromised by Russian intelligence.
Gee, isn’t that exactly what SWC wrote about this whole affair 48 hours ago, in taking down CNN’s decision to run with the story???
And about 48 hours after it pegged it for what it is: showbiz, kids.
Infotainment. Sensationalism. A TV gimmick used by suits to build an audience being peddled as journalism.
And this story is very, very stale bread now. Fresh loaves are being pinched off in tweets for the newsbeat. Stay tuned! CNN needs that audience.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 1/15/2017 @ 8:45 pmYes it’s all fun at the ministry of silly walks until someone gets killed because a really important but of info was left out of the briefing.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/15/2017 @ 8:50 pm@498 Don’t forget voted for Gus Hall (CPUSA) in ’76 which surfaced during his CIA hiring in 1980 on the “workded with/for groups dedicated to overthrowing the govt question. He told the polygrapher it was his way of fighting the system and for change. As he said to the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s annual conference last September:
Just the kind of guy that should be at the helm of the CIA.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/15/2017 @ 9:03 pmClarice is ON it. This is the article you pass on to any of your friends or relatives who are still on the fence about this idiocy. She thinks there is still more ugliness to come out, too.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/the_trump_dossier_puts_the_deep_state_in_deep_doodoo.html
elissa (7d8dcb) — 1/15/2017 @ 10:20 pmClarice is great.
Brennan has always been odd to me.
The first I heard about him was this story:
“On Friday, the department revealed that Obama’s passport file was improperly accessed three times this year, and the security of passport files of the two other major presidential candidates — Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain — had also been breached.”
That, at first was reported as breaking news by a distraught Keith Olbermann when it was thought it was only Obama’s records that had been breached.
It always seemed so weird that the guy was rewarded when someone from his company did that- or at least that Obama didn’t seem to care. My guess was that Obama had wanted to know what the State Department had in his passport files.
Brennan has been steadfastly loyal to Obama, and quick to the microphones to praise him.
And who can forget when we gave away a British Intelligence asset so Brennan could give Obama credit for foiling an underwear bombing plot:
But now thanks to Clarke, who was briefed by White House aide Brennan, and King, who also claims to have been briefed by the White House, the world learned that the underwear bomber plot had been undone by a double agent inside al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. …
maintained that the double agent held a British passport and that multiple “security services” had participated in the operation, including that of Saudi Arabia. Reuters (“British played central role in foiled bomb operation: sources,” May 10) gave British intelligence services MI5 and MI6 “a central role” in the operation. (MI5 is the U.K.’s domestic security agency. MI6 is its CIA equivalent.) The Telegraph (“British secret agent was al-Qaeda mole who cracked new ‘underpants’ bomb plot,” May 10) reported that the double agent was recruited by MI5 and MI6, and worked with the Saudis on the operation.
London wasn’t thrilled by our leaking about this, but Obama didn’t do anything publicly to chastise Brennan.
Brennan and Obama have been very loyal to each other, and Brennan is a bragger. I would certainly suspect him for this leak as well.
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/16/2017 @ 3:07 amI’m also guessing Brennan has no love for Gen Flynn, who got ISIS right at the very time Brennan and Obama were trying to pretend al Qaeda was on the run for the 2012 elections.
MayBee (a7822d) — 1/16/2017 @ 3:11 amBrennan’s the turdwipe what voted for the actual honest to God commie in ’76 over Jimmy Carter
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/16/2017 @ 4:43 amhttp://ace.mu.nu/archives/obama-4.jpg
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/16/2017 @ 5:41 am515… but… but… CNN… NBC!!!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/16/2017 @ 5:43 amAh yes maybes I wrote a whole series of posts on that story, they blamed it on an fbi consultant, who couldn’t have possibly known the agents identity.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 5:55 amThe streetwise professor who is a mold mannered business professor by day, has further unraveled this kerfluffle,
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 6:05 amOf course you would need to know something about how the oil business works in russia, which apparently the head of mi6 is clueless about.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 6:09 amThe next question is was Brennan’s leak unauthorized and criminal or authorized and legal?
crazy (d3b449) — 1/16/2017 @ 6:31 amWell Obama probably authorized it, and it was full of lies so.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 6:33 am“Instant Declassification.” See page 11 et seq. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS21900.pdf
nk (dbc370) — 1/16/2017 @ 6:49 amScooter Libby got f***ed over because the Shrub did not want to risk his reelection by ratifying Cheney buttboy Richard Armitage’s leak and the thing snowballed. There’s where the blame lies, not USA Fitzgerald.
nk (dbc370) — 1/16/2017 @ 6:55 amBut Armitage was an opponent of the war, as was Novak,the truth is val was entering in foggy bottoms Intel shop,
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:00 amFits always played favorites Armitage over Libby, radler over Conrad black.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:02 amAnd comey was the one that kept the game going.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:04 amIf one keeps an eye on the ball, this a proxy /war over the control of intelligence, as the treehouse points out.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:06 amFrom page 16 of the above pdf:
As a practical matter, however, there is little to stop agency heads and other high-ranking officials from releasing classified information to persons without a security clearance when it is seen as suiting government needs. The Attorney General has prosecutorial discretion to choose which leaks to prosecute. If in fact a case can be made that a senior official has made or authorized the disclosure of classified information, successful prosecution under current laws may be impossible because the scienter requirement (i.e., guilty state of mind) is not likely to be met. The Espionage Act of 1917, for example, requires proof that the discloser has the intent or reason to believe the information will be used against the United States or to the benefit of a foreign nation.7
It was all about politics and appearance.
nk (dbc370) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:10 amSo did holder choose to prosecute, sterling who revealed the too clever by half trick the Iranians saw through, kirikaou who should
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:23 amD have been hanged for revealing the names of his fellow operaTives
So whose influence campaign is damaging American democracy? Putin’s attempt to feed allied and American intel services kompromat on Trump or the beltway brainiacs who are confident they can leak like a sieve because it suits “government needs” and the difficulty in establishing a guilty state of mind?
crazy (d3b449) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:26 amOddly very few seem to ask that question, the answer is both.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:30 amIt’s all about taking the wind out of Trump’s sails. Not to mention putting some sandbars, shoals, reefs, and mines in his way. Why? So as much as possible of Obama’s “Change” will survive.
nk (dbc370) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:31 amWhen did that realization dawn on you?
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:33 amLol
Colonel Haiku (6c3d91) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:36 amWhat we’ve gotten away from is why they did, not what cover story they used, and which squirrel they let loose.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:42 amBow NATO is obsolete it can’t protect their own headquarters, Germany practices with outdated aircraft and broomhandles, they would be no match for the Russians if they really decided to push forward
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:47 amI think nk’s comment has something to do with the need for men and women of character and wisdom to repeat the obvious in times of mass hysteria are lunacy.
Or something to that effect.
Bush had a degree of truce in the beginning because he was happy to work with Kennedy on a major education bill,
and then for a short time after 9/11
Then dissent being patriotic and participatory democracy took over.
I must admit,
I,
even I,
Limited my gaze to the fury of the Dem character assassination to the time of the campaign,
Not the aftermath.
They must have been so sure of themselves that they didn’t bother to try hard.
Until the next Dem gets the presidency,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:00 amOr the mass of the public wakes up and laughs at the media,
Everything will be like the national enquirer,
“Trump gets economic plans from space aliens!!!!!”
And meaningful discussion about anything will be lost amidst the shouting.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:02 amWe know how unserious the Barack Administration is about “hacking” based on the punitive actions they didn’t take against China vis a vis the OBM disaster a couple years ago.
Barack is the captain of the JV team!
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:04 amThe Espionage Act of 1917, for example, requires proof that the discloser has the intent or reason to believe the information will be used against the United States or to the benefit of a foreign nation.
Or he was paid to do it. If somebody is in the service of a foreign power, then he doesn’t need to believe disclosure of the information will be harmful to the United States.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:05 amIts a wonder what they expect us to forget, not only that but the hacking of the exchanges, the fact the drawdown on missile defense in eastern Europe.
narciso (d1f714) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:14 amI wanted Obama for President less than I wanted Trump. I voted for Hillary in the Illinois primary in 2008, for all the good it did.
nk (dbc370) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:16 amBut narciso….
Which is worse,
That they expect us to forget,
Or that so many do?
Maybe someone should start a carton named Orwell, and point out various things in every day life that are illustrations of what he was talking about.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:19 amThat woman has a lot to answer for.
nk (dbc370) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:19 amOk, we can forgive her putting Billy in the White House. He is her husband.
But then she put Obama in the White House.
And now she put Trump in the White House, although that also can be considered a consequence of Obama.
@539. They blew up Trump’s transition. Everybody’s either investigating or under investigation for the next year while Congress and the IC pushes for more control and weaponization of cyberspace.
It’s been awhile, but when the IC worked behind closed doors, appeared in Congressional closed hearings only and stayed out of the media we didn’t have these problems. Let’s try that again. Policy makers not intelligence officials should be doing the talking. Intelligence officials should be producing and protecting intel not blabbing it to anyone who’ll listen.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:21 amMaybe we could crowd write it right here,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:21 amnarciso and nk @545 and 546. I think we’re in the wrong thread here. DSoesn’t this belong in “RedState Post..” where nk mentioned @11 that Donald Trump wants people to forget that the only reason he’s not president is that he’s not Hillary? (and I said the Democrats want us to forget that too, maybe more than Trump.
They’re going with the idea that Hillary was unfairly maligned, both by Putin and by FBI Director Comey.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:22 am550. MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:21 am
What? The replacement for Obamacare?
Isn’t this also from the other thread?
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:24 amBob had the right idea last night,
The senior leadership in all of the Intel services have lost touch,
If they ever had it,
With the work in the field,
Everybody reassigned to active outposts.
If they want to see what Russia is doing,
Let them see it up close,
Etc.
Can you say Benghazi?
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:26 amYeah, put the senior people into those positions.
When a thread goes over 500 comments, everything’s fair game, Sammy. When the thread’s about Trump, even the first comment might be off topic.
nk (dbc370) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:27 amNo, Sammy,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:29 amRead along
The new political cartoon called Orwell
Russia has always been a threat,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:31 amObama always said so.
How many fingers am I holding up???
If somebody doesn’t use their refundable tax credit, part if it wld expire after two years, or maybe part after ne year and the rest after two years. That’s all you need to do to take care of the worry about someone saving and not spending up his health care budget. The issue goes away and there’s no need to require anyone healthy to carry insurance.
Let’s also add that, for a period after the end of two years, a person could spend the expiring or expired tax credit money for medical gift cards, usable either by that person or another, entitling him to a certain number of doctor visits etc. Or MRI’s or X-Rays or medical tests, but it would be better for any such gift cards to cover a variety of things, and .or maybe even be exchangable to alimited degree.
A medical practice would also be limited in the number of gift cards they could sell, so they don’t wind up, after five or ten years, owing care they can’t afford to fulfill.
With prescriotion drug prices you realy have the problem of what are you trying to do. Drug makers are granted patents, and they are supposed to make the money back that way, that was needed to get it approved and to research it and do all their research. Much more now is spent on drug approval than aon any genuone research. Now it costs too much to get a drug approved, and it is starting to cost way to much just to get approval to continue to manufacture a drug, or to start. Just the quality and safety regulation.
Drug manufacturing companies with good track records, absent special information – and you need to be careful that nobody is maliciously making accusations – should be given a presumption of safety.
I would also allow interested people to pay for the approval of drugs whose patents they do not own, or hat are unpatenatable and get something. I would also buy up some patents.
Because there will be spot shortages, there is also a need for the ability to pay premium prices, but there needs to be a financial incentive to avoid that.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:40 amOrwell would cover mis-use of language?
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:42 amMD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/15/2017 @ 6:46 pm
Oh, yes that’s right. David Petraeus was the second CIA Director the career people there got rid of. (In Petraeus’ case, my theory is by causing Jill Kelley to try to frame Paula Broadwell in order so that the FBI would discover that Petraeus had a mistress, because they’d only found that out illegally, by scrutinizing his communications out of Langley for something besides the presence of classified information. Nobody was supposed to tell anyone about anything else. Taht was in 2012-3.)
I never really studied what happened with Porter Goss, but this is what Wikipedia says:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter_Goss
There follow various leaks as to what this was all about. Whatever was going on, Goss probably did not have the support of President Bush.
Goss was replaced by Michael Hayden.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 8:58 amRick Ballard (1c290b) — 1/15/2017 @ 8:15 am
Plame did not send her husband, Joe Wilson, to Niger. That was the CIA’s cpver stry afetr Scooter Libby started asking questions after he was prompted by New York Times reporter Judith Miller. The CIA didn’t just tell this story to Libby – they spread it throughout the upper echelons of the Administration.
And the real question was: Why was this trip undertaken, instead of the CIA taking a second look at the documents which showed Saddam Hussein having signed a contract to import uranium from Niger in 1998?
Wilson reported (only orally) that it was highly unlikely that any uranium had left Niger outside of known channels – but that was not the question that Vice President Cheney’s office had asked in early 2002.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 9:05 amGoss was not an “inside fighter”, and the Cong. staff he brought with him was not prepared to take on the “inside” CIA people.
The top echelons of the CIA are folks who have been there 25 or more years. That situation was created more or less by George Tenet and John McLaughlin.
Tenet came to the CIA from the Senate, but IIRC over the years he developed a bit of “hero worship” in the career spooks. When he was suddenly thrust into the position of Director after the debacle of John Deutch’s sudden resignation, he relied heavily on John McLaughlin. They don’t come any “deeper” in the CIA that John McLaughlin — he started with the CIA in 1972.
As Dep. Director under George Tenet, McLaughlin oversaw the staffing of the highest levels of the CIA, and being in place in that spot for 4 years, he oversaw the “burrowing in” of dozens of political loyalists to the CLINTONS into senior career positions.
Goss’s Cong. staff was blitzed from day one by Steve Kappes, one of McLaughlin’s top guys — with Kappes understanding that McLaughlin had his back.
Kappes and several others “resigned” as a result of the turmoil, but once Goss and his group was run out because the Bush Admin was under seige over he WMD issues, Kappes and the others all came back in.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/16/2017 @ 9:37 amThe article by Clarice Feldman is pretty much a GRAND SLAM on the whole fiasco.
Frankly, I dare the Host to read that article closely, and the sources she links to, and then attempt to continue his defense of CNN.
I hadn’t really thought of this in the framework of the Bush National Guard “fake story” fiasco, but its has a lot of the same hallmarks.
Un-sourced sensational allegations that can’t easily be refuted, a sense of sensationalism that will send “true believers” over the edge, leaked to a too-willing media outlet to get into the national bloodstream.
Where I think they have undone themselves is that the IC had to get their fingerprints on this in order to get it out to CNN.
Because of that an obliging liberal media seems to have been more than matched by a counter-veiling conservative media ready and able to pull off the mask.
BUT AS SIGNIFICANT — and which I think is going to be a repeated shock to their system — Trump doesn’t roll over on these kinds of attacks.
My guess is that these kinds of attacks on him will likely end up with multiple firings in the IC, and each new attack will produce a new round of firings until such time as they stop happening.
While some here might think its impossible to get rid of spooks, that’s not correct.
The way you get rid of spooks is simple — you pull their clearances (they have no right to them), you reassign them to a desk on a subject which they are not prepared to work on (send a Mid East Analyst to look over issues involving South America left-wing Marxist groups), and give them little or nothing to actually do.
They might just collect their check for a while, but they will be exiled from their normal support network, and its not long before they simply resign.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/16/2017 @ 9:48 amNot only the host, but good reading for a few others, too.
Colonel Haiku (6c3d91) — 1/16/2017 @ 9:49 am@shipwreckedcrew:They might just collect their check for a while… and its not long before they simply resign.
Huh. Try me. I could spin that out for decades.
Gabriel Hanna (61adec) — 1/16/2017 @ 9:52 amThanks, SWC, as always
I hope that at some point in time this item about Trump in the news and the response to it elsewhere and here,
Can be addressed by Pat and you and others as necessary regarding
What all can agree on
What is still disagreed on
And suggestions for lessons learned going forward
I hope we can do that.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 9:53 amAh, thanks again,
That was what I raised earlier,
Essentially a generous early retirement buy-out while still reporting to work in a demeaning job in an unattractive setting.
With no insiders left to cover their backs.
But boy, can we hear the howling now.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 9:57 amWhen I wrote my long take down last week, I had not had the opportunity to go out exploring other articles that were published on the affair.
In looking through the comments here, I see links to very interesting pieces – and those pieces have links to earlier stories that began to unravel this tale.
What I’m taken aback by now in going through some of this earlier reporting is the fact that a couple of the earliest explorations of how the dossier came to be, and how the fiasco was pulled off, is that they were published on JANUARY 11?!?!?
Now, didn’t CNN first report its story in the early afternoon of January 11?? Didn’t Trump’s press conference later that day include the blow-up with the CNN reporter where he disputed the accuracy of CNN’s report and labeled it “Fake News”?? Didn’t NBC’s rebuke of part of CNN’s report come late in the evening of January 11?
How is it that the NYT has a long backstory on the dossier — AND THE FACT that the Obama Justice Department and FBI had sought (twice) and obtained a FISA Court wiretap that centered on connections between two Russian banks and Trump (rejected), and later a private served that might have been connected to an affiliate of the Trump campaign (granted)?
Stories that involved and sourced in that fashion don’t get written in the few hours between the breaking of the news by CNN, and the time of the publication of the NYT article.
The fact that the memos had been floating around for a while makes it not surprising that one or more news outlets had made a decision some time ago to prepare a backstory on them in case they ever came to light. And the NYT certainly has the resources to put into this kind of effort even without knowing if they would ever be able to make use of it.
But it just shows you IMO that there was a level of coordination here between the press and the IC community to blow his issue up in hours after the memos fist made their way out after CNN’s story.
But, it also gives the Trump people a trail to follow. IMO, Sessions should put together an investigation that identifies every person connected to the effort to get the two FISA warrants, and have them explain under oath the justification and reasoning that went into their decisions to pursue a FISA wiretap against the GOP nominee for President.
If they can’t justify their actions in a neutral non-partisan manner, they should be canned.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/16/2017 @ 10:24 ami’m wanting i’m needing i’m waiting
for you
to justify my trump
one nation under trump
with liberty and justice for all
we just gotta make it to Friday
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/16/2017 @ 10:40 am“But it just shows you IMO that there was a level of coordination here between the press and the IC community to blow his issue up in hours after the memos fist made their way out after CNN’s story.”
I believe the White House deserves top billing over the press and IC. I know it was a joint effort and SloJo had only a small part in the production but the sheer stupidity of the maneuver suggests an inner circle Executive origin.
Rick Ballard (1c290b) — 1/16/2017 @ 10:41 amthis stinks worse than Valerie Jarrett’s finger
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/16/2017 @ 10:42 amSo much for the Obama-Biden “voices of reason” crap…
Colonel Haiku (6dd99d) — 1/16/2017 @ 10:50 amJust to keep things honest, I believe both Cnn’s and Buzzfeed’s contributions to American history occurred on Tuesday Jan 10. The Trump presser was on the 11th, after the shocking fake news had had a day to percolate around the media and in the public realm. The intel “briefing” took place on the previous Friday the 6th.
elissa (377b6d) — 1/16/2017 @ 10:57 amwe still don’t know if they’ve washed the sheets yet though
happyfeet (28a91b) — 1/16/2017 @ 11:00 amSince the Trump presser had been previously scheduled and announced for the 11th, I think it was no coincidence that the story
elissa (377b6d) — 1/16/2017 @ 11:04 amexplodedbroke on the 10th so that the media jackals could have at him.And then there’s the strange case of the D. C. National Guard General who elected to resign at the moment of Trump’s swearing in. He had been told by the transition team that his resignation had been accepted, but the date and time of his leaving was his choice. The fellow had never been deployed to a theatre of war, and had spent his “career” in the D. C. National Guard. The timing of his departure gave the W-Post the opportunity to print another inflammatory headline followed by a misleading story. Both were changed the next day, but they got what they needed for one news cycle.
There are a lot of moving parts in this pre-inaugural drama. It’s good to remember that, while the law abiding citizenry of D. C. is disarmed, none of those in high office who have orchestrated this attempt to discredit Trump have been similarly defanged. We have not seen the end of history by any means.
BobStewartatHome (c24491) — 1/16/2017 @ 11:51 amElissa — yes, in doing some more reading I realized that. The reports and the presser were on 1/10, and the stories began to appear on 1/11.
And some of the reporting on the FISA warrant goes back to a story in Heat Street that was published on 11/7, the day before the election, but that was too late to gain any real attention/traction, and was completely swamped the next day by the fact that Trump pulled off the huge upset.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/16/2017 @ 11:52 amPresser on the 11th — yes.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/16/2017 @ 11:52 amThere will be non-stop trashing of Trump forever and ever.
Sometimes the claims might even be true,
and a lot of things that we would criticize Trump for, will never be covered.
Maybe we should start a “Wolf cries” meter like the “Pinocchios” meter,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/16/2017 @ 12:08 pmwith every false charge against Trump,
how many “Cry wolfs” does it get.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/16/2017 @ 9:37 am
Twenty five years as of 2016, or as of 2005? (the time Porter Goss was there)
That sounds like a significant part of the picture here.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 12:39 pmshipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/16/2017 @ 9:48 am
Wouldn’t each new firing produce screams of political interference with intelligence? They’d certainly scream the’d certainly scream to the Congressional intelligence committees. In fact even befroe any firings, thered be complaints that tehy weren’t being listened to.
And Democrats on those committees then might echo complaints and say this maybe happened because Trump is so close to Russia, and there needs to be an investigation. Is Trump being controlled by Putin?
Is that what Tenet and McLaughlin did? orf standfeield Turner under Carter?
They would have needed some kind of excuse for pullng clearanes but in some cases that might have been ginned up. And it is one thing for insiders to carefully prepare the pulling of clearances – it is another thing for political appointees to do so.
Would re-assigning people avoid screams of taking politial control of intelligence?
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 12:58 pmPeople still don’t understand what happened with Benghazi. I heard Newt Gngrich on Face the Nation refer to the CIA going along with white on Benghazi. But in reality, if you study this carefully, you will see that it was the CIA that originated the idea taht the attack was spontaneous and dragged along the Obama Administration.
The Administration believed the attack was not planned, and wanted to get the “good news” out, which was somewhat contrary to he practice with secret information. When they got it out, the whole story immediately exploded because everybody already knew it was untrue. That story had been intended only for the ears of Obama and his political appointees, so they would not be tasked with finding out who was behind the attack in Benghazi.
The CIA version was: nobody was behind it – it was spontaneous, just a small local Islamist organization, that maybe notified al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb after the fact.
The video was actually one of the cover-up stories of the terrorists, (a New York Times stringer in Benghazi heard it the night of the attack, and the terrorists mentioning it was the first he heard of that video) but the CIA later stressed they only said it was spontaneous and inspired by the events in Cairo but they didn’t say – on paper anyway – that the video had anything to do with the alleged protest (that never was) in Benghazi.
Later, in early January 2013, they found nobody at the CIA made any mistakes.
Hillary Clinton, of course, knew the idea of a demonstration was false. But an important Democrat later said Hillary was right not to dispute the CIA.
Congressman Adam Schiff, the Ranking Minority Member of the he House Intelligence Committee, and also a member of the Select Committee on Benghazi, was on the CBS Sunday interview show Face the Nation On Sunday, October 25, 2015 and, believe it or not – it’s on video – that had Hillary Clinton told the truth about Benghazi that week, she would have been justly criticized:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-transcripts-october-25-trump-christie-nunes-schiff/
This wasn;t icked up, because too many people are stuck on seeing the misstatements on Benghazi as something taht originated in the White House.
Now notice this again. What are you supposed to believe? First hand knowledge, or what the intelligence agencies tell you? According to Adam Schiff, what the intelligence agencies tell you.
Because all the people at the State Department knew that it had bene a surprise attack with no preceding demonstration. They were in communication with Benghazi.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 1:00 pmWhile the Steele stuff was being shopped around to the press post convention without success it wasn’t for lack of trying. It took Harry Reid’s complaints to Comey to investigate Trump’s Russian connections in August and then demands that Comey come clean about the Trump investigation when he announced FBI was reviewing the Weiner laptop a week before the election to at least get somebody to write the story.
David Corn’s Oct 31 and Jan 13 stories in MotherJones details what political and govt insiders were pushing but couldn’t get the big media to run were the earliest I could find.
It took the leak to CNN by what sure looks like Brennan that Trump was briefed that gave CNN enough to launch this making it increasingly clear Obama’s guys are pushing Putin’s dirty dossier on US.
crazy (d3b449) — 1/16/2017 @ 1:06 pmMy own thinking is that the real reason Hillary Clinton did not attempt to prevent the wrong information in the talking points from being put out (there’s no trace of what she said, because she was always careful to do as much as possible off the record, but she was in very regular communication with Jake Sullivan, and somebody must have been telling Voctoria Nuland what to object to and what not to object to – it’s also true the State Department demurred on two points – the location in Benghazi was a mission and not a consulate and they hadn’t really been warned)
My thinking about the real reason Hillary Clinton did not attempt to correct anything about there being a demonstration in Benghazi
…is that she knew, or strongly suspected, that the main person responsible for he death of Amabassador Christopher Stevens had also murdered Vincent Foster, and if he really went down he might take her with him.
Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who was the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the United States in 1993 and lived right across the street just a bit down the road from Fort Marcy Park, was in 2012 the head of Saudi intelligence. If the U.S. and Saudi Arabia were at odds about what was supposed to happen to weapons stockpiled by Qaddafi – and they were – and Stevens was in Benghazi to try to stop a ship from leaving for Turkey – it had already sailed but he still was successful in getting Turlkey to impound the weapons – there might have been the idea of murdering the ambassador and chasing the CIA out of Benghzazi so they would no longer be in competition wih them buying up the weapons so that Saudi Arabia could send them to Syrian rebels that the United States was afraid to arm. Leaks have really confused people about this, and have the U.S. government wanting the arms to go to Syrian rebels.
Saudi Arabia (and allies) could have been the “intelligence partners” that the CIA said supplied information about the attack in Benghazi.
There’s a lot of confusion about this, but only one way out, and that solves other mysteries too, just like there is with the dossier on Trump (in that case it was genuine Russian disinformation aimed the British which the Russians didnt think wold interfere with their efforts to help Trump.
In the case of Vincent Foster I also have what looks like a leaked “explanation” of a secret unscheduled meeting in the White House between Prince Bandar, Sandy Berger and President Bill Clinton sometime in July 1993, that was published in an article by Fred Barnes starting on page 10 of the March 14, 1994 New Republic, right at the time of known Foster case leaks:
http://i58.tinypic.com/ih8nx3.jpg
My hunch was that Prince Bandar came there to report that he or his people had just killed Vincent Foster, giving an explanation as to why which was satisfactory to Bill Clinton, and asked for assistance in covering it up, and President Clinton told him to take the body into Fort Marcy Park, which would put the death under federal jurisdiction, and he would take care of the rest.
In 1997, I filed FOIA requests to verify this meeting but could not verify it, but I suspect some record exists. The Secret Service said it didn’t maintain records of white House vistors and I shold ask the White House Counsel’s office. The the White House Counsel’s office said it wasn’t covered by the Freedom of Information act. An attempt to verify this by filing a FOIA to the state Department (was any news of a meeting communicated to the State Department – which should have hapepned if this was really about the sale of Boeing planes) was answered early in the Bsh Administration but with nothing that verified this meeting. I ws particualtly interested in whetehr t hapepned on July 20, 1993.
The article itself later tried to take back its explanation and says not to generalize (and indeed Clinton did not geneally act like Trump in promoting trade) The Boeing deal also, had already been done, although there was some pretending that it could be made bigger.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 1:30 pm515. elissa (7d8dcb) — 1/15/2017 @ 10:20 pm
>
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/the_trump_dossier_puts_the_deep_state_in_deep_doodoo.html
This is more than I heard of, but she doesn’t give his name, meaning it is impossible to follow his political track record.
Usually hired by Democrats.
Steele was engaged only in June, we read, by which time, Fusion GPS was being funded by Democrats.
The “Jeb Bush donor” may have been the first to hire Fusion GPS, but whatever they did then, they didn’t do anything with regard to Russia that led to this until later.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 2:41 pmThis was May 3, the day of the Indiana primary. Cruz dropped out taht night, and Kasich maybe the next day.
There were still some hopes of stopping Trump, and that continued all the way till the middle of July. But it was probably the (unspecified) pro-Hillary Democrats who were funding Fusion GPS by June.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 3:00 pmThis was only in December.
Who’s blaming McCain for this thing now?
The FBI probably had it, or earlier versions, at least as far back as October, because Senator Harry Reid is thought to have been referring to an investigation sparked by that in a open letter he sent to FBI Direcrtor James Comey late Sunday nighht October 30, 2016, or that’s at least what BuzzFeed may have been told.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/31/harry-reid-just-made-a-huge-incendiary-evidence-free-claim-about-trump-and-russia/
Of course Harry Reid knew perfectly well why there was this “double standard.”
In the first half of 2016 there had been leaks and speculation that Hillary Clinton was going to be indicted. Hillary Clinton wanted a clean bill of health. She got it (or something that could be characterized that way)
There were also Justice Department guidelines, which most people didn’t know about, that precluded
doing something too close to an election. This was put in by President Clinton after the 1992 second Casper Weinberger indictment that was used to try to claim that George Bush the Elder had lied when he said he was ‘out-of-the-loop” (not noticed: Out-of-the=loop had a different meaning in 1986 and 1987 than it did later.
There’s lies within lies here, because the “comtemporaneous” memo that he donated to the Library of Congress at the suggestion of Prince Bandar (I remember reading but can’t find) that was used to say that Casper Weinberger lied in his Iran-contra testimoney to Congress was itself false.
The memo claimed that 1) Reagan had approved the sale of arms to Iran o January 6, 1986, when itn fact he had rejected it on that date, ands only approved it on January 17, 1986 after teh arangements had been changed so as not to run through the Defense Department and 2) that it was an Israeli idea, which it was not, although Israel had sent some weapons to Iran if I remember right. It was the proposal of John Poindexter. And most important, Bush was at that meeting (while he wasn’t at the Jan 17 meeting)
That was supposed to prove that Bush lied about being out of the loop, except that when he said it, out-of-the-loop meant put of the chain of responsibility, as is the case with Vice Presidents, and he indeed had no responsibility for the sale of arms to Iran, and it did not mean not out of the chain of knowledge, as Democrats were claiming and Bush I was too stupid to realize.
The Democrats actually succeeded in changing the meaning of ‘out-of-the-loop’ in order to attack Bush.
Truly Orwellian.
Back to 2016. So Hillary knew that if she was not indicted befire the conventions, she would not be indicted before the election, and she knew she could push off any indictment by not granting any interviews, unless she was about to be indicted. Bill Clinton arranged to be at the same airport with Loretta Lynch for he purpose, I think, of seeing whether or not there was a RICO investigation. He knew that she would avoid meeting him if there was, because she would have been warnrd not to, but would not if there wasn’t.
It was carefully planned. It couldn’t be scheduled, like a meeting at some event, because she would decline in any case, even without Bill Clinton being the target of any investigation. And it couldn’t be a true accident because she would have no opportunity to avoid running into him. Both planes at the same airport was the best way. If she ran away from him, there was a RICO investigation and Hillary should not agree to an interview, and if she did, there wasn’t, and an interview would be safe becase they already knew what questions would be asked.
This investigation was limited only to the question of whether classified information, or information that is inherently classified, had been improperly handled.
When she was cleared, it could be spun as clearing her from everything criminal. Any other investigation, as is usual with investigations, was being kept secret.
At the time that Comey gave Hillary Clinton this sort of clean bill of health he also promised Congress that, shold the investigation be resume, they would be informed. And that’s exactly what he did in October. Comey did not otify the public. He sent a letter to a few committees, both the Repubians and the Democrats. The Democrats claimed at first that the letter had only been sent to the Republicans, but they were lying.
In response to Democratuic criticism he tried to end the investigation again, and to do so also in a way so that no human beings looked at any emails not concerned with the question of Hillary not handling classified information properly. And he cleared her again.
With Donald Trump, the whole investigation was secret, and so not disclosed.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 3:29 pmAs I recall we only know about the Lynch-Clinton tarmac meeting because a local reporter caught on when Clinton didn’t leave as scheduled creating confusion about aircraft parking, ground services, security, etc
crazy (d3b449) — 1/16/2017 @ 3:45 pmClarice Feldman:
That was handed out by Fusion GPS, before he election, according to a BBC reporter
John McCain had no more to do with that than Scooter Libby had to do with the Bob Novak story about Valerie Plame.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 3:54 pm574. elissa (377b6d) — 1/16/2017 @ 11:04 am
December: Original scheduled date for Trump press conference to discuss how he’s going to disassociate himself from his businesses postpponed from December 15.
Monday January 2, late: press conference scheduled for Wednesday, January 11.
Tuesday, January 3: Original date (denied by the IC) for Trump’s intelligence briefing.
Wednesday, Thursday: Testimony to Congress and leaks.
Friday January 6: Trump’s intelligence briefing by the heads of the CIA, NSA, FBI and the DNI.
Tuesday, January 10: Story “breaks” about the dossier with hook that Trump was briefed about it Friday.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:12 pmshipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 1/16/2017 @ 10:24 am
Donald Trump in fact thanked some news organizations for not publishing it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/trump-press-conference-transcript.html
The “group” must be BuzzFeed, the “television station” (sic – should maybe be channel) must be CNN.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/16/2017 @ 7:28 pmPutin today came to the defense of Trump, saying he was in charge of a beauty contest/ Why would he then hire two loose women? He said, though, that their (prostotutes) were the best.
This ignores that, according to the Russian disinformation, Trump hired those prostitutes to damage the bed that Obama slept in, because he suppossedly hated Obama very much.
Sammy Finkelman (0cf810) — 1/17/2017 @ 5:09 pm