I came across this article from another source. Based on the content of the article and the comments I decided to subscribe, which is something I rarely do. I've read a number of Matt's articles as well as the comments. The one question that I can't find an answer to is "why?" What is it about trump that has the IC and democrats so worked up that they want him removed? I understand why people don't like him, and there is a long list of reasons for this dislike. But what in the hell has he done that makes people think that this circus of impeachment is even remotely justified? I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that both the CIA and FBI need to be disbanded and replaced with something else. What need is there for agencies to protect us from external/internal threats when they themselves are this nation's worst enemies?
I think Scott has it about right. There are obviously concrete policy concerns (Trump's campaign stances on NATO and Syria were surely upsetting to Washington) but the biggest thing is that Trump was both antagonistic and an unwelcome outsider. The campaign process is designed to prevent the election of anyone who doesn't have press, major donor, and major party backing, and Trump bucked all three obstacles. I'm convinced this is why the Russia story had such traction with certain audiences, because it painted Trump as not just a crook, but illegitimate, someone who stole an election.
Matt: All good points. One more: 2016 was the first election where the mainstream media did not/could not influence the outcome of a presidential race.
They piled on the negative coverage (most of it justifiable) and all but handed the election to Hillary before a vote had even been cast (remember that graphic on the front page of the New York Times every day showing Hillary Clinton as the clear statistical winner?).
To make matters worse, Trump only spent a fraction of what Hillary spent on TV ads.
Trump's victory was a monumental blow to media credibility and influence. And he also showed you can get elected without buying endless TV ads.
American media elites have been certifiably insane ever since.
Also, they hedged their bets thinking that the US public actually WANTED another career politician driving us into more war, more global expansion, more drone strikes and the rest.
I think it's glorious and that they get what they deserve.
Fucking sleazy pigs, every one of them.
It takes a certain kind of sleazy pig to game the gamers though, and even though I can't stand the guy, I have to give Trump's team props for achieving what I had previously thought impossible.
This will be studied for decades, unless the whole thing comes crashing down.
All good points and true, but I think Strider49 (below) hit on is also correct, and probably more terrifying. The election of Trump was a rejection of all of the above by the electorate. That rejection signifies loss of control of the people. As long as they can maintain a docile public by using the media to set the agenda, they maintain power. Trump's election turned that on its head. The media went out of its way to portray him as disgusting, boorish, stupid, and unfit, and the electorate VOTED FOR HIM ANYWAY. The elites can't maintain power- and thus wealth and comfort- if they can't control the public. This is why they hate the internet- it's beyond their control.
Yes, and well... Russia still looms large in the recent memories of most of the US citizens. In the 80s, it was THE bogey man. Are they a threat still? Probably.
Are they the best manufactured threat the press and bureau chiefs can come up with right now? Definitely.
This is bad political theater, written by Intel hacks and established career politicians.
How can anyone defend this attack on "the office of the presidency" or on "elections"; regardless of who sits in the Oval Orifice?
Seriously, people need their heads examined, or Trump is deliberately going to be used to change the way election results are managed forever more. Sure, fucken cheer it on.
I agree with you that Trump screwed up the intel communities' plans for world domination or whatever they were after.But,it is better to have a president who praises the likes of Mr. Kim,Erdogan,Duarte,MBS,Orban,Putin,Balsonaro and Sisi to name a few and who openly admires the way these men govern? What about the press in say... Russia or Saudi Arabia.Do you think there might be media manipulation there that's even worse than what's happening here?Is it a good thing to have a president who embraces evangelical fanatics who are pining to create a theocracy here in the US?Have you read IG Barr's recent comments about the evil nonbelievers plans to destroy his religion? My point again is that Trump is creating a NEW deep state and most are missing it.Analyzing the past is one thing but anticipating the future is another.If Trump and his commentary is our future we're really fucked.
Why is it always about the dangers of "white guys" as in "rounding up old white guys and putting them on trains".....white guys. Out here in the southwest that's actually happening to Hispanics....right now.Sure Bush did it,Obama did it and Trump is campaigning on it.Is this another of the "deep states" plans....to get rid of people of color one way or the another.If so,why is Trump leading the charge?
My last point is that government does more than engage in international intrigue.People here at home need Medicare,Social Security,health care,access to education,decent pay and equal pay for equal work among other things.Trump is screwing them over with the help of Mitch and his cronies.
What role is the "deep state" playing in all of this?Maybe the NEW deep state Trump is creating will create a whites only theocracy.Maybe worrying about the future rather than the past is more productive.Maybe getting rid of Trump in any legal way possible is a good thing....even if you're version of the deep state helps do it.
You simply have to get over your hatred for this Orange Buffoon and see how the integrity of the office itself is under direct attack and decide for yourself if you're down with a coup, (or series of attempts,) on home soil.
They've been doing it since 1905, all over the world. Now, the big money and the CIA lapdogs are conducting media blitzes, misinformation and PsyOps through social media to try this guy publicly and people are eating the shit up.
No, I don't excuse Trump for being the douchebag he is. What I know about the office of president is that whoever is in there is just a puppet, usually. The fact that an outsider made it in is at the very least encouraging -not because of WHO got in, but that someone not sponsored by the State made it in.
Now look at the mess.
I was using "white guys" as an example... because "white hetero males" are the undesirable of the day.
It could be Jews. It could be Roman Catholics. It could be Asians. Today, it's white men.
It's pervasive and unacceptable to single out ANY class/race/gender/religion for time in the barrel just to achieve some nefarious ends.
Just saying.
As for those Hispanics being rounded up... they're here illegally. Try living in Mexico, Iran, Palestine, Yemen, Canada, the UK or anywhere else illegally and see how fast you get rounded up for breaking the law.
Honestly, if the political ruling class was SO fucking concerned with "illegal immigration", they'd put their stack of bills from corporate donors aside for a half a second and put together legislation that alleviates the situation and ends this nonsense. They won't, of course... because once the election is over, they can't use it as a political football anymore.
Fucken weak, dude. A Do-Nothing Congress, House of Representatives and Cabinet that sits around serving itself won't save any of us -here legally or illegally.
Ok... I don't hate Trump....I see him as the symbolic head of a large group of people whose views I don't like and I disagree with.I worry about Trump because I believe him to be incompetent.He could be a mayor of a small southern town.He do quite well in that position but as the president....I don't think so.Also.I don't see "white hetero males (as )the undesirable(s) of the day." Just who views us this way? Why.. the "deep state" is made up almost entirely of "white hetero males".We own the top 10% of wealth in this country.There are a lot of ways of assessing desirability.
As to Hispanics being illegal.I have several close Hispanic friends who think that we're the illegals.California and much of the Southwest was Mexico 150 years ago.At that time we pushed them out with more guns and ammo....ditto Native Americans.Maybe there was a deep state then.To add insult to injury,we made them jump through hoops to come back to what had been their land in order to pick our produce.To my way of thinking,whether or not Hispanics in the US are legal or illegal is still a very open question.And as for living in Mexico(which isn't all that bad),Iran,Palestine,Yemen etc as an "illegal"...I really don't hold them up as countries we should emulate.
I'm not saying we should emulate those countries. I'm saying as a statement of fact that we are the ONLY country that doesn't enforce it's own immigration laws.
I should add that I completely agree with you about the crocked wall street bankers.Matt has written extensively about their corruption.But after Trump's daddy passed away and he was on his own ,he managed to produce 4 bankruptcies and 2 liquidations as well as losing numerous lawsuits.Guess who bailed him out?...and I'm not talking about the Russians.....a big wall street bank.Trump was completely comfortable dealing with these crooks.Maybe he owes them something....jus maybe.
As to the office of the president,I care much more about who's in it.I think one beneficial effect Trump will have is that we'll realize that we don't really want an all-powerful executive ....an imperial president.....at least I don't.It's harder to corrupt 535 members of the legislative branch than it is a president who has some serious missteps in his past.
This: “Whites only theocracy.” Aka “deplorables.” “Clinging to guns and religion.” Just keep piling it on. MAGA is nothing more than 60+ million bigots and rubes. It would be most helpful if you’d go meet some of the lovely people on whom you so blithely cast aspersions. You will be hard pressed to find a couple dozen truly racist Americans. You will find none - zero, including Barr - who have any interest in creating a theocracy.
James...I happen to live in rural America.Judging from your comments you probably don't.I know hundreds of people who are evangelicals.Among other things,they've told me that America is a "Christian Nation" and it was founded by Glen Beck's famous (and imaginary) "Black Coat Regiment."Again,I don't hate these people.Many of them are my friends.I just don't agree with them.The fact that you're "hard pressed to find a couple of dozen racists" tells me that you haven't traveled much in the south or,for that matter,in rural america.I didn't imply Barr was a racist....he's a religious zealot.Again, he has every right to be but I don't want such a person as IG..that's all. That's what I believe.As for the 60 million who voted for Trump,rubes..probably,but not necessarily bigots.
What is it about Trump that compels so many left-leaning Americans to give into this irrational hatred and vitriol? Trump’s immigration and border policies are right-down the middle (until 11/09/16). Trump isn’t coddling any dictators without at least getting something valuable in return. Do you believe China should pay no price for predatory trade practices that have blighted so many American cities? Do you believe Putin’s Russia, or Saudi Arabia, or Maduro’s Venezuela are in favor of fracking? Or, should we just go to war with all of them? Trump’s domestic policies are by no means extreme either. You, sadly, are afraid of fear itself. My suggestion to you is grow the hell up! We live in a dangerous world populated by people who don’t share....anything, including your sentiments.
Sam....calm down....relax.Maybe you need to get out a little more.Travel the world.Maybe even China and India....at least Europe.The world,except for the Middle East, is not such a dangerous place as you seem to think.By the way,I have a small company that does some business with China.I'm not an arm chair expert on the subject.'m not sure what your "fracking" comment means.I'm not full of "hatred and vitriol".I'm not "afraid of fear". I just disagree with you.It's OK with me if you believe as you do.....it's just that I don't.
You beg the question, Matt. The Russia story has traction, as you say, because it makes Trump illegitimate. But why the Russia story in the first place? Q. When did it start, and with whom? A. No later than early 2016, and within the Obama administration. Can Obama not have been aware? It seems inconceivable to me.
Trump bucked the usual obstacles to win the Republican nomination. But he won the election via a fraudulent election process. Since 2000 the vote tallies have not matched the exit polls in significant battleground elections. Add to that all the other election fraud tactics practiced since probably the founding of the republic. He didnt steal the election but the party did. See Palast's work and the book Code Red. Democracy in the USA is a constant coup in process with various factions aligned with each party always at work. A history of election fraud in the USA would be very interesting. Then a history of false flag wars... but I digress.
He was and is an outsider; not prepared by the money that runs the show -to wit: he outsmarted them all and got free airtime by being spastic and douchey. He played the role of "heel" well... and the news outlets practically fell over themselves trying to cover his antics because they thought it would sink him. It didn't, because they are not trusted... and he won.
Gross, I know, but when the political hacks are so incompetent that they can't beat a guy who hands them career-ending news twice and three times a week. It's very apropos, really. All they are good at it moving legislation sent to their offices by corporate interests and raising campaign money.
Yes, he is an outsider. But that seems an insufficient answer for his enemies to behave as they have. What does he threaten that makes them take such risks?
He's not a part of the establishment. Not that I LIKE him, or wanted him to be president, but he really took advantage of the BS circus that is a general election year here. It's a carnival of horrors. At least, it has been my entire adult voting life.
He made them all look like the assholes they really are. That, to them is treasonous because they own this shit, or they thought they did until 2016.
He's a threat because he is not one of their globalist chums. He threatens to undo everything HW Bush, Clinton, W and Obama so carefully allowed to happen on their watches. He's not part of that club, though he is despicable nonetheless.
This is spot on- Trump is without question a demented fascist clown. The DC political elite even encouraged him run (Bill Clinton even personally suggested to him that he do so and HRC had her 'pied piper' strategy which backfired) so they turned to their allies in the international organized crime syndicate, the Intelligence Community to implement a domestic coup. Their supporters are horrifyingly ok with believing every word that comes out of the mouths of the likes of Clapper who has lied to Congress and any alphabet soup psychopath who vomits up their 'analysis' on their favorite talking head panel. An alarming number of them still cling to the Russiagate bullshit even now.The global ruling class is obviously currently split as to how they want to manage the existential issue of climate change (I'm no fan of Ed Markey, for example, but when JKIII is running to unseat him in order to preserve his family's fossil fuel investments, it's pretty obvious and that race is but one example), rates of income inequality that rival the gilded age, and US Empire decline, they'll ultimately unite to preserve their class interests while naive liberals continue to support a 'less crass' yet equally dangerous flavor of fascism as some sort of answer. I'm usually a fairly optimistic person, although I've grown less optimistic after every election since I reached adulthood and now that I'm a middle aged grandmother I have little if any political optimism left. The IC has committed horrors Trump can only dream of pulling off although being the giant asshole that he is, he'll certainly try, and none of this bodes well for anyone who isn't a part of the global ruling and political classes. What a time to be alive.
Oh, YOU are spot on. It's not that Trump ISN'T the kind of douche that they are, (a fascist, a pig, an utter cunt, etc.) it's that he's not part of the global ruling class and threatens to undo, (at the worst,) or erode blind support for, (least of all,) the "it takes a village" of sweatshops and global weapons sales to raise a child.
Seriously, seeing people who I had always respected as being socially liberal, tolerant... and kind drooling on their bits for a coup by illegal means just turns my stomach and removes my faith in *this* society.
It's on the skids, and they're selling everything that isn't nailed down. Parking meters in Detroit... real estate everywhere, selling debt... it all goes to the highest bidder for campaign contributions and kickbacks.
They're selling all that we built as the bus careens over the cliff.
That is what I can't figure out either (the threat) except he isn't genteel like Kerry or folksy like GWB or eloquent like BO. He just does not fit DCs idea of what is presidential and he doesn't know what he doesn't know and doesn't seem to care. I guess this might make "everyman" think they could be president, too. Of course he ended up being a threat to the IC because maybe they feared he'd smell the money that was flying back and forth (Biden's son etc.) and wouldn't be one of the crowd who for years have looked the other way regardless of which party was in power as long as their extended family got Board directorships, cable news slots or policy institute sinecures.
I think it's less about his image and more to do with his not being in the REAL DC power elite.
They didn't invite him; they don't want him. The Democrats are fine with the CIA attempting these coups because they are firmly in the lap of the Masters. He is in their way. It's poetic, really... the biggest asshole in the universe shoved his way into a corrupt and scummy sandbox full of vipers and he has been pissing in the sand and stealing their toys.
His relationship with Netanyahu should clue us all in on why the establishment hates him. He has bucked a decades long effort to just pay them lip service and go on selling weapons systems to their neighbors.
There's big giant money involved... and he threatens that!
I agree. The establishment doesn't give a damn about Trump's crass language, his way to public extramarital affairs. They clearly view Trump as a threat to the status quo, which the globalist elite are amassing great wealth and power.
Right. This system is designed to pare the choices down to "Candidate Red: working for the big money" or "Candidate Blue: working for the big money" -either way we lose. It used to be done in smoke-filled rooms by greasy old boys; now it's done through Super-PACs, media endorsement, et all.
It really is poetic, and the US will go down in the same way it has done everything in it's lifespan: fantastically.
We're sitting front row to a fall that would make the Romans chuckle and feel good about themselves! Seems a natural function of humanity. A reset button of sorts.
He is incompetent and corrupt. And the people that are seeing it first hand are alarmed. Half his campaign team is in jail. His lawyer is in jail for committing a felony at the direction of Trump himself.
So... he fits right in to the Washington D.C. club then, eh?
Only, we're supposed to allow the CIA to break the law over and over again and stage multiple coup attempts on home soil to oust someone most people don't like?
What's next, bro? Book burning? Rounding up old white guys and putting them on trains?
I suppose the pretense, (at least,) of institutional integrity means not shit to you as long as you can rid yourself of the Orange Clown?
I don't like him; didn't vote for him... but I don't want the Evil Empire's Intel goons conducting a coup at home with the liberal leaning Democrats all cheering this one-man pogrom on.
He sucks... we get it. Maybe, just maybe if the Democrats could actually address foreign and domestic policy in terms most US voters could get behind, he'd be ousted LEGALLY.
No, let's sick the CIA on him... you're fucked. This is supposed to be, (ugh,) the difference between how we do things here v the rest of the world.
I know... it was a show and a scam, but really... the fourth wall is broken. Still, can you really cheer on the same people who tested chemical weapons on their own citizens?
Um, wasn’t the whistle blower complaint done through a legal means? I think this all says something about Trump’s inability to govern effectively. This so called coup is happening in the executive branch. It is his job to protect the American people from abuse of executive power. I’m not arguing that there are real concerns about leaks, but leaking info that is alarming is not the same thing as a deep state coup. All of this hoax talk by Matt, but he’s also making a pretty big leap of faith of his own.
I admit that the "whistleblower" was legal... but do you really not see that Russiagate was a concerted scam of a coup perpetrated by Intel chiefs paid to provide commentary?
That this is just an extension of the same bullshit?
I'm not defending Trump's "ability to govern effectively" -he's a fucking asshole.
I'm saying that it's pretty clear that there is a concerted effort to oust him by marginally legal means and that the act itself is corrupt and a scam.
You obviously buy into it... because you THINK it's going to get you what you want -no Orange Man in office.
If your mechanic told you that rather than fixing the muffler on your car he could just steal a new car for you, and that you'd never be found guilty of the crime... would you go along with that?
Honestly, these bureaucrats are only good at serving the Masters. You aren't the master. Your vote doesn't really matter, and neither does mine.
I suppose you have utter faith in the democratic process, too. You think that elections aren't just big money pageants put on for show by the owners of the world.
You seem deluded by your hatred, yet you call out Taibbi and others who dare question the motives of these Intel Chiefs and the DNC as being kooky and off-base.
That's rich, friend.
Hey, remember when our Intelligence Agencies bombed the Valley of the Jars and killed a LOAD of civilians in a country we weren't even at war with?
Remember when these same players ran roughshod over most of the Middle East that matters toppling governments and ousting rulers they didn't like so their donors could go on making trillions in weapons sales and oil onwership rights?
Remember when these same players thought it would be a really cool idea to test LSD on civilians, prisoners, the infirm and even entire villages in France to try and find a mind control drug that would help them fuck over Russia and China?
Remember when they were caught collecting vast amounts of data without warrants and kidnapping civilians?
I guess you don't.
Dude.. these are worse players that your Orange Douche, and you better believe that they're after absolute control.
I'm not going to tell you that eating a frozen shit is better than eating a loose and watery one. The loose and watery one is all over you though, as you complain about the taste of the frozen one.
At least Trump is manageable. He's a buffoon.. if the DNC COULD get their shit together and manage him, they would. They are even more incompetent than he is though; believe that.
Nobody is asking you to pardon Trump. All I'm asking you to do is see the CIA and Intel Goons as tools of the Masters; hell bent on smashing the fourth wall and seizing power by ANY means.
That's not OK; less OK than some Orange Idiot in office.
Dude, I get it. I obviously am interested in what Matt says because I pay to read it. My comments are not made in a fit of emotional hatred for Trump. I care about the rule of law. What Matt says here is valid and important. I’m just trying to sort it out in my head. Basically, at what point does it cross the line from concerned bureaucrats sounding the alarm to deep state coup?
At the point where a candidate is spied on and has agents planted around their team while they run for office, while employing the help of foreign intelligence agencies and former "sources" to build a fake dossier, get warrants in a secret court and conduct an all-out attack based on the fake dossier. That's when.
“Committing a felony at the direction of Trump.” This is not true. You are making statements that have been shown in a court of law to be false. Incompetent—compared to whom? I submit that there is no one person who is competent to be POTUS. Too much power. It is my opinion that compared to Obama he is quite good.
I am assuming that “Individual 1” cited in the court documents is the president. I make this assumption due to the fact that it has been clearly stated that the Dept of Justice has taken the position that a sitting president can’t be charged while in office. Therefore, he was not named in the document. And why would Cohen pay porn stars with his own money if it wasn’t at the direction of his client, who then used campaign money to pay him back. If you are equating Obama and Trump in terms of knowledge of how our constitutional system works and their ability to administer government you have completely lost my attention. Incompetence is different than just pointing to the overwhelming job of the president. Apples and oranges. Incompetent is when you lack the knowledge and skills to complete tasks. This isn’t just my opinion on Trump. Dozens of federal judges have issued injunctions against his actions because of the ad hoc way he’s carried out these policies. I mean, the guy watches FoxNews and tweets all day.
Matt, every Time I read one of your articles, I breathe a sigh. Yes, someone out there gets it. It’s so hard for me to understand why my liberal, and especially, my progressive friends don’t get this. Even If Ukrainegate does rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors”— and I’m willing to withhold judgement on that for now— any impeachment hearings are tainted by the ravenous searching for crimes that began immediately post-election. I remember Watergate. The hearings were deliberate and no one, neither Democrat nor Republican — was anxious to impeach. That, as you point out, was not our preferred way to change administrations. I also believe that we are at a critical point. If we do this now, there’s no turning back, and a president who makes it through four years will be a rarity.
Matt and his chums like the moronic Jimmy Dore, and the smug Aaron Mate have decided to embrace conspiracy theorizing and rhetorical whataboutism as a way to deny, deflect, and apologize for Trump. Sad to see Matt go so far down the rabbit hole that he may never surface again. I would have never guessed he'd throw in his lot with the likes of Jimmy friggin' Dore....
Accuse me of being “too patient” if you’d like, however this whole tangled mess of flawed characters with warts on all players and their partisan cheerleaders, especially major media and politicians, will become more clear as the current investigations (of the investigators) are concluded and not before. Until then, I will put faith in Matt’s perspective, for what does he have to gain by taking sides and willfully ignoring stuff that’s “believable"? Tell me that and I will gladly put it into my analysis as a “qualifier” of whatever he’s telling us.
There is a growing collection of books and articles that counter what the network chatterers tell us and/or choose to ignore and keep out of sight. What about those, Dr. John? Some are positioned in the “best seller” standings. Are you dismissing that input? Do the NYTimes and WaPo, etc., even interview the authors and do reviews? Or do they just look the other way and espouse their preferred narratives, instead?
I often wonder “why", about a couple of things. First, why is it that the Democrats are trying to fast track hearings labeled as so-called "impeachment inquiries" done kind of heater-skelter by multiple committees. If they have a strong case to make, why wouldn’t they want it to be made in an “orderly” way, making it airtight instead of using shortcuts that are questionable in a procedural sense. Second, how can the Democrats really think that their nonsensical positions and their collection of “s/he’s a stretch" POTUS candidates are going to carry the day in the next election? If they’re hoping to convince Independents like me that they’ve got a stable of all-stars on stage for us to choose from, that’s just not working and it’s getting worse. Would I vote for Trump? — don’t think so. Would I write in someone as an outsider no matter how pointless? Yep, for sure. Would I vote for a Democratic candidate if it becomes clear their party tried to pull off a whatever-it-takes removal of Trump via impeachment or political sabotage? Surely would not, and I think that’s probably what will happen.
Why? Probably because they are as desperate as can be and they're looking at losing another election to this orange clown.
Why would they lose again to this clown? The answer is because they are SO incompetent at securing their own jobs, performing their own jobs and with at least pretending to care about the constituency that they're resorting to using the Intel chiefs as weapons, rather than try to get their collective shit together and run a presidential campaign that will succeed.
They're incompetent boobs.
They've been assured that the other incompetent boobs who have tabs on EVERYONE and have shown they can hijack other countries governments that they can get it back for them... but they're incompetent -all of them.
The boobs leading the boobs.
Speaking of which... I like actual boobs; just not looneybird boobs.
I have NPR and Talk Radio in my vehicle. I switch back and forth. The take of each sides' narratives about current events is stark. If you listen only to one there is no room a broader perspective. The advertising differences are interesting. NPR ads mainly cultural and hoity toity and Talk Radio peoples' aches and pains and illnesses.
Kathleen, we were made for each other! As a grad student in the late ‘60s and early ’70s I subscribed to a liberal monthly and a conservative one and read them both cover-to-cover. I’ve kept that mental framework as much possible over the years. May have gotten this more “objective” orientation (“balanced” might be a better word) from my dad, a Columbia U Journalism grad. He was a lttle right of center on many things, but never closed-minded or knee-jerk, and read everything. He was a quiet but visible champion of equal rights for minorities and took a leadership role in immigration matters re: “displaced persons”. The Great Depression affected his career, as did the early death of my mother during WWII, so he wasn’t a published writer except on business and technical matters. But I try to practice what I saw from, and in, him.
I’m always curious about which candidates attract votes and other support from citizens with views like mine. My favorites are usually marginalized in the relatively early going!
I am on same time-frame as you. As grad student in 70s during Nixon the intelligence agencies were the focus of so much scrutiny (and Iran-Contra!). I am baffled by the embracing of the intelligence communities by news media like MSNBC since 2016. It as if they have no historical knowledge of the past actions of the U.S. intelligence agencies or no remembrance of the Stasi, 610 Police or Bolivarian Intelligence Service.
Sounds like you patently reject the very idea that the IC could stage a COUPLE of coups on their own country's elected officials.
You don't see this?
You actually WANT the intelligence community conducting top-level coups through the media, social media and through politicians who are deeply in the pocket of the masters?
Scott, you have an excellent point here. Trump is a one-off phenomenon in my opinion that can be corrected in the next election if in our collective judgement he shouldn’t be reelected. And it’s unlikely that someone like him (if there even IS such a person somewhere), would be lucky enough to run against a candidate with Hillary’s inherent unlikeability ratings and deeply troubling baggage. But a "faux impeachment” movement engineered by deeply entrenched career officials, especially partisan members of the IC scheming out of sight, could be a repeatable threat to ANY future POTUS and executive branch. This “soft coup” impeachment strategy is a brazen attempt to chip away at Trump’s support for 2020. If the investigations of the investigators play out as I expect, .it’s precisely what the founders wanted to avoid related to impeachment. It should be dragged out into the daylight and punished so that it would not likely happen again.
It's a desperate attempt to cloud his re-election, which... looks inevitable now.
How sad, really... because if the Democrats weren't just riding the CIA's Magic Trips Furthur bus since the end of the last election, they MIGHT have had a chance to actively work to regain the voters' trust and win by fair means... like in an election.
Nope, they wasted time and effort on Russiagate; it didn't work, and now they're wasting time and effort on this horse shit. Meanwhile, their party is in shambles, nothing gets done in Washington, (still,) and the voters are fed up, (still,).
They'll lose again... and this masquerade will likely fall apart like Russiagate did.
By the way... what HAS Hunter Biden been up to over there in the Ukraine... working for a giant company his dad gave handouts to?
Do you think he's just doing a good job, working away at his desk? Or is he just whoring and partying on his dad's dime still?
Saw a sign on someone's yard the other day that read "ANY Responsible Adult -2020" and laughed so hard I almost drove off the road.
Calling an argument “whataboutism” is one of the things a person does when they don’t have an argument. It is a perfectly valid rhetorical device. Taibbi is correct that objectively the treatment Trump (and us Trump voters) have received would rightly be viewed, by the same people who see it as legitimate now, as outrageous if it were done to a Democrat. Just as an intellectual exercise, try it out.
I entirely agree. This would be a dangerous precedent. I’d like to challenge you about the Ukraine phone call. Is it really true that you are withholding judgment, or do you already know that it is far, far short of an impeachable offense? If a president can be impeached for that, then we have no shot.
We've long whispered about the Deep State, assuming that the Intelligence Community should have counter-intelligence responsibilities, out of sight, protecting the Executive branch from moles planted by foreign foes, and that our secret agents would, if necessary, quietly dispatch a Manchurian Candidate. But we assume that he deep state are protecting us from foreign foes, and that the less said beyond that, the better. And we assume they operate out of some sub-basement of the CIA in Langley.
But what we appear to have here is an alternative version in which the Deep State protects the Domestic interests of the Elite -- that group of financial powers of whom nobody went to jail for any misdeeds leading to the 2008 crisis, that group which also happen to control the media which control the boundary lines of permissible political discussion, as Matt has documented in his precious book. Let us suppose that the Washington Swamp works for that elite, serve it and profit from it. And let us suppose that the Deep State are not there to protect the constitutionally designated Executive branch, but to guard and protect the Swamp.
And so for a candidate from outside of those boundaries to be elected president, that's not merely a threat to the power of the institutional media, it's an existential threat to the security of all the swamp creatures. Alligators are usually solitary and don't usually work in teams, but we suppose they are wired to respond with the same instincts and to swarm and attack the intruder.
And since you and I understand that the alligators in the moat, or in the swamp, are there to protect against invaders, and we see them attack, we are conditioned to cheer for the alligators. They are doing their job. And if they are promoting the story that they are protecting us from Russians, all the better.
But who do the alligators serve? Who can protect us against them? That's the context in which Matt has framed the question, which is the worse choice to lead the country, Donald Trump, with all his known flaws and evils? Or the swamp gators? I heard Rudy Giuliani last week say something to the effect that Trump was elected on the promise of draining the swamp, but none of us has a clue how bad the swamp was. Say it ain't so.
How utterly gross. This is the answer to the nagging question about how most of Germany got behind a douche like Hitler and the Nazi Party... They wanted to excise people they thought were responsible for the downfall of their country -and they didn't care how it was done.
Well what's the matter Taibbi? Don't you love democracy? Don't you support the rULe oF LAw? How can you question these heroes? The only possible explanation for questioning the IC's motives must be that you are a Trump supporter. It's a very sad day for journalism Matt!
I'm kidding of course. It appears this is the new powerserving media spectacle to consume all the oxygen in the room, and marginalize issues that actually affects people's lives. The parallels between this and the trumprussia histrionics are too much to bear.
Matt, I dig the way you write. You elevate and contextualize boring, confusing news and politics into something not only digestible but exciting. But here, (and maybe I'm confused) are you saying that it’s better to ignore Trump’s crimes and leave him in office? Because why? The CIA and FBI have done illegal shit, too? Unless you’re accusing those agencies of framing Trump, you are creating more whataboutism and confusion not unlike what the mainstream media peddles. Unless he is impeached and removed, Trump proves that a US President is above the law.
Thanks - see Chuck McClenon’s reply below. I can’t stress enough that the Russiagate insanity, and specifically the Steele leak, began before Trump took office. If it was not framing exactly it was certainly manipulation of wrong intelligence, on par with using Chalabi’s tales to start war. There are only three explanations for the January 7, 2017 “intel chiefs” meeting. One, they sincerely believed Trump was a cultivated foreign agent as Steele reported. I don’t buy that this is possible. They had half a year at least to investigate these extremely serious claims. If they were true, leaking to CNN and letting Trump take office is an extremely weak response. Moreover no evidence to substantiate the idea ever surfaced. Two: Steele was on some level genuinely reporting rumors he heard, and the agencies merely waved this dicey intel on to the public via leaks (and gave it gravitas with leaks of their meeting) because it was explosive and expedient, advancing political goals they had. This to me is the most likely explanation. A sub-possibility is Steele was duped by Russian disinformation and the agencies either knew this and waved it through, or weren’t sure and waved it through anyway. Three: the agencies had a direct hand in creating the Steele nonsense. I think this unlikely. It’s what Trump and Giuliani believe, and it’s not completely unsupported, given Steele’s relationship with the FBI and Fusion’s dubious history, but I have a hard time believing such a Dr. Evil narrative absent hard hard evidence. Still, option #2, i.e. cynically using/leaking wrong intel to cripple an incoming president, would be an awesome corruption/meddling story, beyond anything Trump has done.
Right. And this is where I'm also caught, trying to figure between options #2 and #3 -- it's hard to believe #3 in which there is some intentional Dr. Evil master-minding the coup, even if the incestuous relationships among Steele, the McCabes, foreign intelligence partners, etc. Certainly the opportunities were there for some very deliberate collusion, but have all of these players already been totally in the bank for Hillary from the beginning? It seems more likely that there were more tentacles, operating more or less independently -- Steele and Fusion GPS doing their thing, bought and paid for fairly directly by the Clinton campaign, and the IC community/FBI believing this because it was useful to them. But it becomes a fuzzy line between when the IC community is wanting to believe it and wanting more of it. Are they conspirators, or dupes? Which would be worse? As evidence in support of #3, we have McCabe keeping in touch with Steele even after Steele is officially fired, and it appears that the rest of the agency is aware of this. What we lack is the specific individual Dr. Evil who is pulling the strings. But isn't a multi-header Dr. Evil both more plausible and more evil? But, as you say, even option #2 is far more corrupt and awesome than anything Donald Trump is capable of.
I put the question in another reply in this thread, but it is apropos here: Is it plausible that President Obama would not have been aware of the whole ugly business? It’s inconceivable to me. I do admit to deeply despising Obama, what with his abuse of the IRS to thwart the Tea Party, and on and on. But I can still reason. There are indications in the record, such as Sztrok-Page exchanges. Who, besides Hillary, had the most to lose by Hillary losing to Trump? And who was in the position to do something about it? I doubt we’ll ever know for sure, though. Attorney General Barr, and President Trump, are too much the patriots to put the country through that.
Because they aren't interested in reporting the news that doesn't serve the propaganda "leaked and then publicly tried as if it were real or credible.
In short, they're fucking shills for the Man. Our democracy never really was, and now it's being revealed more as the sham it always was. Not soon now before shit hits the fan.
I lean towards Option #2 but I still don't get what happened with Mueller.
It's pretty apparent the intelligence agencies were leaking false intelligence to the media which drove support for the Special Counsel investigation.
What was the endgame strategy?
Did the CIA think Mueller could be *reached* and he'd just make shit up? Remember how Brennan smugly predicted indictments before the report came out?
But Mueller didn't play along. He blew gaping holes in the entire Russiagate narrative and embarrassed a lot of powerful people.
Why? It's pretty obvious he was being pressured by the establishment to regurgitate the usual talking points and take down Trump.
The only plausible explanation is that the CIA Russiagate "intelligence" was such transparent bullshit even an old hand like Mueller knew it would come back to haunt him. And if Mueller is anything, he's a careerist bureaucrat down to his wing-tipped shoes.
It brings to mind Colin Powell preparing for his UN WMD speech. He gave a very mendacious speech, but there were certain things he just wouldn't say. There are lies and there are LIES. A good company man knows the difference.
That's just my theory. I could be wrong. Whatever the case, I bet there's a fascinating backstory to the Mueller investigation.
Don't forget Robert Mueller was in charge, head of the FBI when 9/11/01 happened. Evidence at the scene rapidly disappeared and no testing for thermites was done. Our corporate newsmedia continuously referred to the "well respected" Mueller during the Russiagate probe. It seems the bigger job under way was to connect WikiLeaks, and Assange and Manning while taking the word of the DNC and Crowdstrike with Russia and letting Trump fall by the wayside
How do you explain where Mueller was during the entire investigation where he seemed like the invisible man? Then his first opportunity to answer questions he seemed, to be as polite as possible, out of touch with reality? Mueller was/is a useful idiot. I’d like to see another Mueller interview though. Maybe his latest testimony was an act?
"In his book Victims of Groupthink, Janis (1972) described a
particular kind of group pathology that he believed contributed
to such fiascos of U.S. foreign policy as the Bay of Pigs invasion
and escalation of the Vietnam War. The essence of the pathology was described as a group pressure for consensus that interfered with full consideration of available alternatives and risks, and this pressure was hypothesized to be a direct function of
the cohesion of the decision-making group"
It's a weird job "they" have, being professional paranoids who work (in their mind, at least, and I'm willing to accept that perspective as legit) for the "greater good", and they're prone to some sort of mild group psychosis. They live in an echo chamber made of secrets, and it's not "healthy" for them as people sometimes. Something like that.
They're also normal, everyday, flawed people with egos and insecurities. They're REALLY not very open to alternative ideas on how to refine their "narratives" in light of new evidence. They SUCK at that. They SEEM to think if they admit to an error about one tiny thing about their media narratives, the whole edifice of national security will crumble, the US and global order will be delegitimized and collapse, and we'll all die. So they're acting like children about the "collusion/conspiracy" aspect of Russiagate when they try to work it into the Ukrainegate narrative. They can't suck up the fact that they went a little crazy for a minute there.
With Ukrainegate, there's basically no chance the senate will convict. That makes it not a coup in my mind right off the bat. I'm in favor of impeachment just to make the republicans face how awful they've been behaving in letting this guy so overtly defy rule of law all the time, like at the rallies and inciting violence, just *daring* someone to do something about it. Even if they don't convict, they'll learn that that was a bad idea.
And the quid pro quo was demonstrably illegal. They actually caught his ass there. They're going to let him off, but it'll be like everyone rolling their eyes over Clinton "not having had sexual *relations* with that woman."
Anywho, I'm a total nobody who loves your work, Matt. I can't say for sure I'm right and you're wrong about if this qualifies as a real, scary coup. I just THINK we're probably okay.
No, the possibilities are not limited to your three, Matt. There are indications in the article and in your comments that you are familiar with the counter-counter-intelligence that has been developed since the corruptly hatched Mueller investigation was initiated. I wonder how seriously you have taken it, though. You suggest that Trump is caught in some conspiracy theory, as the liberal media are wont to allege when their intent is to dismiss any assertion out of hand. A conspiracy theory, you well note, can be completely legitimate. There is abundant evidence in the public record now that such a conspiracy existed and persists. (Again, to your credit, you are on it.) Your third option is that “the agencies had a direct hand in creating the Steele nonsense.” What you fail to consider is that the ‘Steele nonsense’ is the tip of the iceberg of the conspiracy. (Here I imagine you and your audience getting a good chuckle. Ok, laugh, then. We shall see in due time.) I believe we will learn that the purpose of that Jan 7 meeting was nefarious. One wonders, for instance, why would Susan Rice have felt it necessary, at noon on Inauguration Day, to return to her official computer to send herself an official memo to memorialize that President Obama had instructed the attendees to do things “by the book”? The Mueller Report indicates that the investigation had determined before mid-2017 that the Russia allegations were unfounded. Why was it not wrapped up then? (Would it still be going on had William Barr not been appointed?). I have a favorite quotation, from Mario Puzo, about enemies: “Don’t hate your enemies. It clouds your judgment.” Easier said than done. It is clear to me, being someone who does not hate Trump, that hatred for Trump, or disdain or contempt, whichever one indulges in, has flooded this country with an utter blindness to reality. But Trump is only the purported target—the true target is Trump voters. You are right about the threat of a permanent coup. But I think it started long before Trump. There is a still small but very intense minority on the left which has begun to consider illegitimate those election results that don’t suit their fancy. This is the germ not of a coup but of a civil war. It was apparent when GWB was elected. It was obvious when Kavanaugh was appointed. It will happen again if Trump wins 2020. I surmise you’d grant that. But what about the next time a Republican wins? Where is the Republican who is not hated by the left? Where are the liberals who denounce the resistance? It is not just in the FBI/Intel nexus—it is millions of victims of Trump Derangement Syndrome. When Trump is gone, the resistance will shift to the next Republican. There is nothing dangerous about Trump. But we are in danger.
Yes. Assuming that you are a subscriber within Matt's paywall, then you can go and find my comment, in another thread, on the thought that Obama chose Biden as his VP in significant part because Joe had a pretty good history of insider dealings (as Obama also had within the Chicago machine) and we need not speak of the Clintons. Biden was the perfect senior guy to supervise the boundaries. It could be an administration "without a hint of a smidgeon of corruption" because all the key officials were the very best at it, (and were far slicker than the 'investigators' in the media).
Of course, as I spin this out this way, I'm obviously asserting a conspiracy that I can't quite prove. But just because we're paranoid does not mean our fears are not well-founded. And you (James Per) ask the question, how far back does this go? Since when has the Intelligence Community become a deliberate player? GWB was the son of a CIA director, and might have been allowed soem ground, but sometime later the IC might have begun to turn against him?
#2 is the most plausible premise imo. I think you’re also attributing too much credit for leaks to the Chiefs when the leaking is really being done by the Indians.
Lest we forget, Comey’s October surprise letter regarding reopening investigation of HerEmails was as much a bid to head off elements in the FBI that were a threat to leak the Abedin laptop revelation as anything. We can discuss whether those were anti-Hillary or pro-Trump factions, but this idea that the leaks are uni-directional, or are even a top down phenomenon, is extremely questionable.
"Unless you’re accusing those agencies of framing Trump, you are..." I believe that this is Exactly what Matt is doing. What was Russiagate all about, if it was not the agencies framing Trump? If it was not the Deep State constructing deliberate lies in order to protect the Swamp against an intruder.
If Trump IS impeached and removed on the basis of a false narrative construed by the IC community, then that proves the Deep State is not merely beyond the law, but the Dark Force guarding the Empire.
Yes, Trump oafishly trying to get dirt on a good old boy from our other capitalist imperialist party really was the straw that broke that camel. Not Bush illegally starting a war in Iraq to justify rolling back the bill of rights. Not Obama rewarding the criminals who destroyed the world's economy with $29 trillion dollars and get out of jail free cards. Not only has the president been above the law for the majority of my lifetime, but so has the entire top 5% of households.
But sure, one evil corrupt politician pointing out that another evil corrupt politician is indeed corrupt by phoning a friend in Kieve is somehow beyond the pale. Let's give the accountable to no one orwellian intelligence agencies an effective veto of elections. What could possibly go wrong?
Thanks, Jeff. This is my question as well. Matt is proposing a false choice between Trump’s actions and those of the Intel Community. The IC is so bad that we wave away unacceptable behavior from POTUS?
I’ve noticed a trend in current “personal” journalism. In every story there is one moment where an honest practitioner exposes an unwillingness to adequately leaven their outrage. It almost always begins with the phrase “To be sure,” and is a rapid hand wave at a glaring obstacle to the author’s thesis that he or she feels honor bound to acknowledge but won’t explore in the depth that obstacle demands. I’ll let everyone re-read the story for that moment.
As a long time reader I continue to follow Matt avidly, but I’m increasingly worried that he’s losing the thread and indulging a form of confirmation bias. The IC deserves every bit of skepticism we can muster, and I’d be interested in more stories that drill down on their undemocratic and unconstitutional actions. The idea that this somehow excuses Trump’s actions? Absurd.
Those who advocate for Trump's removal effectively argue for removal of Trump by any means. My guess is that the commentariat opposing Trump believe the Russia nonsense was valid. And with the predicted (by Matt and others) failure of the bogus Intel generated and supported Russia-gate hooey, my guess is that the fervor for Trump's removal/retirement has merely risen in it's ferocity among this crowd.
So we have Ukraine-gate (Russia-gate 2). Trump has Finally been shown to have acted illegally. The degree of illegality is of some concern for his opponent's position. After all ,Trump's overt actions could have been accomplished surreptitiously using IC assets abroad(assuming there are some still loyal to the Constitution and not to their biases.)
He could have backed Republican Senate inquiries into the apparent suspect activities of the Biden/Kerry/Bulger kiddie troika and perhaps Biden himself. But being the narcissistic swell that he is he took to twitter, the phone and public rallies to hang himself in the eyes of his opponents. But that's Trump-an egoist with no sense of propriety and a complete sense of self-entitlement.
Only, has he hung himself? As Matt clearly points out the IC has had it's hands deeply manipulating the Russia-gate bit and seems equally involved with Ukraine-gate. This alone should cause pause in the anti-Trumpites ardor. That Trump will use these facts to effectively harass, criticize and condemn the accusers is lost on the opponents, although recent history(Russia-gate) shows Trump is quite effective with this approach. Also the chance of the Senate ever throwing Trump out is infinitesimally small.
The end of the story is that Trump remains , his supporters galvanize around him, the 4-8% of the voters who decide the presidential elections are swayed by the ham-handed actions of the MSM and its Intel Community operatives and Warren(a politically naive and ham-handed candidate in her own right) loses by 1%.
The mere assertion of sufficient evidence to impeach is not the same as having enough to indict. Impeachment is purely a political act with no requirement that a crime be committed(e.g. Blow job Bill). The Dems have taken a hazardous chance that can easily explode in their face. We've just completed 2+ years of listening to assertions of "We've got him Now" by the Trump haters. The Ukraine nonsense is beginning to sound eerily similar.
They don't care... they're like Germans during Hitler's rise to nasty power.
Oh, it's great to have a maniac in the cage to rid you of elements you don't like, but when they kick YOUR door in at 2AM and stuff you naked on a train... that's when you get it.
I'm referring to the rise of fascist national socialism here... and how it's not at all coming from the place most people thought it would -"the conservatives". No, these are people who vote along socially progressive lines, and they're cheering on multiple coups at home.
After WWII, people sat around wondering out loud how a nation of seemingly good people could get behind that sort of shit. Books were written, studies were conducted. It's a little clearer now, I think.
ICE has been kicking in doors at 2 am and stuffing people into vans, buses, trains, cars and planes since their inception under the 'leadership' (gag) of both duopoly parties of capital since their inception and prior to that, as INS. They're part and parcel of the IC the Pantsuit Nation crowd somehow believes are working towards 'restoring democracy' lmao. Why do you think Obama earned the nickname 'Deporter in Chief' from the Immigrant rights community? Trump has escalated what every POTUS has escalated as far as ICE is concerned with horrifying results. Do you think that Obama rationalizing his escalation of that horror and handing the keys to a mass surveillance/deporation/militarized- with concentration camps 'with eloquence' over to a demented vicious clown like Trump was an accident lol?
Yep, do we need to make mention of Obama's world record for most drone strikes?
A pallet of CASH fucking money to Iran?
I mean... what about handing trillions, (with a TR) to the same people who greedily orchestrated the depletion of the mortgage and securities market to keep their greedy asses in business?
ICE... come on. Penny ante shit compared to what's probably coming.
“Trump has finally been shown to have acted illegally” - this is not the case. This is your opinion. Impeachment does not require a crime - again, not the case. “High crimes and misdemeanors” means something, and its definition cannot be created out of whole cloth by the Democratic House.
I don’t see anything Matt says here, or in any previous articles, as excusing Trump. I think we all agree that he’s the worst, least qualified president in our history, and that’s saying a lot. But it comes down to choosing the greater risk. Trump wasn’t created in a vacuum, and as with any populist, there are enough grains of truth in what he says to lend him credence. The self-proclaimed truth-tellers of the media may not actually fake the news, but they do pick and choose according to their biases. And while we who hate him may be glad to see him removed from office by any means, his supporters, honestly rightly, see a president who has been accused since day one of crimes that haven’t stuck. Just like happened to Bill Clinton. Add to this the resurgence of power in the intel community, regressing to the days when J.Edgar Hoover held the fate of everyone in his files. The question becomes, which is the greater evil? One, if the Democrats play their cards right, will be gone in a little over a year. But the other, non-elected groups, will be with us long after and can do a lot more damage.
I disagree that there is a need to frame this as a choice between risks. The IC being a threat to democracy and Trump being a corrupt train wreck of a human being whose actions necessitate his removal are hardly mutually exclusive, and the former doesn’t preclude the latter imo. It’s a false choice.
Yeah, you're right.. one can't be on the side of the institutions' integrities without being a "trump supporter". It's better to stay on the side of the intel goons... the same ones that have tested chemical weapons on their own ciitizens without their knowledge, deposed hundreds of governments so that corporate interests would be safe, kidnapping people, illegally collecting ALL phone, email and text information without warrants... yeah, they're the good guys.
Trump is many things but least of all is he a “corrupt train wreck of a human being.” That kind of talk, hyperbolic or not, is where the term Trump Derangement Syndrome came from. Take a deep breath and calm yourself down.
“Worst, least qualified president”? Not everyone sees it that way, hard as it may be to believe. In my opinion, we only need go back to, say, 2016 to find a weaker one.
Great piece. I like Matt's writing and his perspective. I think the issue here is not about whose crimes, because they are evident on both sides. The key issues are the accusations of corruption from both sides, which question the very nature of corruption, or at least, its legal status. It places the blame squarely in how money for services transactions are defined legally. And that includes political donations from business interests. Such is the conflict between business, the whole money/financial system, and politics. There needs to be a better legal framework, and much more strongly enforced separation of the two, like church and state. Politics is susceptible to money, or revolving door jobs, or other favours, the difference between the two has always been difficult to spot. But Trump has come to power through a business and media lens, using the law as a battering ram; this is how he sees relationships with others, as well as with other nations - his awfulness is quite unique. But on the plus side, the nature of this corruption is becoming more public, its effects on the social fabric more exposed to scrutiny by journalists like Matt. And laws can change.
"using the law as a battering ram". As opposed to using the law as a weapon for a coup? It seems regime change is in our DNA now. It’s not just a game we play when it comes to toppling foreign powers anymore. We get to play this game at home now too. To the public we can say, "We undertake this with great seriousness, because there's evil doers at work. And let's not forget the law!" And to our political enemies, we say, "nothing personal, it’s just business."
But that all pales in comparison to mixing of “business, the whole money/financial system, and politics”. Right?
Meh, it's just all becoming clear that mixing business/ finance/ and politics has been the modus operandi all along. It's been thinly veiled, for sure.. but now it's just out on the table.
It's amazing to me that people think we still have a fair election system at all still, and that "their side" is "right".
I think you Deep State guys and Russia Hoaxers are a little bit in the weeds here. I'm not saying there isn't one, but why do you need a deep state when Trump commits and admits to crimes out in the open? Just like Col. Jessup in A Few Good Men confessing to the "Code Red", Trump is so morally bankrupt that he's incapable of seeing the crimes he commits as crimes.
I agree the media irresponsibly created an "espionage or bust" narrative around the Mueller investigation. It wasn't sexy, but Mueller delivered a bunch of arrests and 10 examples of boring old obstruction of justice. Not a hoax.
Furthermore, Trump caused his own investigation when he admitted to firing James Comey for not "dropping the whole Russia thing". He also spoon fed Don Jr. the lie about the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians. How can he NOT be investigated at this point, even if nothing turned up? For our nation's safety, we had to at least make sure that Trump was truly the unfit idiot we suspected. Although, I would've been tickled to see this news conference:
BREAKING NEWS!
Newscaster: "We interrupt this program to take you to Washington DC where Special Investigator Robert Mueller is making a statement."
Mueller: "We have decided to stop investigating Donald Trump's ties to Russia. It's obvious that he's a moron and and even though he is clearly corrupt, he is simply too stupid to do real espionage. Thank you."
Trump is a life long grifter. He will continue to commit crimes because that's what criminals do. He's too corrupt to stop and too dumb to cover it up.
Also, and FWIW... Taibbi isn't latching on to this concept of a "deep state" as some type of literary device; it's real and it's been operating with impunity since it's creation from the ashes of the OSS/ Civil Intelligence Agency.
These people have been testing chemical weapons on it's own citizens, wiretapping and illegally collecting data on all of us and conducting coup after coup, (in a seemingly endless parade of "failed" or deposed governments since anyone can remember.
These are bad dudes... with connections to even worse dudes. By "dudes" I mean anyone with enough clout to grease the wheels... so, not just dudes.
You are really so clueless as to thin the "deep state" isn't an actual thing?
Nothing but respect for Taibbi and his work. Also never said "deep state wasn't an actual thing". What I meant was, take away the Deep State and Trump is still a criminal. That’s all I mean when I say some folks are in the weeds. The ball is right there in the fairway. I’m not implying that Intel crimes should be excused, but I don’t think a criminal president should be ignored as a way to foil Intel crimes.
With William Barr attending Opus Dei conclaves and meeting with Rupert Murdoch while Gina Haspel takes over the CIA,I think the coup has already happened.Add to this list the greedy billionaires in his cabinet...Betsy DeVoss,Wilbur Ross etc.Trump is the perfect stooge to front the NEW deep state.I agree with your views on the old intelligence guys but that is the past.Under Trump we are already becoming a "show me your papers" country.Ask any Hispanic.I can see him carting liberal SCOTUS members away in vans to work in the countryside and undergo reeducation programs.I know Eric Swalwell is a hack but c-mon....Lindsey Graham?We are in a "which is worse" situation.I pick Trump...the "Insane Clown President". Remember what you wrote about him? Hollywood has already shown us how dangerous clowns can be and this isn't a movie.
Well, once you realize that the bipartisan system is designed to disrupt any momentum that an outsider could hope to gain in any branch of the federal government, you see how the bad political theater is a tool used to confound us all. (Those of us who still bother to look at it believing that it's REAL,)
Was the deep state responsible for Clinton having been impeached for a blow job?Were they behind the Benghazi fiasco or the Clinton email disclosures?Whose side are they on anyway?I agree with your assertion that they IC has done some really "shitty" things and is not to be trusted.My point,however, is that Trump,because he is a pathological narcissist ,can easily be manipulated if his self esteem is threatened.I think a new "deep state" is emerging around and in response to him. "Deep states" keep changing their personnel and tactics as the years go by.To many religious zealots with fascistic tendencies(Bill Barr), Trump is the goose who laid the golden egg.It's their turn to run things now.
Trump wasn't elected because he was going to stick it to the elites.Have you ever seen Trump Tower in NY or been to Palm Beach? This guy is the elite on steroids.I know,I know ,he doesn't sound that way at a rally in rural Minnesota.Do you think he didn't know what he was doing with his famous tax bill?He was elected because the public would rather be entertained than bored with policy debates.In this respect he is more benign as long as he doesn't take to believing he really is a military genius. I'm sorry for getting a little off topic here but if you think that the "deep state" is only made up of Democrats,then you're only seeing half the picture.What's really happening right now is just simple politics.In this game either side will use any source to maintain power.Barr at the DOJ is not exactly a maverick Republican,enthralled with the great man he serves.He's a scheming member of the new,emerging deep state and colonel bone spurs is his cover.
FWIW, I never asserted that the "deep state" was just the DNC. Sure, they are going along with it -because their voting fanbase expects it.... but they all play for the same team ultimately.
I think what is said in this article would resonate more if all of the leaks were not revealing such concerning details about how Trump and the White House have been operating. I just don’t see how leaking concerning details about Trump’s abuses and incompetence somehow lessens the legitimate need to follow up and act on evidence of wrongdoing. Yes, having an intel community leaking info isn’t good, but neither is having a president who commits felonies. Did his lawyer and all of those campaign people go to jail because of a hoax? No. They went to jail because they broke the law. Did Mueller say that the Trump campaign did not coordinate with Russian actors? No. He said that what occurred was deeply troubling. Did he say that there were not at least 8 instances of probable instruction? No, he saId Congress needed to handle that because he can’t charge a president with a crime. And just because there are hardcore partisans who want Trump out by any means necessary does not change the fact that there are lots of Americans who care about the rule of law much more than they do politics right now. We can discuss how our democracy reins in the intel community while also acknowledging the serious corruption in the current executive.
You’re right about this. I think it generally stems from our broad interpretation of the states secrets doctrine. The IC has almost unlimited legal cover for keeping things classified. Therefore it is hard for a legit journalist to gather evidence on what is really happening. In other words, it’s hard to report on what you can’t verify through multiple sources.
I saw that interview back a few months ago.It was on MSNBC ....that far left propaganda machine.I urge you to look it up.....you'll understand what "taken out of context" means.Brennan didn't come close to saying what you think he said.I hate to say it, but is the Wash.Times pushing "Fake News"?The videos is easy to find if you're interested in hearing what he actually said.
Yes, Mueller explicitly said Trump did not collude with Russia. Almost 3 years investigation, no collusion. He tried to make a case for obstruction, which is ludicrous. If it were not ludicrous, we would have long since seen an impeachment trial. Trump and the administration cooperated far more than the law requires. The rule of law? The Democratic Party, the FBI brass, the CIA brass, the media - they have made a mockery of the rule of law. They conducted an inquisition worthy of the Soviet Union: “Show me the man, I will show you the crime.” This is something that will not be forgotten - ever - by those of us who voted for Trump.
1. Violated campaign finance law when he paid hush money to a porn start with campaign funds in order to win an election. (His lawyer is in jail for this crime, and he would be too if he didn't win the election)
2. Obstruction of justice in the Mueller investigation when he asked Comey to "let Flynn go" and to be "loyal" to him and then fired Comey based on false pretenses to "lift the cloud" of the Russia investigation and admitted this on live television as well as to the Russian ambassador in the oval office. He also ordered the removal of Mueller but his lawyer thought that was "crazy shit" and did not follow the order. He also dangled pardons to Manafort and Flynn. He also made false accounts of the Trump Tower meeting where is inner circle met with Russians to get dirt on Clinton. And if you don't think this is obstruction, you're not just arguing against me, you're saying that thousands of federal prosecutors put their name on the record saying that these actions do indeed constitute obstruction. Mueller also said that Congress needed to take up these charges because he could not do it himself.
3. He violated Corrupt Practices Act when he used foreign policy to pressure and ask for a "favor" from a foreign government to investigate his political rival. He essentially set up a shadow foreign policy operation through Giuliani.
4. He is currently obstructing justice in an impeachment inquiry by ignoring subpoenas. (This was one of the articles of impeachment against Nixon)
Your list of "crimes" committed by Donald Trump are baseless and absurd, they are simply Democratic Party/Leftist Media talking points that anyone with an ounce of integrity would be embarrassed to repeat.
1. Michael Cohen plead guilty to the so-called election campaign finance violation as part of a plea bargain Cohen cut with the DOJ when he agreed to "flip" on Trump. A similar case between the Justice Department and John Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, accused the presidential candidate of using illegal campaign contributions to conceal an affair during his 2008 presidential run, he argued the money was meant to hide his mistress from his wife, not to influence the election. A jury acquitted him of one charge and deadlocked on the rest. People in this country, including President Trump, are innocent until proven guilty. I guess in a country run by corrupt Democrats that legal foundation is in peril.
2. There wasn’t a “Mueller Investigation” until after Comey was fired, on the advice of Acting AG Rod Rosenstein, and was based on damning information revealed in Inspector General Horowitz’s review of Comey’s handling of the Clinton email “matter.” Neither the president, nor the American public, were aware of a criminal investigation against Trump – so, how can one “obstruct” an investigation that was not happening? The answer for low IQ Democrats is it’s not possible – no crime no obstruction.
3. Read the transcript of the call again, if you even bothered reading it at all, low IQ Democrats simply repeat the Party’s talking points, there is absolutely no quid pro quo.
Hunter Biden, a man who was kicked out of the Navy for drug abuse (he’s a crack cocaine) and son of VP Biden, was being paid, as recently as a few months ago, $50,000 per month for sitting on the board of a Ukrainian energy company, owned by Ukrainian oligarchs, with zero qualifications, except that his father was Obama’s point person for Ukraine. That no-show position was worth several million dollars over 5 +/- years.
Did you forget the video and audio of former VP Biden bragging about how he was able to get a Ukrainian prosecutor fired by using the threat of withholding a $1 billion American loan as leverage? Not incidental is the fact the fired prosecutor was planning on interviewing Hunter Biden as part of an anti-corruption probe into the company where Hunter Biden was being paid millions of dollars. The sad fact that you show zero interest in anything except anti-Trump propaganda is a damning inditement against your integrity, ethics, and lack of common decency. Your party’s interests over the interests of justice, and American national security – truly disgusting behavior, but, typical of the Clinton/Obama Democratic Party.
4. The so-called impeachment inquiry has no basis in law and is an obscene abuse of power by a small group of Democrats led by Nancy Pelosi. In our country’s 240-year history only two presidents have been impeached, and one, Nixon, resigned the Presidency before he was impeached.
However, in each of the three instances the full House of Representatives voted prior to launching an official impeachment inquiry. Once a majority of House members voted in favor of beginning the process rules were established to provide both sides with subpoena powers, ability to call and question witnesses, and other procedures that were meant to protect the rights of the accused.
These procedures form the foundation of American justice. Apparently, to rabid Democratic Party zealots, like yourself, equal protection under the law doesn’t apply to President Trump, his associates, his family, nor to his supporters.
1. Cohen plead guilty not to a "so called" crime. He led guilty to a crime. And "individual 1" directed him to commit this crime. I will concede Trump, like Edwards is not "guilty" of the crime, because he has not been prosecuted for it, because he's president. Of Edwards won, my same arguments would apply. Doesn't change the fact that both of these men took illegal actions. We can't use Edward's trial to quit Trump. That's not how low works.
2. The Russian investigation was started prior to the the Mueller investigation. Mueller was appointed as special prosecutor because Session recused due to the fact he was involved with the campaign. That letter was a cover. Trump himself admitted that the letter sent was based on false pretenses when he publicly admitted the real reason he fired Comey. Mueller said in the report that all of his actions are all worthy of conclusions and that Congress should do so.
3. There is more to the current situation than the transcript of the call. That is the tip of the iceberg. All the people testifying this week have started to fill in the wholes about this concerted effort to extract personal favors from Ukraine. The Biden acting through an official government channel and was trying to remove a prosecutor who was not taking corruption seriously. He was fired as a way to use American influence to change their corrupt ways.
Complete opposite. If there was actually any evidence that Biden did this to protect his son, then I'd be all ears. Right now, it is just a way to point to something else to avoid what we do have clear evidence on with Trump.
4. Your claims of due process in a House impeachment inquiry have no basis in law. Show me the section of the constitution, statute or House rules that says they need to provide a full vote? If Trump wants to trample our democratic norms, he can't cry over House procedure that doesn't even exist. Could the dems follow tradition and hold a floor vote? Sure. Do they have to? No. The constitution provides due process during the Senate trial where Trump will be allowed to call all the witnesses they want. At this point, they just want to collect the record of facts in the investigation. He'll have his day(s) in court.
I will concede that all of these things I'm bringing up are not charges that have been prosecuted (yet). The fact that he is president makes this a very different situation. But nothing I have said here reflects someone who is low IQ. I am simply looking at the public record. Anyone who breaks the law should be held accountable.
Point 1 you concede is bullshit. Trump was never charged with, nor found guilty of, committing any campaign finance violations. Point 2. Comey was fired for a myriad of reasons, including findings of the Inspector General's investigation. Comey exonerated Clinton before she was interviewed, usurped the authority of the DOJ/AG, and then reopened the investigations just days before the election - Comey was a bad cop, his firing was the right move. Point 3: When specific rules are not in place the House of Representatives are required to use precedents as the guideline. The two previous impeachment inquires were launched AFTER the full House of Representatives had an opportunity to vote. This point reveals your lack of integrity because you know full well that Pelosi doesn't want a vote because it isn't politically favorable to her party. Why are you okay with allowing Adam Schiff to run a secret trial in the basement of Congress without allowing access to the information on the other side of the aisle. The previous two impeachments were not run like this shitshow. Your lack of honor disgusts me. You leftists are fascists. I don't need to go through your other bullshit points because frankly you're too stupid to get it anyway.
PS: it's not even a "impeachment" at this point; it's unofficial, never been voted on, and really just a cheap ploy to throw shade before the lose yet another election because they are incompetent shills.
Again, they're hogging up all of the oxygen in the room just to win political points.
Bingo! Blind followers who would rather remove the rule of law and supplant it with... a fascist national socialist dictatorship. So progressive that they're riffling on politics of the early 1930s to take an "undesirable" out of office.
You are completely ignoring the context of these crimes. That matters in a court of law. Just because you can justify Comey’s firing in some way, it does not mean that Trump’s public admission of his motive becomes irrelevant. Are you okay with literally EVERY prosecutor at EVERY level of government secretly investigating crimes? Imagine if law enforcement invited every suspect to participate in investigations against then prior to charges being filed. It would be very hard for witnesses to give reliable testimony when everyone knows what everyone else says. You seem to know a lot about partisan politics. Maybe start looking into out legal system a little closer.
"a damning inditement against your integrity, ethics, and lack of common decency."
Give me a break. Are you serious with this? It seems like you're putting in a lot of effort trying to talk away what is right in front of everyone's eyes by using "whataboutism" and name calling. And you have the balls to judge my integrity. That says something about your character, pal.
PS: Just because you voted for someone doesn't mean you have to blindly defend them or take it personal when they get themselves into legal trouble. You should be disappointed that the man you thought would help the country actually turned out to be much more selfish and corrupt than you imagined. I really thought he might be able to move things towards helping the working class again by disrupting the cozy elites, but that wish is long gone. His only legislative accomplishment is air dropping a trillion dollars onto the billionaire class. Sad.
Yes, I agree. I’m not political. I’m just trying to understand things better and engage in civil discourse. Stating things like “oh, like Obama” just shows that you are the partisan one.
Taibbi, Jimmy Dore, Michael Tracey, Aaron Mate and the like have formed a new little clique who deal mainly in whataboutism. They interview each other and prop each other up. The problem is they seem to mainly be spinning their wheels in rhetorical mud. And this substack thing that Taibbi was supposed to be the figurehead of hasn't gone too well. The posts have slowed to a crawl, and most of them are public, so what is the point of having a paid subscription? Now that Taibbi has his show with Katie Halper, most of his energy seems to be going into that project. If Matt has lost interest in this substack project, he should let the paying customers know....
Also, include the following reasonable people to your so-called clique list: David Solomon, Mollie Hemingway, Kimberly Strassel, Chuck Ross, Victor Davis Hanson, Alan Dershowitz, etc.,
You rant about whataboutism (another meaningless term employed by fools who can't argue the merits of the topic) while you ignore the substance of the topic under scrutiny.
Can you point out where you disagree with any of the vast amount of information presented either in the article and/or in the comments?
Meh, this is proof of how pervasive mass media influence truly is. He must believe that if anyone doesn't support the #Resistance, a manufactured platform of bias and hatred, then they are immediately WRONG and in league with Orange Man.
This fervency for complete government control of the system to remove an undesirable is highly grim. It sickens me to the core.
I have read a number of Taibbi’s articles over the years. Like any of us, he is biased, but he comes across to me as about as honest a broker there is on the left. I have decided to subscribe so that I get a more regular read from the other side—without being induced to blow my own brains out (as might happen were I to follow most of the liberal media). I know people don’t subscribe here to read my commentary, so I will keep it brief when I comment. I think it may liven things up a bit for this audience to hear from someone who doesn’t hate Trump. You’re welcome.
Thank you for your very revealing and informative research and readable style. I’m happy to be part of the focus group. I would just say in reading these articles that so well take us to a deeper level behind the superficial and dysinformative headlines, I hope you will at some point in your book discuss the relationship of IC to global corporations and banking. I don’t believe the IC is just a headless chicken jumping around, they too have their superiors. I would love to see you wrap your research around that aspect “behind the headlines.” There is yet another Russian doll inside the IC doll. I’m ashamed to admit that at the time after 9/11 I fell for a Frontline report on PBS that gave a “behind the scenes” report on Iraq “exposing” their hidden WMD. Do you not find it credible that the invasion of Iraq was motivated by Cheney’s relationship with Halliburton?
So, I think HRC’s recent comments re: unnamed Tulsi Gabbard shine a new light on Matt’s argument. Are we going back to the days of McCarthyism when a person can be destroyed for holding views with which certain party elites disagree? And why would HRC be privy to any of this? I have commented before that progressives should not be smug about a Trump take down.
It blows my mind that people can read anything relating to this topic and STILL come in here chanting tropes about Orange Man Bad. The programming is SO deep.
They can't even see that the CIA and Intel agencies are deliberately staging coup after coup illegally... nope, not without obfuscating the issue.
At it's face, a non-military coup here at home is TERRIFYING; doesn't matter who is perpetrating it.
That "trumps" Trump... because it means that not one of us here can run for and get to that office, not ever.
Why? Because the power won't let it happen, or if it DOES happen while they're daydreaming... they'll get rid of you. That's not how it's supposed to work, and there is NO hope here anymore.
Note how the corporate newsmedia revises the history of Ukraine turning it all into aggression from Russia with no mention of Victoria Nuland and Hillary Clinton's coup in overturning leadership. Also, no mention that Obama refused sending arms to the new neocon lead leaders while they blow up the fact that Trump for a brief time refused to send US weapons there. No mention of the fact that the newly elected Ukrainian leader by 70% had a platform of making some peace with Russia. Obama's administration gave us the overturn of the Smith/Mundt Act which forbid propaganda going into the US news.
I came across this article from another source. Based on the content of the article and the comments I decided to subscribe, which is something I rarely do. I've read a number of Matt's articles as well as the comments. The one question that I can't find an answer to is "why?" What is it about trump that has the IC and democrats so worked up that they want him removed? I understand why people don't like him, and there is a long list of reasons for this dislike. But what in the hell has he done that makes people think that this circus of impeachment is even remotely justified? I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that both the CIA and FBI need to be disbanded and replaced with something else. What need is there for agencies to protect us from external/internal threats when they themselves are this nation's worst enemies?
I think Scott has it about right. There are obviously concrete policy concerns (Trump's campaign stances on NATO and Syria were surely upsetting to Washington) but the biggest thing is that Trump was both antagonistic and an unwelcome outsider. The campaign process is designed to prevent the election of anyone who doesn't have press, major donor, and major party backing, and Trump bucked all three obstacles. I'm convinced this is why the Russia story had such traction with certain audiences, because it painted Trump as not just a crook, but illegitimate, someone who stole an election.
Matt: All good points. One more: 2016 was the first election where the mainstream media did not/could not influence the outcome of a presidential race.
They piled on the negative coverage (most of it justifiable) and all but handed the election to Hillary before a vote had even been cast (remember that graphic on the front page of the New York Times every day showing Hillary Clinton as the clear statistical winner?).
To make matters worse, Trump only spent a fraction of what Hillary spent on TV ads.
Trump's victory was a monumental blow to media credibility and influence. And he also showed you can get elected without buying endless TV ads.
American media elites have been certifiably insane ever since.
Also, they hedged their bets thinking that the US public actually WANTED another career politician driving us into more war, more global expansion, more drone strikes and the rest.
They're shit-scared, I bet.
I think it's glorious and that they get what they deserve.
Fucking sleazy pigs, every one of them.
It takes a certain kind of sleazy pig to game the gamers though, and even though I can't stand the guy, I have to give Trump's team props for achieving what I had previously thought impossible.
This will be studied for decades, unless the whole thing comes crashing down.
It seems like the left, the Democrats, are willing to risk the whole country "crashing down" in order to destroy Donald Trump. That's madness!
All good points and true, but I think Strider49 (below) hit on is also correct, and probably more terrifying. The election of Trump was a rejection of all of the above by the electorate. That rejection signifies loss of control of the people. As long as they can maintain a docile public by using the media to set the agenda, they maintain power. Trump's election turned that on its head. The media went out of its way to portray him as disgusting, boorish, stupid, and unfit, and the electorate VOTED FOR HIM ANYWAY. The elites can't maintain power- and thus wealth and comfort- if they can't control the public. This is why they hate the internet- it's beyond their control.
Yes, and well... Russia still looms large in the recent memories of most of the US citizens. In the 80s, it was THE bogey man. Are they a threat still? Probably.
Are they the best manufactured threat the press and bureau chiefs can come up with right now? Definitely.
This is bad political theater, written by Intel hacks and established career politicians.
How can anyone defend this attack on "the office of the presidency" or on "elections"; regardless of who sits in the Oval Orifice?
Seriously, people need their heads examined, or Trump is deliberately going to be used to change the way election results are managed forever more. Sure, fucken cheer it on.
Jesus.
I agree with you that Trump screwed up the intel communities' plans for world domination or whatever they were after.But,it is better to have a president who praises the likes of Mr. Kim,Erdogan,Duarte,MBS,Orban,Putin,Balsonaro and Sisi to name a few and who openly admires the way these men govern? What about the press in say... Russia or Saudi Arabia.Do you think there might be media manipulation there that's even worse than what's happening here?Is it a good thing to have a president who embraces evangelical fanatics who are pining to create a theocracy here in the US?Have you read IG Barr's recent comments about the evil nonbelievers plans to destroy his religion? My point again is that Trump is creating a NEW deep state and most are missing it.Analyzing the past is one thing but anticipating the future is another.If Trump and his commentary is our future we're really fucked.
Why is it always about the dangers of "white guys" as in "rounding up old white guys and putting them on trains".....white guys. Out here in the southwest that's actually happening to Hispanics....right now.Sure Bush did it,Obama did it and Trump is campaigning on it.Is this another of the "deep states" plans....to get rid of people of color one way or the another.If so,why is Trump leading the charge?
My last point is that government does more than engage in international intrigue.People here at home need Medicare,Social Security,health care,access to education,decent pay and equal pay for equal work among other things.Trump is screwing them over with the help of Mitch and his cronies.
What role is the "deep state" playing in all of this?Maybe the NEW deep state Trump is creating will create a whites only theocracy.Maybe worrying about the future rather than the past is more productive.Maybe getting rid of Trump in any legal way possible is a good thing....even if you're version of the deep state helps do it.
The Deep State doesn't even SEE color.
You simply have to get over your hatred for this Orange Buffoon and see how the integrity of the office itself is under direct attack and decide for yourself if you're down with a coup, (or series of attempts,) on home soil.
They've been doing it since 1905, all over the world. Now, the big money and the CIA lapdogs are conducting media blitzes, misinformation and PsyOps through social media to try this guy publicly and people are eating the shit up.
No, I don't excuse Trump for being the douchebag he is. What I know about the office of president is that whoever is in there is just a puppet, usually. The fact that an outsider made it in is at the very least encouraging -not because of WHO got in, but that someone not sponsored by the State made it in.
Now look at the mess.
I was using "white guys" as an example... because "white hetero males" are the undesirable of the day.
It could be Jews. It could be Roman Catholics. It could be Asians. Today, it's white men.
It's pervasive and unacceptable to single out ANY class/race/gender/religion for time in the barrel just to achieve some nefarious ends.
Just saying.
As for those Hispanics being rounded up... they're here illegally. Try living in Mexico, Iran, Palestine, Yemen, Canada, the UK or anywhere else illegally and see how fast you get rounded up for breaking the law.
Honestly, if the political ruling class was SO fucking concerned with "illegal immigration", they'd put their stack of bills from corporate donors aside for a half a second and put together legislation that alleviates the situation and ends this nonsense. They won't, of course... because once the election is over, they can't use it as a political football anymore.
Fucken weak, dude. A Do-Nothing Congress, House of Representatives and Cabinet that sits around serving itself won't save any of us -here legally or illegally.
Ok... I don't hate Trump....I see him as the symbolic head of a large group of people whose views I don't like and I disagree with.I worry about Trump because I believe him to be incompetent.He could be a mayor of a small southern town.He do quite well in that position but as the president....I don't think so.Also.I don't see "white hetero males (as )the undesirable(s) of the day." Just who views us this way? Why.. the "deep state" is made up almost entirely of "white hetero males".We own the top 10% of wealth in this country.There are a lot of ways of assessing desirability.
As to Hispanics being illegal.I have several close Hispanic friends who think that we're the illegals.California and much of the Southwest was Mexico 150 years ago.At that time we pushed them out with more guns and ammo....ditto Native Americans.Maybe there was a deep state then.To add insult to injury,we made them jump through hoops to come back to what had been their land in order to pick our produce.To my way of thinking,whether or not Hispanics in the US are legal or illegal is still a very open question.And as for living in Mexico(which isn't all that bad),Iran,Palestine,Yemen etc as an "illegal"...I really don't hold them up as countries we should emulate.
Spain stole that land in the first place.
I'm not saying we should emulate those countries. I'm saying as a statement of fact that we are the ONLY country that doesn't enforce it's own immigration laws.
That's kind of fucked.
I should add that I completely agree with you about the crocked wall street bankers.Matt has written extensively about their corruption.But after Trump's daddy passed away and he was on his own ,he managed to produce 4 bankruptcies and 2 liquidations as well as losing numerous lawsuits.Guess who bailed him out?...and I'm not talking about the Russians.....a big wall street bank.Trump was completely comfortable dealing with these crooks.Maybe he owes them something....jus maybe.
As to the office of the president,I care much more about who's in it.I think one beneficial effect Trump will have is that we'll realize that we don't really want an all-powerful executive ....an imperial president.....at least I don't.It's harder to corrupt 535 members of the legislative branch than it is a president who has some serious missteps in his past.
'
This: “Whites only theocracy.” Aka “deplorables.” “Clinging to guns and religion.” Just keep piling it on. MAGA is nothing more than 60+ million bigots and rubes. It would be most helpful if you’d go meet some of the lovely people on whom you so blithely cast aspersions. You will be hard pressed to find a couple dozen truly racist Americans. You will find none - zero, including Barr - who have any interest in creating a theocracy.
James...I happen to live in rural America.Judging from your comments you probably don't.I know hundreds of people who are evangelicals.Among other things,they've told me that America is a "Christian Nation" and it was founded by Glen Beck's famous (and imaginary) "Black Coat Regiment."Again,I don't hate these people.Many of them are my friends.I just don't agree with them.The fact that you're "hard pressed to find a couple of dozen racists" tells me that you haven't traveled much in the south or,for that matter,in rural america.I didn't imply Barr was a racist....he's a religious zealot.Again, he has every right to be but I don't want such a person as IG..that's all. That's what I believe.As for the 60 million who voted for Trump,rubes..probably,but not necessarily bigots.
What is it about Trump that compels so many left-leaning Americans to give into this irrational hatred and vitriol? Trump’s immigration and border policies are right-down the middle (until 11/09/16). Trump isn’t coddling any dictators without at least getting something valuable in return. Do you believe China should pay no price for predatory trade practices that have blighted so many American cities? Do you believe Putin’s Russia, or Saudi Arabia, or Maduro’s Venezuela are in favor of fracking? Or, should we just go to war with all of them? Trump’s domestic policies are by no means extreme either. You, sadly, are afraid of fear itself. My suggestion to you is grow the hell up! We live in a dangerous world populated by people who don’t share....anything, including your sentiments.
Sam....calm down....relax.Maybe you need to get out a little more.Travel the world.Maybe even China and India....at least Europe.The world,except for the Middle East, is not such a dangerous place as you seem to think.By the way,I have a small company that does some business with China.I'm not an arm chair expert on the subject.'m not sure what your "fracking" comment means.I'm not full of "hatred and vitriol".I'm not "afraid of fear". I just disagree with you.It's OK with me if you believe as you do.....it's just that I don't.
If it helps, this is not a zero-sum issue as the media has painted it to be.
Not if you see the bigger picture, fellow citizen.
You beg the question, Matt. The Russia story has traction, as you say, because it makes Trump illegitimate. But why the Russia story in the first place? Q. When did it start, and with whom? A. No later than early 2016, and within the Obama administration. Can Obama not have been aware? It seems inconceivable to me.
Yeah, and he wasn't aware that Bill Clinton spent 45 minutes on a tarmac with the AG to make HRC's crimes go away during an election.
Yuck.
Trump bucked the usual obstacles to win the Republican nomination. But he won the election via a fraudulent election process. Since 2000 the vote tallies have not matched the exit polls in significant battleground elections. Add to that all the other election fraud tactics practiced since probably the founding of the republic. He didnt steal the election but the party did. See Palast's work and the book Code Red. Democracy in the USA is a constant coup in process with various factions aligned with each party always at work. A history of election fraud in the USA would be very interesting. Then a history of false flag wars... but I digress.
He was and is an outsider; not prepared by the money that runs the show -to wit: he outsmarted them all and got free airtime by being spastic and douchey. He played the role of "heel" well... and the news outlets practically fell over themselves trying to cover his antics because they thought it would sink him. It didn't, because they are not trusted... and he won.
Gross, I know, but when the political hacks are so incompetent that they can't beat a guy who hands them career-ending news twice and three times a week. It's very apropos, really. All they are good at it moving legislation sent to their offices by corporate interests and raising campaign money.
Yes, he is an outsider. But that seems an insufficient answer for his enemies to behave as they have. What does he threaten that makes them take such risks?
He's not a part of the establishment. Not that I LIKE him, or wanted him to be president, but he really took advantage of the BS circus that is a general election year here. It's a carnival of horrors. At least, it has been my entire adult voting life.
He made them all look like the assholes they really are. That, to them is treasonous because they own this shit, or they thought they did until 2016.
He's a threat because he is not one of their globalist chums. He threatens to undo everything HW Bush, Clinton, W and Obama so carefully allowed to happen on their watches. He's not part of that club, though he is despicable nonetheless.
This is spot on- Trump is without question a demented fascist clown. The DC political elite even encouraged him run (Bill Clinton even personally suggested to him that he do so and HRC had her 'pied piper' strategy which backfired) so they turned to their allies in the international organized crime syndicate, the Intelligence Community to implement a domestic coup. Their supporters are horrifyingly ok with believing every word that comes out of the mouths of the likes of Clapper who has lied to Congress and any alphabet soup psychopath who vomits up their 'analysis' on their favorite talking head panel. An alarming number of them still cling to the Russiagate bullshit even now.The global ruling class is obviously currently split as to how they want to manage the existential issue of climate change (I'm no fan of Ed Markey, for example, but when JKIII is running to unseat him in order to preserve his family's fossil fuel investments, it's pretty obvious and that race is but one example), rates of income inequality that rival the gilded age, and US Empire decline, they'll ultimately unite to preserve their class interests while naive liberals continue to support a 'less crass' yet equally dangerous flavor of fascism as some sort of answer. I'm usually a fairly optimistic person, although I've grown less optimistic after every election since I reached adulthood and now that I'm a middle aged grandmother I have little if any political optimism left. The IC has committed horrors Trump can only dream of pulling off although being the giant asshole that he is, he'll certainly try, and none of this bodes well for anyone who isn't a part of the global ruling and political classes. What a time to be alive.
Oh, YOU are spot on. It's not that Trump ISN'T the kind of douche that they are, (a fascist, a pig, an utter cunt, etc.) it's that he's not part of the global ruling class and threatens to undo, (at the worst,) or erode blind support for, (least of all,) the "it takes a village" of sweatshops and global weapons sales to raise a child.
Seriously, seeing people who I had always respected as being socially liberal, tolerant... and kind drooling on their bits for a coup by illegal means just turns my stomach and removes my faith in *this* society.
It's on the skids, and they're selling everything that isn't nailed down. Parking meters in Detroit... real estate everywhere, selling debt... it all goes to the highest bidder for campaign contributions and kickbacks.
They're selling all that we built as the bus careens over the cliff.
Hmm. I guess it's right, then.
That's comforting in a way.
That is what I can't figure out either (the threat) except he isn't genteel like Kerry or folksy like GWB or eloquent like BO. He just does not fit DCs idea of what is presidential and he doesn't know what he doesn't know and doesn't seem to care. I guess this might make "everyman" think they could be president, too. Of course he ended up being a threat to the IC because maybe they feared he'd smell the money that was flying back and forth (Biden's son etc.) and wouldn't be one of the crowd who for years have looked the other way regardless of which party was in power as long as their extended family got Board directorships, cable news slots or policy institute sinecures.
I think it's less about his image and more to do with his not being in the REAL DC power elite.
They didn't invite him; they don't want him. The Democrats are fine with the CIA attempting these coups because they are firmly in the lap of the Masters. He is in their way. It's poetic, really... the biggest asshole in the universe shoved his way into a corrupt and scummy sandbox full of vipers and he has been pissing in the sand and stealing their toys.
His relationship with Netanyahu should clue us all in on why the establishment hates him. He has bucked a decades long effort to just pay them lip service and go on selling weapons systems to their neighbors.
There's big giant money involved... and he threatens that!
I agree. The establishment doesn't give a damn about Trump's crass language, his way to public extramarital affairs. They clearly view Trump as a threat to the status quo, which the globalist elite are amassing great wealth and power.
O you give us Occam's razor..they didn't invite him.
Right. This system is designed to pare the choices down to "Candidate Red: working for the big money" or "Candidate Blue: working for the big money" -either way we lose. It used to be done in smoke-filled rooms by greasy old boys; now it's done through Super-PACs, media endorsement, et all.
It really is poetic, and the US will go down in the same way it has done everything in it's lifespan: fantastically.
We're sitting front row to a fall that would make the Romans chuckle and feel good about themselves! Seems a natural function of humanity. A reset button of sorts.
He is incompetent and corrupt. And the people that are seeing it first hand are alarmed. Half his campaign team is in jail. His lawyer is in jail for committing a felony at the direction of Trump himself.
So... he fits right in to the Washington D.C. club then, eh?
Only, we're supposed to allow the CIA to break the law over and over again and stage multiple coup attempts on home soil to oust someone most people don't like?
What's next, bro? Book burning? Rounding up old white guys and putting them on trains?
I suppose the pretense, (at least,) of institutional integrity means not shit to you as long as you can rid yourself of the Orange Clown?
I don't like him; didn't vote for him... but I don't want the Evil Empire's Intel goons conducting a coup at home with the liberal leaning Democrats all cheering this one-man pogrom on.
He sucks... we get it. Maybe, just maybe if the Democrats could actually address foreign and domestic policy in terms most US voters could get behind, he'd be ousted LEGALLY.
No, let's sick the CIA on him... you're fucked. This is supposed to be, (ugh,) the difference between how we do things here v the rest of the world.
I know... it was a show and a scam, but really... the fourth wall is broken. Still, can you really cheer on the same people who tested chemical weapons on their own citizens?
Um, wasn’t the whistle blower complaint done through a legal means? I think this all says something about Trump’s inability to govern effectively. This so called coup is happening in the executive branch. It is his job to protect the American people from abuse of executive power. I’m not arguing that there are real concerns about leaks, but leaking info that is alarming is not the same thing as a deep state coup. All of this hoax talk by Matt, but he’s also making a pretty big leap of faith of his own.
I admit that the "whistleblower" was legal... but do you really not see that Russiagate was a concerted scam of a coup perpetrated by Intel chiefs paid to provide commentary?
That this is just an extension of the same bullshit?
I'm not defending Trump's "ability to govern effectively" -he's a fucking asshole.
I'm saying that it's pretty clear that there is a concerted effort to oust him by marginally legal means and that the act itself is corrupt and a scam.
You obviously buy into it... because you THINK it's going to get you what you want -no Orange Man in office.
If your mechanic told you that rather than fixing the muffler on your car he could just steal a new car for you, and that you'd never be found guilty of the crime... would you go along with that?
Honestly, these bureaucrats are only good at serving the Masters. You aren't the master. Your vote doesn't really matter, and neither does mine.
I suppose you have utter faith in the democratic process, too. You think that elections aren't just big money pageants put on for show by the owners of the world.
You seem deluded by your hatred, yet you call out Taibbi and others who dare question the motives of these Intel Chiefs and the DNC as being kooky and off-base.
That's rich, friend.
Hey, remember when our Intelligence Agencies bombed the Valley of the Jars and killed a LOAD of civilians in a country we weren't even at war with?
Remember when these same players ran roughshod over most of the Middle East that matters toppling governments and ousting rulers they didn't like so their donors could go on making trillions in weapons sales and oil onwership rights?
Remember when these same players thought it would be a really cool idea to test LSD on civilians, prisoners, the infirm and even entire villages in France to try and find a mind control drug that would help them fuck over Russia and China?
Remember when they were caught collecting vast amounts of data without warrants and kidnapping civilians?
I guess you don't.
Dude.. these are worse players that your Orange Douche, and you better believe that they're after absolute control.
I'm not going to tell you that eating a frozen shit is better than eating a loose and watery one. The loose and watery one is all over you though, as you complain about the taste of the frozen one.
At least Trump is manageable. He's a buffoon.. if the DNC COULD get their shit together and manage him, they would. They are even more incompetent than he is though; believe that.
You're defending the hoax while denying it.
You've been completely duped, dude.
Nobody is asking you to pardon Trump. All I'm asking you to do is see the CIA and Intel Goons as tools of the Masters; hell bent on smashing the fourth wall and seizing power by ANY means.
That's not OK; less OK than some Orange Idiot in office.
Dude, I get it. I obviously am interested in what Matt says because I pay to read it. My comments are not made in a fit of emotional hatred for Trump. I care about the rule of law. What Matt says here is valid and important. I’m just trying to sort it out in my head. Basically, at what point does it cross the line from concerned bureaucrats sounding the alarm to deep state coup?
At the point where a candidate is spied on and has agents planted around their team while they run for office, while employing the help of foreign intelligence agencies and former "sources" to build a fake dossier, get warrants in a secret court and conduct an all-out attack based on the fake dossier. That's when.
“Committing a felony at the direction of Trump.” This is not true. You are making statements that have been shown in a court of law to be false. Incompetent—compared to whom? I submit that there is no one person who is competent to be POTUS. Too much power. It is my opinion that compared to Obama he is quite good.
I am assuming that “Individual 1” cited in the court documents is the president. I make this assumption due to the fact that it has been clearly stated that the Dept of Justice has taken the position that a sitting president can’t be charged while in office. Therefore, he was not named in the document. And why would Cohen pay porn stars with his own money if it wasn’t at the direction of his client, who then used campaign money to pay him back. If you are equating Obama and Trump in terms of knowledge of how our constitutional system works and their ability to administer government you have completely lost my attention. Incompetence is different than just pointing to the overwhelming job of the president. Apples and oranges. Incompetent is when you lack the knowledge and skills to complete tasks. This isn’t just my opinion on Trump. Dozens of federal judges have issued injunctions against his actions because of the ad hoc way he’s carried out these policies. I mean, the guy watches FoxNews and tweets all day.
You come off as someone desperately clinging to a presupposition.
Nope. Just desperately trying to communicate reality.
No.. you routinely reject anything that doesn't fit the narrative being peddled by CNN and the CIA's propaganda.
You are an indoctrinated fool. Seig... HEIL!
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
Matt, every Time I read one of your articles, I breathe a sigh. Yes, someone out there gets it. It’s so hard for me to understand why my liberal, and especially, my progressive friends don’t get this. Even If Ukrainegate does rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors”— and I’m willing to withhold judgement on that for now— any impeachment hearings are tainted by the ravenous searching for crimes that began immediately post-election. I remember Watergate. The hearings were deliberate and no one, neither Democrat nor Republican — was anxious to impeach. That, as you point out, was not our preferred way to change administrations. I also believe that we are at a critical point. If we do this now, there’s no turning back, and a president who makes it through four years will be a rarity.
Matt and his chums like the moronic Jimmy Dore, and the smug Aaron Mate have decided to embrace conspiracy theorizing and rhetorical whataboutism as a way to deny, deflect, and apologize for Trump. Sad to see Matt go so far down the rabbit hole that he may never surface again. I would have never guessed he'd throw in his lot with the likes of Jimmy friggin' Dore....
Accuse me of being “too patient” if you’d like, however this whole tangled mess of flawed characters with warts on all players and their partisan cheerleaders, especially major media and politicians, will become more clear as the current investigations (of the investigators) are concluded and not before. Until then, I will put faith in Matt’s perspective, for what does he have to gain by taking sides and willfully ignoring stuff that’s “believable"? Tell me that and I will gladly put it into my analysis as a “qualifier” of whatever he’s telling us.
There is a growing collection of books and articles that counter what the network chatterers tell us and/or choose to ignore and keep out of sight. What about those, Dr. John? Some are positioned in the “best seller” standings. Are you dismissing that input? Do the NYTimes and WaPo, etc., even interview the authors and do reviews? Or do they just look the other way and espouse their preferred narratives, instead?
I often wonder “why", about a couple of things. First, why is it that the Democrats are trying to fast track hearings labeled as so-called "impeachment inquiries" done kind of heater-skelter by multiple committees. If they have a strong case to make, why wouldn’t they want it to be made in an “orderly” way, making it airtight instead of using shortcuts that are questionable in a procedural sense. Second, how can the Democrats really think that their nonsensical positions and their collection of “s/he’s a stretch" POTUS candidates are going to carry the day in the next election? If they’re hoping to convince Independents like me that they’ve got a stable of all-stars on stage for us to choose from, that’s just not working and it’s getting worse. Would I vote for Trump? — don’t think so. Would I write in someone as an outsider no matter how pointless? Yep, for sure. Would I vote for a Democratic candidate if it becomes clear their party tried to pull off a whatever-it-takes removal of Trump via impeachment or political sabotage? Surely would not, and I think that’s probably what will happen.
Why? Probably because they are as desperate as can be and they're looking at losing another election to this orange clown.
Why would they lose again to this clown? The answer is because they are SO incompetent at securing their own jobs, performing their own jobs and with at least pretending to care about the constituency that they're resorting to using the Intel chiefs as weapons, rather than try to get their collective shit together and run a presidential campaign that will succeed.
They're incompetent boobs.
They've been assured that the other incompetent boobs who have tabs on EVERYONE and have shown they can hijack other countries governments that they can get it back for them... but they're incompetent -all of them.
The boobs leading the boobs.
Speaking of which... I like actual boobs; just not looneybird boobs.
I have NPR and Talk Radio in my vehicle. I switch back and forth. The take of each sides' narratives about current events is stark. If you listen only to one there is no room a broader perspective. The advertising differences are interesting. NPR ads mainly cultural and hoity toity and Talk Radio peoples' aches and pains and illnesses.
Kathleen, we were made for each other! As a grad student in the late ‘60s and early ’70s I subscribed to a liberal monthly and a conservative one and read them both cover-to-cover. I’ve kept that mental framework as much possible over the years. May have gotten this more “objective” orientation (“balanced” might be a better word) from my dad, a Columbia U Journalism grad. He was a lttle right of center on many things, but never closed-minded or knee-jerk, and read everything. He was a quiet but visible champion of equal rights for minorities and took a leadership role in immigration matters re: “displaced persons”. The Great Depression affected his career, as did the early death of my mother during WWII, so he wasn’t a published writer except on business and technical matters. But I try to practice what I saw from, and in, him.
I’m always curious about which candidates attract votes and other support from citizens with views like mine. My favorites are usually marginalized in the relatively early going!
I am on same time-frame as you. As grad student in 70s during Nixon the intelligence agencies were the focus of so much scrutiny (and Iran-Contra!). I am baffled by the embracing of the intelligence communities by news media like MSNBC since 2016. It as if they have no historical knowledge of the past actions of the U.S. intelligence agencies or no remembrance of the Stasi, 610 Police or Bolivarian Intelligence Service.
Lol or... "as if" they made a deal with the devil to get something they can't obtain through normal means.
Sounds like you patently reject the very idea that the IC could stage a COUPLE of coups on their own country's elected officials.
You don't see this?
You actually WANT the intelligence community conducting top-level coups through the media, social media and through politicians who are deeply in the pocket of the masters?
That's kind of fucked.
Scott, you have an excellent point here. Trump is a one-off phenomenon in my opinion that can be corrected in the next election if in our collective judgement he shouldn’t be reelected. And it’s unlikely that someone like him (if there even IS such a person somewhere), would be lucky enough to run against a candidate with Hillary’s inherent unlikeability ratings and deeply troubling baggage. But a "faux impeachment” movement engineered by deeply entrenched career officials, especially partisan members of the IC scheming out of sight, could be a repeatable threat to ANY future POTUS and executive branch. This “soft coup” impeachment strategy is a brazen attempt to chip away at Trump’s support for 2020. If the investigations of the investigators play out as I expect, .it’s precisely what the founders wanted to avoid related to impeachment. It should be dragged out into the daylight and punished so that it would not likely happen again.
Yes... and yes, yes, yes.
This is where it's at.
It's a desperate attempt to cloud his re-election, which... looks inevitable now.
How sad, really... because if the Democrats weren't just riding the CIA's Magic Trips Furthur bus since the end of the last election, they MIGHT have had a chance to actively work to regain the voters' trust and win by fair means... like in an election.
Nope, they wasted time and effort on Russiagate; it didn't work, and now they're wasting time and effort on this horse shit. Meanwhile, their party is in shambles, nothing gets done in Washington, (still,) and the voters are fed up, (still,).
They'll lose again... and this masquerade will likely fall apart like Russiagate did.
By the way... what HAS Hunter Biden been up to over there in the Ukraine... working for a giant company his dad gave handouts to?
Do you think he's just doing a good job, working away at his desk? Or is he just whoring and partying on his dad's dime still?
Saw a sign on someone's yard the other day that read "ANY Responsible Adult -2020" and laughed so hard I almost drove off the road.
Calling an argument “whataboutism” is one of the things a person does when they don’t have an argument. It is a perfectly valid rhetorical device. Taibbi is correct that objectively the treatment Trump (and us Trump voters) have received would rightly be viewed, by the same people who see it as legitimate now, as outrageous if it were done to a Democrat. Just as an intellectual exercise, try it out.
Nice ad hominum. What exactly about Jimmy Dore have you found to be disingenuous? Because you dont like the "sound" of it?
I entirely agree. This would be a dangerous precedent. I’d like to challenge you about the Ukraine phone call. Is it really true that you are withholding judgment, or do you already know that it is far, far short of an impeachable offense? If a president can be impeached for that, then we have no shot.
We've long whispered about the Deep State, assuming that the Intelligence Community should have counter-intelligence responsibilities, out of sight, protecting the Executive branch from moles planted by foreign foes, and that our secret agents would, if necessary, quietly dispatch a Manchurian Candidate. But we assume that he deep state are protecting us from foreign foes, and that the less said beyond that, the better. And we assume they operate out of some sub-basement of the CIA in Langley.
But what we appear to have here is an alternative version in which the Deep State protects the Domestic interests of the Elite -- that group of financial powers of whom nobody went to jail for any misdeeds leading to the 2008 crisis, that group which also happen to control the media which control the boundary lines of permissible political discussion, as Matt has documented in his precious book. Let us suppose that the Washington Swamp works for that elite, serve it and profit from it. And let us suppose that the Deep State are not there to protect the constitutionally designated Executive branch, but to guard and protect the Swamp.
And so for a candidate from outside of those boundaries to be elected president, that's not merely a threat to the power of the institutional media, it's an existential threat to the security of all the swamp creatures. Alligators are usually solitary and don't usually work in teams, but we suppose they are wired to respond with the same instincts and to swarm and attack the intruder.
And since you and I understand that the alligators in the moat, or in the swamp, are there to protect against invaders, and we see them attack, we are conditioned to cheer for the alligators. They are doing their job. And if they are promoting the story that they are protecting us from Russians, all the better.
But who do the alligators serve? Who can protect us against them? That's the context in which Matt has framed the question, which is the worse choice to lead the country, Donald Trump, with all his known flaws and evils? Or the swamp gators? I heard Rudy Giuliani last week say something to the effect that Trump was elected on the promise of draining the swamp, but none of us has a clue how bad the swamp was. Say it ain't so.
It is indeed frightening. They're perfectly willing to take us all down with the Pequod for any chance to get their orange whale.
Where will it end? With concentration camps?
How utterly gross. This is the answer to the nagging question about how most of Germany got behind a douche like Hitler and the Nazi Party... They wanted to excise people they thought were responsible for the downfall of their country -and they didn't care how it was done.
Well what's the matter Taibbi? Don't you love democracy? Don't you support the rULe oF LAw? How can you question these heroes? The only possible explanation for questioning the IC's motives must be that you are a Trump supporter. It's a very sad day for journalism Matt!
I'm kidding of course. It appears this is the new powerserving media spectacle to consume all the oxygen in the room, and marginalize issues that actually affects people's lives. The parallels between this and the trumprussia histrionics are too much to bear.
...but bear it we must. Or.. just look away and wait until it's time to gather a backpack of essentials and just wander away into the woods.
Matt, I dig the way you write. You elevate and contextualize boring, confusing news and politics into something not only digestible but exciting. But here, (and maybe I'm confused) are you saying that it’s better to ignore Trump’s crimes and leave him in office? Because why? The CIA and FBI have done illegal shit, too? Unless you’re accusing those agencies of framing Trump, you are creating more whataboutism and confusion not unlike what the mainstream media peddles. Unless he is impeached and removed, Trump proves that a US President is above the law.
Thanks - see Chuck McClenon’s reply below. I can’t stress enough that the Russiagate insanity, and specifically the Steele leak, began before Trump took office. If it was not framing exactly it was certainly manipulation of wrong intelligence, on par with using Chalabi’s tales to start war. There are only three explanations for the January 7, 2017 “intel chiefs” meeting. One, they sincerely believed Trump was a cultivated foreign agent as Steele reported. I don’t buy that this is possible. They had half a year at least to investigate these extremely serious claims. If they were true, leaking to CNN and letting Trump take office is an extremely weak response. Moreover no evidence to substantiate the idea ever surfaced. Two: Steele was on some level genuinely reporting rumors he heard, and the agencies merely waved this dicey intel on to the public via leaks (and gave it gravitas with leaks of their meeting) because it was explosive and expedient, advancing political goals they had. This to me is the most likely explanation. A sub-possibility is Steele was duped by Russian disinformation and the agencies either knew this and waved it through, or weren’t sure and waved it through anyway. Three: the agencies had a direct hand in creating the Steele nonsense. I think this unlikely. It’s what Trump and Giuliani believe, and it’s not completely unsupported, given Steele’s relationship with the FBI and Fusion’s dubious history, but I have a hard time believing such a Dr. Evil narrative absent hard hard evidence. Still, option #2, i.e. cynically using/leaking wrong intel to cripple an incoming president, would be an awesome corruption/meddling story, beyond anything Trump has done.
Right. And this is where I'm also caught, trying to figure between options #2 and #3 -- it's hard to believe #3 in which there is some intentional Dr. Evil master-minding the coup, even if the incestuous relationships among Steele, the McCabes, foreign intelligence partners, etc. Certainly the opportunities were there for some very deliberate collusion, but have all of these players already been totally in the bank for Hillary from the beginning? It seems more likely that there were more tentacles, operating more or less independently -- Steele and Fusion GPS doing their thing, bought and paid for fairly directly by the Clinton campaign, and the IC community/FBI believing this because it was useful to them. But it becomes a fuzzy line between when the IC community is wanting to believe it and wanting more of it. Are they conspirators, or dupes? Which would be worse? As evidence in support of #3, we have McCabe keeping in touch with Steele even after Steele is officially fired, and it appears that the rest of the agency is aware of this. What we lack is the specific individual Dr. Evil who is pulling the strings. But isn't a multi-header Dr. Evil both more plausible and more evil? But, as you say, even option #2 is far more corrupt and awesome than anything Donald Trump is capable of.
I put the question in another reply in this thread, but it is apropos here: Is it plausible that President Obama would not have been aware of the whole ugly business? It’s inconceivable to me. I do admit to deeply despising Obama, what with his abuse of the IRS to thwart the Tea Party, and on and on. But I can still reason. There are indications in the record, such as Sztrok-Page exchanges. Who, besides Hillary, had the most to lose by Hillary losing to Trump? And who was in the position to do something about it? I doubt we’ll ever know for sure, though. Attorney General Barr, and President Trump, are too much the patriots to put the country through that.
Obama knew, according to Strozk & Paige texts.... AND https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
Not "in the bank" for Clinton, but for the establishment and the money
And why this isn't looked at in most news rooms with analysis rather than emotion?
Because they aren't interested in reporting the news that doesn't serve the propaganda "leaked and then publicly tried as if it were real or credible.
In short, they're fucking shills for the Man. Our democracy never really was, and now it's being revealed more as the sham it always was. Not soon now before shit hits the fan.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
I lean towards Option #2 but I still don't get what happened with Mueller.
It's pretty apparent the intelligence agencies were leaking false intelligence to the media which drove support for the Special Counsel investigation.
What was the endgame strategy?
Did the CIA think Mueller could be *reached* and he'd just make shit up? Remember how Brennan smugly predicted indictments before the report came out?
But Mueller didn't play along. He blew gaping holes in the entire Russiagate narrative and embarrassed a lot of powerful people.
Why? It's pretty obvious he was being pressured by the establishment to regurgitate the usual talking points and take down Trump.
The only plausible explanation is that the CIA Russiagate "intelligence" was such transparent bullshit even an old hand like Mueller knew it would come back to haunt him. And if Mueller is anything, he's a careerist bureaucrat down to his wing-tipped shoes.
It brings to mind Colin Powell preparing for his UN WMD speech. He gave a very mendacious speech, but there were certain things he just wouldn't say. There are lies and there are LIES. A good company man knows the difference.
That's just my theory. I could be wrong. Whatever the case, I bet there's a fascinating backstory to the Mueller investigation.
Don't forget Robert Mueller was in charge, head of the FBI when 9/11/01 happened. Evidence at the scene rapidly disappeared and no testing for thermites was done. Our corporate newsmedia continuously referred to the "well respected" Mueller during the Russiagate probe. It seems the bigger job under way was to connect WikiLeaks, and Assange and Manning while taking the word of the DNC and Crowdstrike with Russia and letting Trump fall by the wayside
How do you explain where Mueller was during the entire investigation where he seemed like the invisible man? Then his first opportunity to answer questions he seemed, to be as polite as possible, out of touch with reality? Mueller was/is a useful idiot. I’d like to see another Mueller interview though. Maybe his latest testimony was an act?
I am pretty sure the whole deal can be mostly be explained by this: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Clark_Mccauley/publication/232519343_The_Nature_of_Social_Influence_in_Groupthink/links/5713e05808aeebe07c063b3f/The-Nature-of-Social-Influence-in-Groupthink.pdf
"In his book Victims of Groupthink, Janis (1972) described a
particular kind of group pathology that he believed contributed
to such fiascos of U.S. foreign policy as the Bay of Pigs invasion
and escalation of the Vietnam War. The essence of the pathology was described as a group pressure for consensus that interfered with full consideration of available alternatives and risks, and this pressure was hypothesized to be a direct function of
the cohesion of the decision-making group"
It's a weird job "they" have, being professional paranoids who work (in their mind, at least, and I'm willing to accept that perspective as legit) for the "greater good", and they're prone to some sort of mild group psychosis. They live in an echo chamber made of secrets, and it's not "healthy" for them as people sometimes. Something like that.
They're also normal, everyday, flawed people with egos and insecurities. They're REALLY not very open to alternative ideas on how to refine their "narratives" in light of new evidence. They SUCK at that. They SEEM to think if they admit to an error about one tiny thing about their media narratives, the whole edifice of national security will crumble, the US and global order will be delegitimized and collapse, and we'll all die. So they're acting like children about the "collusion/conspiracy" aspect of Russiagate when they try to work it into the Ukrainegate narrative. They can't suck up the fact that they went a little crazy for a minute there.
With Ukrainegate, there's basically no chance the senate will convict. That makes it not a coup in my mind right off the bat. I'm in favor of impeachment just to make the republicans face how awful they've been behaving in letting this guy so overtly defy rule of law all the time, like at the rallies and inciting violence, just *daring* someone to do something about it. Even if they don't convict, they'll learn that that was a bad idea.
And the quid pro quo was demonstrably illegal. They actually caught his ass there. They're going to let him off, but it'll be like everyone rolling their eyes over Clinton "not having had sexual *relations* with that woman."
Anywho, I'm a total nobody who loves your work, Matt. I can't say for sure I'm right and you're wrong about if this qualifies as a real, scary coup. I just THINK we're probably okay.
No, the possibilities are not limited to your three, Matt. There are indications in the article and in your comments that you are familiar with the counter-counter-intelligence that has been developed since the corruptly hatched Mueller investigation was initiated. I wonder how seriously you have taken it, though. You suggest that Trump is caught in some conspiracy theory, as the liberal media are wont to allege when their intent is to dismiss any assertion out of hand. A conspiracy theory, you well note, can be completely legitimate. There is abundant evidence in the public record now that such a conspiracy existed and persists. (Again, to your credit, you are on it.) Your third option is that “the agencies had a direct hand in creating the Steele nonsense.” What you fail to consider is that the ‘Steele nonsense’ is the tip of the iceberg of the conspiracy. (Here I imagine you and your audience getting a good chuckle. Ok, laugh, then. We shall see in due time.) I believe we will learn that the purpose of that Jan 7 meeting was nefarious. One wonders, for instance, why would Susan Rice have felt it necessary, at noon on Inauguration Day, to return to her official computer to send herself an official memo to memorialize that President Obama had instructed the attendees to do things “by the book”? The Mueller Report indicates that the investigation had determined before mid-2017 that the Russia allegations were unfounded. Why was it not wrapped up then? (Would it still be going on had William Barr not been appointed?). I have a favorite quotation, from Mario Puzo, about enemies: “Don’t hate your enemies. It clouds your judgment.” Easier said than done. It is clear to me, being someone who does not hate Trump, that hatred for Trump, or disdain or contempt, whichever one indulges in, has flooded this country with an utter blindness to reality. But Trump is only the purported target—the true target is Trump voters. You are right about the threat of a permanent coup. But I think it started long before Trump. There is a still small but very intense minority on the left which has begun to consider illegitimate those election results that don’t suit their fancy. This is the germ not of a coup but of a civil war. It was apparent when GWB was elected. It was obvious when Kavanaugh was appointed. It will happen again if Trump wins 2020. I surmise you’d grant that. But what about the next time a Republican wins? Where is the Republican who is not hated by the left? Where are the liberals who denounce the resistance? It is not just in the FBI/Intel nexus—it is millions of victims of Trump Derangement Syndrome. When Trump is gone, the resistance will shift to the next Republican. There is nothing dangerous about Trump. But we are in danger.
Yes. Assuming that you are a subscriber within Matt's paywall, then you can go and find my comment, in another thread, on the thought that Obama chose Biden as his VP in significant part because Joe had a pretty good history of insider dealings (as Obama also had within the Chicago machine) and we need not speak of the Clintons. Biden was the perfect senior guy to supervise the boundaries. It could be an administration "without a hint of a smidgeon of corruption" because all the key officials were the very best at it, (and were far slicker than the 'investigators' in the media).
Of course, as I spin this out this way, I'm obviously asserting a conspiracy that I can't quite prove. But just because we're paranoid does not mean our fears are not well-founded. And you (James Per) ask the question, how far back does this go? Since when has the Intelligence Community become a deliberate player? GWB was the son of a CIA director, and might have been allowed soem ground, but sometime later the IC might have begun to turn against him?
#2 is the most plausible premise imo. I think you’re also attributing too much credit for leaks to the Chiefs when the leaking is really being done by the Indians.
Lest we forget, Comey’s October surprise letter regarding reopening investigation of HerEmails was as much a bid to head off elements in the FBI that were a threat to leak the Abedin laptop revelation as anything. We can discuss whether those were anti-Hillary or pro-Trump factions, but this idea that the leaks are uni-directional, or are even a top down phenomenon, is extremely questionable.
"Unless you’re accusing those agencies of framing Trump, you are..." I believe that this is Exactly what Matt is doing. What was Russiagate all about, if it was not the agencies framing Trump? If it was not the Deep State constructing deliberate lies in order to protect the Swamp against an intruder.
If Trump IS impeached and removed on the basis of a false narrative construed by the IC community, then that proves the Deep State is not merely beyond the law, but the Dark Force guarding the Empire.
LOL we KNOW they are the dark force protecting the Empire.
That's pretty well established.
That they're conducting PsyOps and election tampering AND an illegal coup is just a cherry on top of the ol' shit sundae.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
Yes, Trump oafishly trying to get dirt on a good old boy from our other capitalist imperialist party really was the straw that broke that camel. Not Bush illegally starting a war in Iraq to justify rolling back the bill of rights. Not Obama rewarding the criminals who destroyed the world's economy with $29 trillion dollars and get out of jail free cards. Not only has the president been above the law for the majority of my lifetime, but so has the entire top 5% of households.
But sure, one evil corrupt politician pointing out that another evil corrupt politician is indeed corrupt by phoning a friend in Kieve is somehow beyond the pale. Let's give the accountable to no one orwellian intelligence agencies an effective veto of elections. What could possibly go wrong?
Oh, I don't know.. overt rulership by a non-elected bunch of bureaucrats?
When will the sound of that really scare you? When they're rounding people up for work camps?
Jesus.
Thanks, Jeff. This is my question as well. Matt is proposing a false choice between Trump’s actions and those of the Intel Community. The IC is so bad that we wave away unacceptable behavior from POTUS?
I’ve noticed a trend in current “personal” journalism. In every story there is one moment where an honest practitioner exposes an unwillingness to adequately leaven their outrage. It almost always begins with the phrase “To be sure,” and is a rapid hand wave at a glaring obstacle to the author’s thesis that he or she feels honor bound to acknowledge but won’t explore in the depth that obstacle demands. I’ll let everyone re-read the story for that moment.
As a long time reader I continue to follow Matt avidly, but I’m increasingly worried that he’s losing the thread and indulging a form of confirmation bias. The IC deserves every bit of skepticism we can muster, and I’d be interested in more stories that drill down on their undemocratic and unconstitutional actions. The idea that this somehow excuses Trump’s actions? Absurd.
Those who advocate for Trump's removal effectively argue for removal of Trump by any means. My guess is that the commentariat opposing Trump believe the Russia nonsense was valid. And with the predicted (by Matt and others) failure of the bogus Intel generated and supported Russia-gate hooey, my guess is that the fervor for Trump's removal/retirement has merely risen in it's ferocity among this crowd.
So we have Ukraine-gate (Russia-gate 2). Trump has Finally been shown to have acted illegally. The degree of illegality is of some concern for his opponent's position. After all ,Trump's overt actions could have been accomplished surreptitiously using IC assets abroad(assuming there are some still loyal to the Constitution and not to their biases.)
He could have backed Republican Senate inquiries into the apparent suspect activities of the Biden/Kerry/Bulger kiddie troika and perhaps Biden himself. But being the narcissistic swell that he is he took to twitter, the phone and public rallies to hang himself in the eyes of his opponents. But that's Trump-an egoist with no sense of propriety and a complete sense of self-entitlement.
Only, has he hung himself? As Matt clearly points out the IC has had it's hands deeply manipulating the Russia-gate bit and seems equally involved with Ukraine-gate. This alone should cause pause in the anti-Trumpites ardor. That Trump will use these facts to effectively harass, criticize and condemn the accusers is lost on the opponents, although recent history(Russia-gate) shows Trump is quite effective with this approach. Also the chance of the Senate ever throwing Trump out is infinitesimally small.
The end of the story is that Trump remains , his supporters galvanize around him, the 4-8% of the voters who decide the presidential elections are swayed by the ham-handed actions of the MSM and its Intel Community operatives and Warren(a politically naive and ham-handed candidate in her own right) loses by 1%.
The mere assertion of sufficient evidence to impeach is not the same as having enough to indict. Impeachment is purely a political act with no requirement that a crime be committed(e.g. Blow job Bill). The Dems have taken a hazardous chance that can easily explode in their face. We've just completed 2+ years of listening to assertions of "We've got him Now" by the Trump haters. The Ukraine nonsense is beginning to sound eerily similar.
They don't care... they're like Germans during Hitler's rise to nasty power.
Oh, it's great to have a maniac in the cage to rid you of elements you don't like, but when they kick YOUR door in at 2AM and stuff you naked on a train... that's when you get it.
Are you talking about ICE?
I'm referring to the rise of fascist national socialism here... and how it's not at all coming from the place most people thought it would -"the conservatives". No, these are people who vote along socially progressive lines, and they're cheering on multiple coups at home.
After WWII, people sat around wondering out loud how a nation of seemingly good people could get behind that sort of shit. Books were written, studies were conducted. It's a little clearer now, I think.
ICE has been kicking in doors at 2 am and stuffing people into vans, buses, trains, cars and planes since their inception under the 'leadership' (gag) of both duopoly parties of capital since their inception and prior to that, as INS. They're part and parcel of the IC the Pantsuit Nation crowd somehow believes are working towards 'restoring democracy' lmao. Why do you think Obama earned the nickname 'Deporter in Chief' from the Immigrant rights community? Trump has escalated what every POTUS has escalated as far as ICE is concerned with horrifying results. Do you think that Obama rationalizing his escalation of that horror and handing the keys to a mass surveillance/deporation/militarized- with concentration camps 'with eloquence' over to a demented vicious clown like Trump was an accident lol?
Yep, do we need to make mention of Obama's world record for most drone strikes?
A pallet of CASH fucking money to Iran?
I mean... what about handing trillions, (with a TR) to the same people who greedily orchestrated the depletion of the mortgage and securities market to keep their greedy asses in business?
ICE... come on. Penny ante shit compared to what's probably coming.
“Trump has finally been shown to have acted illegally” - this is not the case. This is your opinion. Impeachment does not require a crime - again, not the case. “High crimes and misdemeanors” means something, and its definition cannot be created out of whole cloth by the Democratic House.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
There is a whole string of actions beyond the phoney Russiagate, for which Trump should be impeached. Obstruction of justice, emoluments, etc.
I don’t see anything Matt says here, or in any previous articles, as excusing Trump. I think we all agree that he’s the worst, least qualified president in our history, and that’s saying a lot. But it comes down to choosing the greater risk. Trump wasn’t created in a vacuum, and as with any populist, there are enough grains of truth in what he says to lend him credence. The self-proclaimed truth-tellers of the media may not actually fake the news, but they do pick and choose according to their biases. And while we who hate him may be glad to see him removed from office by any means, his supporters, honestly rightly, see a president who has been accused since day one of crimes that haven’t stuck. Just like happened to Bill Clinton. Add to this the resurgence of power in the intel community, regressing to the days when J.Edgar Hoover held the fate of everyone in his files. The question becomes, which is the greater evil? One, if the Democrats play their cards right, will be gone in a little over a year. But the other, non-elected groups, will be with us long after and can do a lot more damage.
I disagree that there is a need to frame this as a choice between risks. The IC being a threat to democracy and Trump being a corrupt train wreck of a human being whose actions necessitate his removal are hardly mutually exclusive, and the former doesn’t preclude the latter imo. It’s a false choice.
Yeah, you're right.. one can't be on the side of the institutions' integrities without being a "trump supporter". It's better to stay on the side of the intel goons... the same ones that have tested chemical weapons on their own ciitizens without their knowledge, deposed hundreds of governments so that corporate interests would be safe, kidnapping people, illegally collecting ALL phone, email and text information without warrants... yeah, they're the good guys.
You're high, right?
Trump is many things but least of all is he a “corrupt train wreck of a human being.” That kind of talk, hyperbolic or not, is where the term Trump Derangement Syndrome came from. Take a deep breath and calm yourself down.
“Worst, least qualified president”? Not everyone sees it that way, hard as it may be to believe. In my opinion, we only need go back to, say, 2016 to find a weaker one.
No, sir.
What's absurd is the amount of brainwashing you've swallowed by your propaganda organs.
How terrifying.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
Great piece. I like Matt's writing and his perspective. I think the issue here is not about whose crimes, because they are evident on both sides. The key issues are the accusations of corruption from both sides, which question the very nature of corruption, or at least, its legal status. It places the blame squarely in how money for services transactions are defined legally. And that includes political donations from business interests. Such is the conflict between business, the whole money/financial system, and politics. There needs to be a better legal framework, and much more strongly enforced separation of the two, like church and state. Politics is susceptible to money, or revolving door jobs, or other favours, the difference between the two has always been difficult to spot. But Trump has come to power through a business and media lens, using the law as a battering ram; this is how he sees relationships with others, as well as with other nations - his awfulness is quite unique. But on the plus side, the nature of this corruption is becoming more public, its effects on the social fabric more exposed to scrutiny by journalists like Matt. And laws can change.
"using the law as a battering ram". As opposed to using the law as a weapon for a coup? It seems regime change is in our DNA now. It’s not just a game we play when it comes to toppling foreign powers anymore. We get to play this game at home now too. To the public we can say, "We undertake this with great seriousness, because there's evil doers at work. And let's not forget the law!" And to our political enemies, we say, "nothing personal, it’s just business."
But that all pales in comparison to mixing of “business, the whole money/financial system, and politics”. Right?
Meh, it's just all becoming clear that mixing business/ finance/ and politics has been the modus operandi all along. It's been thinly veiled, for sure.. but now it's just out on the table.
It's amazing to me that people think we still have a fair election system at all still, and that "their side" is "right".
It's just so fucked, and so disappointing.
I think you Deep State guys and Russia Hoaxers are a little bit in the weeds here. I'm not saying there isn't one, but why do you need a deep state when Trump commits and admits to crimes out in the open? Just like Col. Jessup in A Few Good Men confessing to the "Code Red", Trump is so morally bankrupt that he's incapable of seeing the crimes he commits as crimes.
I agree the media irresponsibly created an "espionage or bust" narrative around the Mueller investigation. It wasn't sexy, but Mueller delivered a bunch of arrests and 10 examples of boring old obstruction of justice. Not a hoax.
Furthermore, Trump caused his own investigation when he admitted to firing James Comey for not "dropping the whole Russia thing". He also spoon fed Don Jr. the lie about the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians. How can he NOT be investigated at this point, even if nothing turned up? For our nation's safety, we had to at least make sure that Trump was truly the unfit idiot we suspected. Although, I would've been tickled to see this news conference:
BREAKING NEWS!
Newscaster: "We interrupt this program to take you to Washington DC where Special Investigator Robert Mueller is making a statement."
Mueller: "We have decided to stop investigating Donald Trump's ties to Russia. It's obvious that he's a moron and and even though he is clearly corrupt, he is simply too stupid to do real espionage. Thank you."
Trump is a life long grifter. He will continue to commit crimes because that's what criminals do. He's too corrupt to stop and too dumb to cover it up.
Also, and FWIW... Taibbi isn't latching on to this concept of a "deep state" as some type of literary device; it's real and it's been operating with impunity since it's creation from the ashes of the OSS/ Civil Intelligence Agency.
These people have been testing chemical weapons on it's own citizens, wiretapping and illegally collecting data on all of us and conducting coup after coup, (in a seemingly endless parade of "failed" or deposed governments since anyone can remember.
These are bad dudes... with connections to even worse dudes. By "dudes" I mean anyone with enough clout to grease the wheels... so, not just dudes.
You are really so clueless as to thin the "deep state" isn't an actual thing?
Jesus.
Nothing but respect for Taibbi and his work. Also never said "deep state wasn't an actual thing". What I meant was, take away the Deep State and Trump is still a criminal. That’s all I mean when I say some folks are in the weeds. The ball is right there in the fairway. I’m not implying that Intel crimes should be excused, but I don’t think a criminal president should be ignored as a way to foil Intel crimes.
Name the crime.
Ah, thanks for the clarification. He is, but undermining the whole scam's fourth wall I think is worse.
Yes, he's a douche, and a career grifter.
Does this excuse the Intel bureaucrats from staging coup after coup on home turf at the behest of globalist money?
I don't think so.
But meanwhile notice on the big issues of warmongering and corporatism, there is no difference between the DNC and the GOP.
You could have saved some ink with this: Orange man bad.
With William Barr attending Opus Dei conclaves and meeting with Rupert Murdoch while Gina Haspel takes over the CIA,I think the coup has already happened.Add to this list the greedy billionaires in his cabinet...Betsy DeVoss,Wilbur Ross etc.Trump is the perfect stooge to front the NEW deep state.I agree with your views on the old intelligence guys but that is the past.Under Trump we are already becoming a "show me your papers" country.Ask any Hispanic.I can see him carting liberal SCOTUS members away in vans to work in the countryside and undergo reeducation programs.I know Eric Swalwell is a hack but c-mon....Lindsey Graham?We are in a "which is worse" situation.I pick Trump...the "Insane Clown President". Remember what you wrote about him? Hollywood has already shown us how dangerous clowns can be and this isn't a movie.
And the real scam is that the DNC is no different.
Well, once you realize that the bipartisan system is designed to disrupt any momentum that an outsider could hope to gain in any branch of the federal government, you see how the bad political theater is a tool used to confound us all. (Those of us who still bother to look at it believing that it's REAL,)
Oh yes... it is a front.
That they keep "going after" him is just so much bad political theater; devised to keep people from seeing what they're really up to.
Was the deep state responsible for Clinton having been impeached for a blow job?Were they behind the Benghazi fiasco or the Clinton email disclosures?Whose side are they on anyway?I agree with your assertion that they IC has done some really "shitty" things and is not to be trusted.My point,however, is that Trump,because he is a pathological narcissist ,can easily be manipulated if his self esteem is threatened.I think a new "deep state" is emerging around and in response to him. "Deep states" keep changing their personnel and tactics as the years go by.To many religious zealots with fascistic tendencies(Bill Barr), Trump is the goose who laid the golden egg.It's their turn to run things now.
Trump wasn't elected because he was going to stick it to the elites.Have you ever seen Trump Tower in NY or been to Palm Beach? This guy is the elite on steroids.I know,I know ,he doesn't sound that way at a rally in rural Minnesota.Do you think he didn't know what he was doing with his famous tax bill?He was elected because the public would rather be entertained than bored with policy debates.In this respect he is more benign as long as he doesn't take to believing he really is a military genius. I'm sorry for getting a little off topic here but if you think that the "deep state" is only made up of Democrats,then you're only seeing half the picture.What's really happening right now is just simple politics.In this game either side will use any source to maintain power.Barr at the DOJ is not exactly a maverick Republican,enthralled with the great man he serves.He's a scheming member of the new,emerging deep state and colonel bone spurs is his cover.
FWIW, I never asserted that the "deep state" was just the DNC. Sure, they are going along with it -because their voting fanbase expects it.... but they all play for the same team ultimately.
...and no, I don't see it in colors of party affiliation. Not at all.
Just to clarify.
He acts exactly the way you'd expect a guy who lives in his own skyscraper would act.
Like a douche.
He's just not THEIR douche.
You throw around serious allegations like they are M & Ms. Sad.
I think what is said in this article would resonate more if all of the leaks were not revealing such concerning details about how Trump and the White House have been operating. I just don’t see how leaking concerning details about Trump’s abuses and incompetence somehow lessens the legitimate need to follow up and act on evidence of wrongdoing. Yes, having an intel community leaking info isn’t good, but neither is having a president who commits felonies. Did his lawyer and all of those campaign people go to jail because of a hoax? No. They went to jail because they broke the law. Did Mueller say that the Trump campaign did not coordinate with Russian actors? No. He said that what occurred was deeply troubling. Did he say that there were not at least 8 instances of probable instruction? No, he saId Congress needed to handle that because he can’t charge a president with a crime. And just because there are hardcore partisans who want Trump out by any means necessary does not change the fact that there are lots of Americans who care about the rule of law much more than they do politics right now. We can discuss how our democracy reins in the intel community while also acknowledging the serious corruption in the current executive.
Everyone is onto Trump's wrongdoings and talking about it. Hardly anyone in the commerce media is talking about the wrongdoings on the other side.
Commerce media. I am going to use that one.
You’re right about this. I think it generally stems from our broad interpretation of the states secrets doctrine. The IC has almost unlimited legal cover for keeping things classified. Therefore it is hard for a legit journalist to gather evidence on what is really happening. In other words, it’s hard to report on what you can’t verify through multiple sources.
I just wonder why some things get LOUD press, and some are overlooked......https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
AND I would love to find the video of this....BUT I haven't......
I saw that interview back a few months ago.It was on MSNBC ....that far left propaganda machine.I urge you to look it up.....you'll understand what "taken out of context" means.Brennan didn't come close to saying what you think he said.I hate to say it, but is the Wash.Times pushing "Fake News"?The videos is easy to find if you're interested in hearing what he actually said.
Yes, Mueller explicitly said Trump did not collude with Russia. Almost 3 years investigation, no collusion. He tried to make a case for obstruction, which is ludicrous. If it were not ludicrous, we would have long since seen an impeachment trial. Trump and the administration cooperated far more than the law requires. The rule of law? The Democratic Party, the FBI brass, the CIA brass, the media - they have made a mockery of the rule of law. They conducted an inquisition worthy of the Soviet Union: “Show me the man, I will show you the crime.” This is something that will not be forgotten - ever - by those of us who voted for Trump.
...or by people who didn't vote for Trump.
I didn't. I still respect the rule of law though, and do not wish to see this soft coup go on any longer -for the future of ALL of us.
The CIA IS conducting a take-down, and the DNC/members of the RNC are helping wherever they can... because THEIR masters want complete control.
Name the felonies.
Brennan can't, because his conclusions were based on bad intel......https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
"That was BAD, intelligence... very bad!"
"Sorry."
1. Violated campaign finance law when he paid hush money to a porn start with campaign funds in order to win an election. (His lawyer is in jail for this crime, and he would be too if he didn't win the election)
2. Obstruction of justice in the Mueller investigation when he asked Comey to "let Flynn go" and to be "loyal" to him and then fired Comey based on false pretenses to "lift the cloud" of the Russia investigation and admitted this on live television as well as to the Russian ambassador in the oval office. He also ordered the removal of Mueller but his lawyer thought that was "crazy shit" and did not follow the order. He also dangled pardons to Manafort and Flynn. He also made false accounts of the Trump Tower meeting where is inner circle met with Russians to get dirt on Clinton. And if you don't think this is obstruction, you're not just arguing against me, you're saying that thousands of federal prosecutors put their name on the record saying that these actions do indeed constitute obstruction. Mueller also said that Congress needed to take up these charges because he could not do it himself.
3. He violated Corrupt Practices Act when he used foreign policy to pressure and ask for a "favor" from a foreign government to investigate his political rival. He essentially set up a shadow foreign policy operation through Giuliani.
4. He is currently obstructing justice in an impeachment inquiry by ignoring subpoenas. (This was one of the articles of impeachment against Nixon)
Your list of "crimes" committed by Donald Trump are baseless and absurd, they are simply Democratic Party/Leftist Media talking points that anyone with an ounce of integrity would be embarrassed to repeat.
1. Michael Cohen plead guilty to the so-called election campaign finance violation as part of a plea bargain Cohen cut with the DOJ when he agreed to "flip" on Trump. A similar case between the Justice Department and John Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, accused the presidential candidate of using illegal campaign contributions to conceal an affair during his 2008 presidential run, he argued the money was meant to hide his mistress from his wife, not to influence the election. A jury acquitted him of one charge and deadlocked on the rest. People in this country, including President Trump, are innocent until proven guilty. I guess in a country run by corrupt Democrats that legal foundation is in peril.
2. There wasn’t a “Mueller Investigation” until after Comey was fired, on the advice of Acting AG Rod Rosenstein, and was based on damning information revealed in Inspector General Horowitz’s review of Comey’s handling of the Clinton email “matter.” Neither the president, nor the American public, were aware of a criminal investigation against Trump – so, how can one “obstruct” an investigation that was not happening? The answer for low IQ Democrats is it’s not possible – no crime no obstruction.
3. Read the transcript of the call again, if you even bothered reading it at all, low IQ Democrats simply repeat the Party’s talking points, there is absolutely no quid pro quo.
Hunter Biden, a man who was kicked out of the Navy for drug abuse (he’s a crack cocaine) and son of VP Biden, was being paid, as recently as a few months ago, $50,000 per month for sitting on the board of a Ukrainian energy company, owned by Ukrainian oligarchs, with zero qualifications, except that his father was Obama’s point person for Ukraine. That no-show position was worth several million dollars over 5 +/- years.
Did you forget the video and audio of former VP Biden bragging about how he was able to get a Ukrainian prosecutor fired by using the threat of withholding a $1 billion American loan as leverage? Not incidental is the fact the fired prosecutor was planning on interviewing Hunter Biden as part of an anti-corruption probe into the company where Hunter Biden was being paid millions of dollars. The sad fact that you show zero interest in anything except anti-Trump propaganda is a damning inditement against your integrity, ethics, and lack of common decency. Your party’s interests over the interests of justice, and American national security – truly disgusting behavior, but, typical of the Clinton/Obama Democratic Party.
4. The so-called impeachment inquiry has no basis in law and is an obscene abuse of power by a small group of Democrats led by Nancy Pelosi. In our country’s 240-year history only two presidents have been impeached, and one, Nixon, resigned the Presidency before he was impeached.
However, in each of the three instances the full House of Representatives voted prior to launching an official impeachment inquiry. Once a majority of House members voted in favor of beginning the process rules were established to provide both sides with subpoena powers, ability to call and question witnesses, and other procedures that were meant to protect the rights of the accused.
These procedures form the foundation of American justice. Apparently, to rabid Democratic Party zealots, like yourself, equal protection under the law doesn’t apply to President Trump, his associates, his family, nor to his supporters.
1. Cohen plead guilty not to a "so called" crime. He led guilty to a crime. And "individual 1" directed him to commit this crime. I will concede Trump, like Edwards is not "guilty" of the crime, because he has not been prosecuted for it, because he's president. Of Edwards won, my same arguments would apply. Doesn't change the fact that both of these men took illegal actions. We can't use Edward's trial to quit Trump. That's not how low works.
2. The Russian investigation was started prior to the the Mueller investigation. Mueller was appointed as special prosecutor because Session recused due to the fact he was involved with the campaign. That letter was a cover. Trump himself admitted that the letter sent was based on false pretenses when he publicly admitted the real reason he fired Comey. Mueller said in the report that all of his actions are all worthy of conclusions and that Congress should do so.
3. There is more to the current situation than the transcript of the call. That is the tip of the iceberg. All the people testifying this week have started to fill in the wholes about this concerted effort to extract personal favors from Ukraine. The Biden acting through an official government channel and was trying to remove a prosecutor who was not taking corruption seriously. He was fired as a way to use American influence to change their corrupt ways.
Complete opposite. If there was actually any evidence that Biden did this to protect his son, then I'd be all ears. Right now, it is just a way to point to something else to avoid what we do have clear evidence on with Trump.
4. Your claims of due process in a House impeachment inquiry have no basis in law. Show me the section of the constitution, statute or House rules that says they need to provide a full vote? If Trump wants to trample our democratic norms, he can't cry over House procedure that doesn't even exist. Could the dems follow tradition and hold a floor vote? Sure. Do they have to? No. The constitution provides due process during the Senate trial where Trump will be allowed to call all the witnesses they want. At this point, they just want to collect the record of facts in the investigation. He'll have his day(s) in court.
I will concede that all of these things I'm bringing up are not charges that have been prosecuted (yet). The fact that he is president makes this a very different situation. But nothing I have said here reflects someone who is low IQ. I am simply looking at the public record. Anyone who breaks the law should be held accountable.
Point 1 you concede is bullshit. Trump was never charged with, nor found guilty of, committing any campaign finance violations. Point 2. Comey was fired for a myriad of reasons, including findings of the Inspector General's investigation. Comey exonerated Clinton before she was interviewed, usurped the authority of the DOJ/AG, and then reopened the investigations just days before the election - Comey was a bad cop, his firing was the right move. Point 3: When specific rules are not in place the House of Representatives are required to use precedents as the guideline. The two previous impeachment inquires were launched AFTER the full House of Representatives had an opportunity to vote. This point reveals your lack of integrity because you know full well that Pelosi doesn't want a vote because it isn't politically favorable to her party. Why are you okay with allowing Adam Schiff to run a secret trial in the basement of Congress without allowing access to the information on the other side of the aisle. The previous two impeachments were not run like this shitshow. Your lack of honor disgusts me. You leftists are fascists. I don't need to go through your other bullshit points because frankly you're too stupid to get it anyway.
PS: it's not even a "impeachment" at this point; it's unofficial, never been voted on, and really just a cheap ploy to throw shade before the lose yet another election because they are incompetent shills.
Again, they're hogging up all of the oxygen in the room just to win political points.
They'll lose.
Bingo! Blind followers who would rather remove the rule of law and supplant it with... a fascist national socialist dictatorship. So progressive that they're riffling on politics of the early 1930s to take an "undesirable" out of office.
Real nice. Seig... HEIL!
You are completely ignoring the context of these crimes. That matters in a court of law. Just because you can justify Comey’s firing in some way, it does not mean that Trump’s public admission of his motive becomes irrelevant. Are you okay with literally EVERY prosecutor at EVERY level of government secretly investigating crimes? Imagine if law enforcement invited every suspect to participate in investigations against then prior to charges being filed. It would be very hard for witnesses to give reliable testimony when everyone knows what everyone else says. You seem to know a lot about partisan politics. Maybe start looking into out legal system a little closer.
"a damning inditement against your integrity, ethics, and lack of common decency."
Give me a break. Are you serious with this? It seems like you're putting in a lot of effort trying to talk away what is right in front of everyone's eyes by using "whataboutism" and name calling. And you have the balls to judge my integrity. That says something about your character, pal.
PS: Just because you voted for someone doesn't mean you have to blindly defend them or take it personal when they get themselves into legal trouble. You should be disappointed that the man you thought would help the country actually turned out to be much more selfish and corrupt than you imagined. I really thought he might be able to move things towards helping the working class again by disrupting the cozy elites, but that wish is long gone. His only legislative accomplishment is air dropping a trillion dollars onto the billionaire class. Sad.
Oh, like Obama?
Yes, I agree. I’m not political. I’m just trying to understand things better and engage in civil discourse. Stating things like “oh, like Obama” just shows that you are the partisan one.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
Taibbi, Jimmy Dore, Michael Tracey, Aaron Mate and the like have formed a new little clique who deal mainly in whataboutism. They interview each other and prop each other up. The problem is they seem to mainly be spinning their wheels in rhetorical mud. And this substack thing that Taibbi was supposed to be the figurehead of hasn't gone too well. The posts have slowed to a crawl, and most of them are public, so what is the point of having a paid subscription? Now that Taibbi has his show with Katie Halper, most of his energy seems to be going into that project. If Matt has lost interest in this substack project, he should let the paying customers know....
You are either a fool or you are a plant.
did you get your talking points from daily kos or balloon juice?
I suspect Dr. John is a Buzzfeed editor.
Also, include the following reasonable people to your so-called clique list: David Solomon, Mollie Hemingway, Kimberly Strassel, Chuck Ross, Victor Davis Hanson, Alan Dershowitz, etc.,
You rant about whataboutism (another meaningless term employed by fools who can't argue the merits of the topic) while you ignore the substance of the topic under scrutiny.
Can you point out where you disagree with any of the vast amount of information presented either in the article and/or in the comments?
Meh, this is proof of how pervasive mass media influence truly is. He must believe that if anyone doesn't support the #Resistance, a manufactured platform of bias and hatred, then they are immediately WRONG and in league with Orange Man.
This fervency for complete government control of the system to remove an undesirable is highly grim. It sickens me to the core.
I have read a number of Taibbi’s articles over the years. Like any of us, he is biased, but he comes across to me as about as honest a broker there is on the left. I have decided to subscribe so that I get a more regular read from the other side—without being induced to blow my own brains out (as might happen were I to follow most of the liberal media). I know people don’t subscribe here to read my commentary, so I will keep it brief when I comment. I think it may liven things up a bit for this audience to hear from someone who doesn’t hate Trump. You’re welcome.
Thank you for your very revealing and informative research and readable style. I’m happy to be part of the focus group. I would just say in reading these articles that so well take us to a deeper level behind the superficial and dysinformative headlines, I hope you will at some point in your book discuss the relationship of IC to global corporations and banking. I don’t believe the IC is just a headless chicken jumping around, they too have their superiors. I would love to see you wrap your research around that aspect “behind the headlines.” There is yet another Russian doll inside the IC doll. I’m ashamed to admit that at the time after 9/11 I fell for a Frontline report on PBS that gave a “behind the scenes” report on Iraq “exposing” their hidden WMD. Do you not find it credible that the invasion of Iraq was motivated by Cheney’s relationship with Halliburton?
Cheney/Haliburton is old news.. the new guard are multinational globalists with no regard for national boundaries at all. Same, but much bigger.
They even stage astro-turf protests to stop traffic in cities like London and Hong Kong. Fake events for fake news. Makes it "real"?
nah.
Iraq was motivated by bad intelligence. If you are not aware of that by now, you don’t want to be aware of it.
Selective bad intel https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/25/john-brennan-ex-cia-chief-offers-mea-culpa-on-trum/
So, I think HRC’s recent comments re: unnamed Tulsi Gabbard shine a new light on Matt’s argument. Are we going back to the days of McCarthyism when a person can be destroyed for holding views with which certain party elites disagree? And why would HRC be privy to any of this? I have commented before that progressives should not be smug about a Trump take down.
It blows my mind that people can read anything relating to this topic and STILL come in here chanting tropes about Orange Man Bad. The programming is SO deep.
They can't even see that the CIA and Intel agencies are deliberately staging coup after coup illegally... nope, not without obfuscating the issue.
At it's face, a non-military coup here at home is TERRIFYING; doesn't matter who is perpetrating it.
That "trumps" Trump... because it means that not one of us here can run for and get to that office, not ever.
Why? Because the power won't let it happen, or if it DOES happen while they're daydreaming... they'll get rid of you. That's not how it's supposed to work, and there is NO hope here anymore.
Note how the corporate newsmedia revises the history of Ukraine turning it all into aggression from Russia with no mention of Victoria Nuland and Hillary Clinton's coup in overturning leadership. Also, no mention that Obama refused sending arms to the new neocon lead leaders while they blow up the fact that Trump for a brief time refused to send US weapons there. No mention of the fact that the newly elected Ukrainian leader by 70% had a platform of making some peace with Russia. Obama's administration gave us the overturn of the Smith/Mundt Act which forbid propaganda going into the US news.