This is just a gut feel. But I have the sense that the White House is losing control of this story.
Just a short time ago, Sen. Boozman (R) of Arkansas, not at all a fan of the spotlight, not someone who makes waves, said:”Americans deserve a full explanation as to the circumstances of the decision to immediately remove Mr. Comey.”
If you’ve got a Republican Congress member, you might check up on what they’re saying about the Comey firing. Remember, everything, this included, is “shape of earth, views differ” until enough Republicans take a sane position on it.
Baud
I’m a trianglite.
Baud
@Amaranthine RBG:
It’s not popular because it’s false. Any indictment would be thrown out before it went to trial. It would be a big embarrassment for Trump and Sessions if they tried it.
Doug!
@Amaranthine RBG:
I think prosecuting Clinton would be terrible politically for Trump. Not saying he wouldn’t do it.
Felonious Monk
@Baud:
Not exactly sure what a “trianglite” is, but it sounds like it’s at least a step above a circlejerk.
Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes
As I said earlier, Jen Rubin is retweeting ThinkProgress in a positive way. This is abnormal.
Baud
@Amaranthine RBG:
This is wrong too. No Dem would negotiate over Clinton charges.
Baud
@Felonious Monk: Shape of the earth is a triangle. See the post.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Amaranthine RBG: Less
the Conster, la Citoyenne
Nothing this big, deep and wide can stay hidden, not when every IC in the world has what ours has, and not when there are so many lies necessary to keep it all hidden. The Rs are a herd of nervous wildebeest right now, not sure which direction the scent of danger will come from first.
Emerald
I’m optimistic. I said when Tangerine Twitler took office that he’d be out within six months. I had begun to despair of that prediction recently, but this boneheaded Comey firing makes me think that events still might fit my timeline.
I knew he’d be incompetent and stupid, but I really didn’t think he’s be this incompetent and stupid.
Not only is be being investigated for Russiagate, but also for his business dealings, including the casinos. He can’t take it, and I wonder just how long he’s going to try.
Doug!
@Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes:
She’s terrific about criticizing Trump. No two ways about it.
Villago Delenda Est
Wyden, Merkley, DeFazio.
I’m good!
Amaranthine RBG
I tried to clean up a typo in my comment and got a message that it was spam and now it’s deleted.
Help?
Baud
Well that ended quickly.
cain
@Amaranthine RBG:
Trump has no leverage on Democrats over Clinton. Trump is the bigger story than Clinton and whatever crap she did as Secretary of State. The president is a bigger deal than Clinton, and if they want to persecute Clinton it will rile up the base against this president. It will only make it worse, because by now everyone will realize that prosecuting Clinton at this stage especially after firing the guy who was looking into his activities and replace it with another guy who goes after clinton? Please… Nobody is going to be fooled.
Villago Delenda Est
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: Donald seems to misunderstand that federal officials swear/affirm an oath to the Constitution, not to any individual. This is not the transformed Weimar Republic…not yet, anyways. A “domestic enemy” of the Constitution can include treasonous Presidents.
? Martin
Charging Clinton would not provide leverage with Democrats. Democrats would know that the case would get thrown out, proudly proclaim that Democrats are in favor of the rule of law and if there was wrongdoing then she should be held accountable, and they would out the call for quid pro quo as an abuse of power by Trump. Democrats would win all around.
hueyplong
Anything that takes a page to articulate is by definition incapable of being a Trumpian motivation.
cain
@Villago Delenda Est: Same here! (I didnt know you were in Portland?)
Comrade Colette Collaboratrice
@Amaranthine RBG: Grrr, I hate that. I had just finished reading it and mentally preparing a response – which will make no sense if I post it now.
Miss Bianca
@Amaranthine RBG: “well-planned prosecution of Clinton”? These guys couldn’t “well plan” a trip to the can. Your theory may have something to it, but these guys have repeatedly shown that they can fuck up a two-car funeral procession. (Which is all that Bannon will probably have when he’s shuffled off this mortal coil, but I digress. )
That you find something “masterful” in the way Comey was carved up frankly says more about you than about the Republicans’ alleged abilities. This chicken is not going to get unfucked by a return to “BUT HER EMAAAAAIILLLZZZ”. That’s not to say they won’t try, but I think they’ll find it harder then they might imagine when they’re all doing shots together in the West Wing.
West of the Cascades
@Villago Delenda Est: I’ll see you Wyden and Merkley and raise you Blumenauer.
Corner Stone
@Baud: They don’t call her, “Hills The Knife” for nothing.
Amaranthine RBG
@Baud:
But that isn’t the hurdle Trump would be worried about. He just needs something that could hang out there and provide leverage – he does not need to actually make it to trial. I mean, if charges were filed – what would be the mechanism to get rid of matter before trial. With proper judge-shopping, the judge would just not toss the case.
Baud
Interesting. (via Atrios)
Raoul
I think because he’s in a vulnerable seat and took a ton of heat for last week’s AHCA vote, GOP House member Erik Paulsen (MN-03) has called for an independent investigation into Russian interference in 2016 election, post Comey-firing.
I wonder what other swing-dist GOPers might see this as a chance to put some distance between themselves and kicking 24M off insurance via Trumpcare?
‘Cause I don’t really buy that Paulsen is suddenly concerned about the integrity of the 2016 election. But he is concerned about his own chances in ’18.
Villago Delenda Est
@cain: Tracktown/Fighting Fashion Nightmares town, actually :)
The Moar You Know
Name the charge. I’m genuinely curious.
Should probably add before you do so that inadvertent release of classified information is most assuredly not a criminal act.
Baud
@Amaranthine RBG: There’s no leverage. And the evidence is too weak for even a GOP judge to accept. Few if any of them want to ruin their reputation advancing Trump’s personal agenda.
schrodingers_cat
T is scared, Comey’s firing is not what a confident person does. A crazed elephant can do a lot of damage, yes, but this is not a diabolical evil mastermind at work.
Villago Delenda Est
@Baud: Interesting, and utterly pointless. Retired Marine general hack is still a hack.
Riccardo Cabeza
@Amaranthine RBG:
Fire Comey bc derp, hire some sycophant to head the FBI to destroy the Russia Treason investigations, and ramp up HillaryGate. It’s Win/Win/Win! I love it.
randy khan
@? Martin:
And Clinton herself would no doubt tell them not to worry about her. She’d be happy to say that she knows she’s being prosecuted maliciously and that there will be no hostage negotiations.
Amaranthine RBG
Okay, let’s try again:
Some speculation: Comey’s firing was related to the Russia investigation, but not in the obvious way. As it stands now, Trump does not have any mechanism to just stop the Russia/Trump investigation. He needs a _political_ solution to this problem.
I believe that the reasons stated for firing Comey (his handling/disclosures about the Clinton email investigation) are not the real reasons. (I know that most people reached this conclusion immediately, but bear with me a minute.) So what are the real reasons? It is possible that Trump was just generally dissatisfied with Comey and his potential for acting independently. But the more likely reason – the elephant in the room – is the ongoing FBI investigation into Flynn/Russia/etc. However, firing Comey does not really stop that _directly_. I have to believe that there are enough dedicated professionals in the FBI working on this matter that would rebel/resign/create a massive shitstorm if Comey’s handpicked successor tried to shut down the investigation. This is particularly true given the support that they would receive from scores of Democratic Senators/Congresspeople. I would predict that if Comey’s successor just shut down the Russia probe that even some Republicans would rebel.
I speculate that the real reason for Comey’s removal was to facilitate a replacement who will “take another look” at criminal prosecution of Clinton related to the emails. Comey can’t/won’t do that since he’s already stated in his infamous public statements that no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the charges.
I know this is not a popular opinion in these parts, but I think it’s clear that there is sufficient evidence against Clinton to permit facially credible criminal charges against her. (To be clear, I also think that her Republican predecessors also violated federal law in the way they handled classified information.) So why go after Clinton now?
Had Trump entered office, fired Comey, and had the justice department go after Clinton – it would have been viewed as purely political retribution. Now, not so much.
I suggest that prosecuting Clinton will achieve three things for Trump.
First, the Trump base (which is still very much with him, by the way) has been calling to “lock her up” for ages. They will be absolutely delighted to see her investigated and charged. It is important for Trump to service his base and that would be a home-run.
Second, we are already in May 2017 and a well-planned prosecution of Clinton could result in testimony/depositions/charges or even trial right on the eve of the 2018 mid-terms. Trump does not have and will not have a record of legislative achievement on which Senators/Congresspeople can run in 2018. Trump’s real power derives from opposition. Press any moderately intelligent Trump voter and they will tell you that, “Yeah, the guy has warts, but at least he’s not Hillary.” All the more reason to make the 2018 election a referendum on Trump versus Clinton.
Third, having an ongoing investigation of Clinton will give Trump tremendous leverage against the Democratic establishment to move them towards a grand deal: You drop the Russia probe and we drop the Clinton charges. >>> This is the real reason for firing Comey. Trump has announced that Comey is gone b/c of the way he dealt with the Clinton emails. Many, many democrats called for Comey’s head and said he should have been dismissed, etc.. Trump seized on this and, on its face, these are legitimate reasons to can Comey. (Yes, I understand it’s bullshit, but to the Trump base and the few percent of votors who actually determine the outcome of elections, this has a ring of legitimacy.) But this pretext also establishes a foundation for the next step: reopening the investigation of Clinton because Comey handled it so poorly. It won’t be just that Comey screwed up when he stood up and held news conferences, it will be that he tainted the process and so it is time to start fresh or have “another set of eyes” look at this matter. Also, pressure from Trump or the AG down the chain of command to cease the Russia probe would incite rebellion but such pressure to move on Clinton would be more palatable. I have no doubt that there are career prosecutors who simultaneously believe that Trump/Russia should be investigated but ALSO that Clinton got off too easy. It would be easy to steer/enlist them in the cause with the prosecutors thinking all the while that they are just tough-minded and independent and don’t have any “political” agenda at all.
Ordinarily, I wouldn’t think that Trump is capable of conceiving and executing something like this but I think it appears that there is now a capable operator in the White House behind the scenes: maybe Bannon. Or, to put the tin-foil hat on all the way, maybe Russian strategists feeding the plan to someone in the White House. The handling of the Comey firing was very deft and skillful. There was blindsiding Comey and embarrassing him in public – apparently the poor bastard learned he was fired from watching TV – which provided the sort of magnificent spectacle Machiavelli advocated. The reasons for firing Comey (hey, just doing what Chuck Schumer called for) were masterful jiu-jitsu. There was broad coordination with Republican leadership (McConnell/Graham/others) public statements were pitch perfect. (Craven, dishonest, and evil, too – but just very well done.) There was careful coordination beforehand with these folks and, almost as important, no leaks about it.
If I am right about this – there will be a lull of weeks or months while the new FBI director is installed. Then there will be a leak about some “new evidence” or something related to Clinton and the emails. Or maybe even a leak about investigation of the Clinton foundation. Or both. Then new information, or repackaged old information, will start leaking like crazy. Then there will be a leak that there is an investigation of Clinton. Then – there will be a meeting between Republican and Democratic leaders about “how to put this all behind us and move on.”
Ian G.
I don’t have any GOP Senators or Congresscritters. Nonetheless, I called all three offices. Schumer’s staffer was taking notes on how many people were in favor of an independent investigation. Gillibrand’s staffer cut me off and said “she’s working on it” (which makes me think it was about the billionth call said staffer had taken on the subject today). My Congresswoman Kathleen Rice got a call too, although I’m not sure what she might be able to do. The staffer seemed to appreciate the call.
randy khan
@Baud:
That will not go over well.
Villago Delenda Est
@Raoul:
The handwriting is on the stalls and tenement halls.
? Martin
Trump’s other problem is that he’s running out of people he can fire to contain this.
schrodingers_cat
@Baud: Make coming here so cumbersome that no will want to come. Fortress Ruskimerika.
Fester Addams
Eh, you lost me at “facially credible criminal charges.” I’m going to stick with Josh Marshall’s “Trump’s Razor” which says where Trump is concerned, the stupidest explanation is the right one. And claiming Comey was fired for his handling of the e-mail brouhaha sounds to me like a moron’s idea of a deft political move.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
It’s the money laundering, and I think that’s where Schneiderman comes in. That’s what Bharara was doing. That’s what most of this is all about – that sweet sweet Russian oligarch mafia cash.
Sam Dobermann
Byzantium nonsense. Just a few days before, Comey asked for more money for the investigation into Russian meddling. That meant he was on the trail of something or that it was widening.
It was that that likely set of the hunt for reasons to fire him. That they could co-opt Schumer and other Democrats’ complaints was just frosting on the cake.
Jeffro
@Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes:
Dogs and cats, living together!
LOL
I know what you mean, though…
Baud
@Sam Dobermann:
That must have been done in writing. Dems should demand to see that proposal.
Amaranthine RBG
@The Moar You Know:
Okay, I’m not an expert in this, but the RWNJ have a whole list of potential violations. See, e.g. http://ijr.com/2015/03/264655-3-federal-laws-hillary-may-violated-secret-email-accounts/
Also, the Clinton Foundation could be spun up as some pay-to-play operation.
Understand, please, I am not saying that any of this is right – just that there are enough people who would go along with it on the right to give it a veneer of acceptability.
Comrade Colette Collaboratrice
Agree that “Heh, heh, let’s fire Comey and get back to prosecuting that bitch Hillary!” is part of the Trump team’s thinking (if you can glorify it with that word). However, I would bet my cats that’s as far as they got. Wishing for vindictive satisfaction/burning the world down are as close as they can get to rationally laying out a coherent plan, and they’re unable to tell the difference between the former and the latter.
If the Russians are indeed masterminding this move, they’re probably just hoping to sow and profit from chaos at this point.
Mnemosyne
@The Moar You Know:
This. IIRC, a lot of lawyers were pissed at Comey this summer because he seemed to be trying to come up with a charge against Hillary that didn’t actually exist.
I kind of hope the fuckers try it, though. There’s no way in hell it goes anywhere even if they manage to judge-shop to just the right partisan wingnut, and it just makes them look even more desperate to change the subject.
TenguPhule
If I had a dollar for every Republican who makes a mild complaint and then did nothing about it I’d be in New Zealand by now.
tobie
@Baud: Aw heck. I have to go to Europe at the beginning of next week. Really needed the laptop on the plane to get work done. Total pain in the butt. Thanks, Trump, for making it impossible to do business.
Baud
@Amaranthine RBG:
C’mon, man. Every Dem would be in jail if that were the standard. Do you really believe that there is a non-frivolous case for criminality that Comey chose not to recommend last year?
TenguPhule
@cain:
Trump’s base will. Remember, they voted for him.
hitless
I would like to believe that the media would not play going after Hillary in a positive light. And that going after her would be viewed as too politically damaging to Trump.
Baud
@TenguPhule: That’s the only part of the theory that makes sense — Trump’s base would love it.
Baud
@hitless: No, the media would play along.
TenguPhule
@schrodingers_cat:
A crazed elephant definitely looks more dangerous when you’re trapped in a locked room with it.
Baud
@tobie: I don’t know when it takes effect.
Roger Moore
@Amaranthine RBG:
If he thinks it would provide leverage he’s even dumber than we thought. Basically, the Democrats don’t owe Clinton anything, the Trump investigation is too important to sacrifice even if they did, and an attempted prosecution is likely to blow up in Trump’s face, so the Democrats’ correct response would be “bring it on”.
Elizabelle
@tobie: It says from Europe to the US. Maybe you’d be OK heading for Europe. TBD.
TenguPhule
@hitless:
And I’d like a unicorn that farts gold dust.
I expect we’ll see my unicorn first.
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
IANAL, but there seems to be no mechanism at all to “prosecute” someone over the FOIA The guy writing that article seems to have spun off into a fantasy world based on something he heard Lawrence O’Donnell say.
aimai
@Baud: Also are they going to charge colin powell and Condi Rice too?
TenguPhule
@Baud: Which makes it within the realm of the possible for him. Nothing else he’s done so far makes any rational sense. So why start now?
TenguPhule
@aimai: Two black people for Clinton? The ink wouldn’t even have time to dry.
Amaranthine RBG
@Fester Addams:
I agree that smart people see right through it, but I suggest you put on your bio-hazard suit and spend some time on right-leaning blogs.
The reaction on the few dozen sites I monitor is “Yawn” or “Yea, Comey should have been fired a long time ago because he let Hillary off too easy.”
Baud
@aimai: That would be silly.
@TenguPhule: Nothing is out of the realm of possibility with Trump. Are we going to spend the next four years going crazy with our own speculations about what he might do next? That’s madness.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Baud: yeah this election taught me that (Hillary) Clinton Derangement Syndrome is far more widespread than I thought, but I know that the highest levels of HCDS are in the Village
Roger Moore
@? Martin:
It’s not just about the guy he fired; it’s at least as much about finding a replacement who will put a lid on things.
tobie
@Elizabelle: Alas, I will be coming back. But the break from all this will probably do me good. I’ve got June 3 for the March for Truth pencilled in on my calendar and will use the flight time to think of catchy slogans for signs.
Mnemosyne
@Roger Moore:
And I’m pretty sure that Hillary would see it as her civic duty to let herself be dragged through the mud if it meant ultimately exposing Republicans as traitors.
There’s a reason the Clintons have never — not once — been convicted of any crimes. It’s because every single time claims like this have been made and a court of law actually looks into it, the claims turn out to be nothing but hot air. Every. Single. Time.
For. Twenty. Fucking. Years.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: The worst part of the spectacle would be the trolls who come here to argue that we should take the prosecution seriously.
hitless
@Baud: I think that if Trump were George W Bush, someone that the media could pretend is an “upstanding and reasonable man”, that the NYTimes (for example) would rather gleefully go along with Hillary being indicted. But Trump can’t carry his end of the performance and appear like a concerned statesman. It would so clearly look like a political prosecution that many/most(?) media would not be supportive.
hueyplong
By Trump’s next tweets shall ye know the marching orders he received from Russia today.
Baud
@tobie: Return the other way around the (triangle-shaped) planet. That way you’re not flying from Europe.
TenguPhule
@Baud: I think we have to accept that the world doesn’t make any sense any more. That way, surprise becomes less of a problem.
Baud
@hitless: We’ll really never find out. Sessions is a bigot, but I don’t think he’s crazy like Trump is, and the failure of the prosecution would be a major embarrassment for him.
gvg
@Amaranthine RBG: No. Trump is stupid and impulsive and does not understand how government works. He doesn’t have political instincts, just entertainer instincts so he does things real politicians just never even think of. now that he is a politician himself, he keeps hurting himself. the things you say are deft politically, many others are saying “how could he be that stupid”
Baud
@TenguPhule: ok
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@Baud:
Which means they will do it the micro-second the uproar over Comey’s firing starts to settled down. The self destructive derp in Trump is strong. It’s really clear now how Trump managed to go bankrupt so many times.
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
Uh no. She doesn’t owe us or the country that. Its not her job to be a fucking martyr to get rid of the fucking Republicans.
/Pardon my French
Baud
@Enhanced Voting Techniques: You can’t really do it in a micro-second. There needs to be a grand jury and an indictment. That takes a little time. If they can fool a grand jury into issuing an indictment, Clinton’s lawyers will get it quashed fairly quickly.
Mnemosyne
@TenguPhule:
It’s not her job, but she would do it. Because, unlike the Republicans, she actually loves this country and wants to do what’s best for it.
gene108
@schrodingers_cat:
Trump’s not an evil mastermind, but there some clever people, like McConnelll, who want to keep him in power to achieve their own ends.
They are the reason the flaming piece of crap that is the Trump Presidency has not self-destructed yet.
Baud
@TenguPhule: Right. She owes us nothing. But she might relish the fight.
Yoda Dog
College grads letting the boos rain down on poor Mrs. Devos.
FSM bless those kids.
Baud
@Yoda Dog: I wonder if Trump will ever give a commencement speech at any place other than Liberty U.
Mike J
New Quinnipiac poll. What’s the first word that springs to mind when you think Trump?
https://twitter.com/MaggieJordanACN/status/862377224586047490
Barbara
@Amaranthine RBG: Given the events of the last 24 hours I feel confident in stating that Trump does not think the way I do when it comes to making strategic choices. So I cannot say that he will not try to prosecute Hillary Clinton, however, I feel sure that if he did it will be seen for what it is, one of a series of moves of escalating desperation to avoid disclosure of or responsibility for bombshell allegations about his involvement — his family’s, his own, his staff’s at his direction, whatever — with either Russian hacking of the election, or Russian financing of his business that is just one step away (if that) of money laundering.
Amaranthine RBG
@Roger Moore:
I would submit to you that you greatly underestimate what a club the Democratic Party is – esp at the upper levels.
Baud
@Mike J: I assume those aren’t percentages.
GregB
Sen. Warner just referred to Rosenstein’s smear memo.
The Presidency is engulfed in flames.
Baud
@Amaranthine RBG: Yes, we’re all unfamiliar with the Democratic Party.
ThresherK
I’m 2000 miles away from Arizona, and if you asked me who was the non-McCain in the Senate from AZ was, I’d be blank, so the assessment of Boozman as “shunning the spotlight” is accurate.
I like that this is worrying the “normal” R’s.
Cool! They’re on the team. I want to see them handle it.
I predict many will be like the benchwarmers who didn’t practice seriously because they’re never gonna play except in garbage time, and then four starters break their ankles in the first quarter.
TenguPhule
@Mike J:
Tombstone.
Baud
@ThresherK: I was looking at the Senate roster the other day, and it’s amazing how many Senators we never hear or talk about.
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
The fact that dumbasses on the right-wing blogs you frequent think this is possible should have been another clue that there’s no there there.
I mean, I understand why you’re falling for it: you actually believe the right-wing propaganda about the Clintons being crooked. You actually think that the only reason they’ve never been prosecuted for anything is because they’ve never been caught. Therefore, you think Democrats will be willing to make a deal to cover up for the Clintons.
Where you fail is in not realizing that the “crimes” your right-wing buddies are talking about are imaginary and will be laughed out of any court that has jurisdiction. Not only does Hillary know this, every Democratic politician knows this.
So Bring. It. On.
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
She has a daughter and grandchildren to worry about. So I seriously doubt it.
ETA: And rule out anyone else who has hostages to fortune.
Peale
@TenguPhule: Yep. Honestly, if we want to win this thing, it can’t devolve into a battle about Trump vs. Hillary and having us rally to rescue Hillary or her reputation. its over. She’s out of politics. A lot of us like her (I always did), but I don’t think we’re going to take our country back with “Save Hillary” on the banners.
A Ghost to Most
Sent Cory Gardner an email today, asking him he would demand an investigation into the Russian coup conspiracy, or if we was complicit in it.
Spent much of today being nasty to trolls on WaPo. Much pearl clutching about civility, but our folks ain’t having it. An exchange:
MaryL
@Mike J: The details of the most recent poll are brutal. He’s actually starting to lose non-college whites and white men.
https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2456
dogwood
@Amaranthine RBG:
Given your past consistent commentary here, I know this is a dream scenario for you.
Dave
@Enhanced Voting Techniques: Right; they may well attempt do that. It was my second thought. This and it will give them amazing leverage over the Democrats and be win for the Trump is where we part ways. So what that the hardcore base will love it there is no way he can lose them. Therefore where they stand in our calculations is that they don’t.
Amaranthine RBG
@Mnemosyne:
Yes, that is just one of the three grounds the “article” mentioned and I have seen others in the past that passed the laugh test.
And, again, let me state this for the 10th time – I don’t agree with any of this but there would be enough people who do to make this work.
Millard Filmore
@the Conster, la Citoyenne:
This is the problem right there! Trump obviously won the election, even the popular vote, all on his own. He swept everyone aside, going against the advice that he change his ways and “pivot”. Trump won because he is such a wonderful human, and the suggestion that he needed any help from the Russians is utter nonsense.
(this message is not to be taken literally)
MaryL
@ThresherK: The non-McCain Senator from Arizona is Sen. Flake. Boozman is from Arkansas, I believe.
tobie
@Baud: Well, you did out yourself in your first comment as a “trianglite.”
SatanicPanic
@Comrade Colette Collaboratrice: oh yeah, I would be surprised if Trump doesn’t think he can get Hillary charged for something. Of course, this is a man who probably thinks pizza grows on trees.
Amaranthine RBG
@dogwood: Sod off.
I busted my ass trying to get Clinton elected. I have the bed-bug bites from the two weeks I spent in a cheap motel in Reno going GOTV work for her and Cortez-Masto. I maxed out my federal contributions and donated to PACs as well. What did you do?
TenguPhule
@Baud: Heathen. Everyone knows the world has four corners!
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
Make what “work”? There is no evidence and there is no crime.
If we’re at a point in this country where the Republicans can send Hillary to jail based on internet speculation and chants of “lock her up,” then the fascist dictatorship is already here.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@Amaranthine RBG: You are over thinking Trump. Remember Trump is stunned the Democrats aren’t grateful for firing Comey (well the Democrats might end up being grateful, but not for reasons Trump will like). One has to think with one’s lizard/frat boi brain when considering Trump; Comey was insufficiently loyal to Trump, that bad for Trump so in Trump’s mind that makes Comey an evil person. That Comey abused Clinton during the election is merely proof to Trump his emotional reaction is correct.
It’s WWFPDJD? (What Would a Frat Pleg Drunk on Yeagermister Do?) all the time with Trump.
TenguPhule
@SatanicPanic:
They do. In Xanth. Which is a fictional place that Trump probably has never heard of.
Millard Filmore
@Baud:
Its Christmas for the baggage handlers! Seriously, when the airlines won’t protect cameras and electronic items, and claim to be immune from damage-loss claims, how can they be transported? Ship them by freight?
Mike J
@MaryL:
And that poll was before the Comey firing.
Baud
@TenguPhule: I hate parallelobots! Blasphemer!
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
Arrested, perhaps. It wouldn’t take too many New York FBI agents to arrange that. Or even killed while resisting arrest.
Mind you, all the wheels come off in that scenario and all hell breaks loose.
Barbara
@MaryL: The drip drip drip is clear. it’s no longer fun and games when it’s your ass that’s getting kicked, and I feel sure that there are very few voters who voted for Trump so Jared Kushner’s sister could sell visas to wealthy Chinese people. These things will have a cumulative impact.
schrodingers_cat
Bumper crop of trolls to demoralize us and castigate Dems, today. Aren’t we lucky?
Villago Delenda Est
@Amaranthine RBG: I would submit that you have your head fully up your ass.
TenguPhule
@Millard Filmore: Boats.
GregB
Trump also alienated a bunch of very conservtive FBI workers with his showbiz humiliation shit canning of Comey.
Also the bad blood reportedly brewing with McMaster.
Despite his decades long love affair with Russian money, thugs and women, that love is not very deep among many Americans.
He is gradually heading into a canyon.
TenguPhule
@Barbara:
That was probably the only thing this week that Trump voters saw as a bad thing.
Which is rather depressing.
SatanicPanic
@TenguPhule: That was a Wall-e reference, but maybe that’s where the Wall-e people got it from?
Mnemosyne
@TenguPhule:
Which judge in New York issues the arrest warrant? Which prosecutor files the indictment to get the warrant?
Again, if Trump is able to send the FBI out willy-nilly to arrest people without a warrant, then we’re totally fucked and none of this matters. But we are not even within hailing distance of that point.
TenguPhule
@Baud: Three points, no soul!
Mike J
@schrodingers_cat:
It means we’re moving the ball in the right direction.
MisterForkbeard
@Mnemosyne: He’s not arguing with you. He’s saying that enough republicans would agree to literally anything to indict Clinton that there’s a chance it could work – or at least go far enough to provide a huge distraction and popularize Trump with the Hillary-haters and the republican base.
So yes, he’s worried that the fascist dictatorship is already here, at least to the point where it wouldn’t get immediately laughed out of court.
Baud
@Mnemosyne: There wouldn’t be an arrest warrant. There’d have to be an indictment from a grand jury first. (I think.)
Elie
@the Conster, la Citoyenne:
This.. They have to know the potential for major damage is increasing by the day. Their president IS a crook… The problem for them is how deep do they cut? Can they get away with just removing him and hope that the rot stops there? Or, as I suspect, not a few of their own members are implicated — They may actually not know how to do this or where to start. Fun Times!
ThresherK
@MaryL: Geez! That I made that mistake (honestly) shows how low a profile Boozman keeps. Now that you gave me “Flake” and “Arizona, I can even come up with “Jeff”.
I’m just glad this isn’t a game show.
MaryL
: @Mike J:
I know, right? This is my favorite part: White men: approve strongly – 35%; disapprove strongly 40%. Non-college whites: approve strongly – 34%; disapprove strongly 40%.
Where’s he’s still winning within those demographics is among people who “somewhat” approve or disapprove, which I interpret to mean, people who aren’t really paying attention. The news being generated from the Comey firing is bound to cause at least some of those folks to look up and notice that something weird is happening in Washington.
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
Claim its national security. And not FBI willy nilly, just the ones we know have it out for her and will take any excuse to do it. Wouldn’t be the first time “rogue agents” did something that the FBI would not approve of.
Perhaps not too plausible, but at this point, can’t be ruled out as impossible.
JWR
Never mind prosecuting Clinton, how ’bout going after “the basic atrocities” committed by Comey, (first mentioned by bupalos in the last thread), as claimed by Sarah Huckabee Sanders this morning?
Wow. Atrocities! Say it ain’t so, Jimmy boy!
Comrade Colette Collaboratrice
@Mnemosyne:
I agree with you – but sadly, horribly, I think you could truncate the whole statement to this.
Amaranthine RBG
@Mnemosyne:
Coming up with enough evidence to have an investigation of, or even charges against, Clinton that will then be gobbled up by the media and present a political problem to be solved.
Everyone in this thread who is now saying how absurd this all is and how nobody would fall for it has spent the past 5 or 6 months yelling about how the NYT and the media fell for “But her emails”. What, you think that the media has learned a lesson?
They don’t need to get to a trial to achieve their goals here.
@Enhanced Voting Techniques:
I don’t disagree with you. But I did think the handling and the roll-out of the Comey firing was more skillful than anything Trump has done since being in office. Yes, I realize that is a might low bar.
Peale
@Baud: I’m so happy about that! I was worried that the US airline industry was going to get away with that swipe at the Middle East Airline industry that they won a few weeks back where only business class travelers from those airlines would be inconvenienced. Great. Ban them all. All Carriers. All Classes. All foreign flights! The more the administration fucks with middle class business travelers, the better.
Amaranthine RBG
@JWR:
One cannot help but be reminded of his failure to prevent the Bowling Green Massacre.
TenguPhule
@the Conster, la Citoyenne:
And the natural response is to stick together when they run, because that’s the safest course of action collectively and individually.
Mnemosyne
@MisterForkbeard:
Right, but there are still steps that have to be taken. A grand jury has to hand down an indictment. A prosecutor has to bring that indictment to a judge. The judge has to issue an arrest warrant.
And IANAL, this is just shit I know from watching TV. There are steps that have to be taken and as far as I can tell, not a single one of them has been so much as started.
It’s an empty threat.
Villago Delenda Est
@Mike J: Traitor.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@Baud: This is Trump we’re talking about here; ask “What is the stupidest, half assed, sure to fail way to do it?” and that’s how Trump will do it. Maybe even Sessions isn’t so far gone as to let Trump push it threw without a Grant Jury, but I can easily see one Grand Jury on Hilary Cliton after another, with Trump tweeting how Deep State got to the Jury when it fails to indite.
Baud
@Amaranthine RBG: Certain people would fall for it. Where we disagree with you is (1) that there is enough evidence to make a facially plausible claim of a crime, (2) that charging Clinton would give Trump leverage over Dems, and (3) that the whole escapade would somehow work in Trump’s favor.
TenguPhule
@JWR: Misspoke or frame-up? That we even have to ask at this point says something about the times.
A Ghost to Most
@TenguPhule:
The more lions, the quicker the kill.
randy khan
@Amaranthine RBG:
I still don’t see how that’s leverage against the Dems. If your theory is that the Republicans would cut a deal with the Dems to back off on Clinton if the Dems backed off on Russia (a) I think the Dems would love to tell the world about that offer; and (b) the Dems would know it meant that there was fire, not just smoke, on the Russia thing.
And, as I said above, I don’t think Clinton would want them to cut a deal. (Remember that the indictment probably would have to be in D.C., where her chance of getting convicted would be approximately zero.)
Comrade Colette Collaboratrice
@TenguPhule:
@Barbara:
I doubt there were more than a handful of Trump voters who even saw this on the news this past week. Did Fox or the conservative local papers in East Bumfuck cover it?
Baud
@Enhanced Voting Techniques: That scheme would require the cooperation of a lot of not-insane people. It’s isn’t like signing an Executive Order drafted by Bannon on the fly.
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
Not for taking into custody.
ETA: From the FBI website FAQ:
lamh36
OT, but am damn proud of the Bethune Cookman graduates, not just for voicing their opinion of DeVos via boos, but also these graduates for showing that witch their backs…as for those sitting…let’s assume they all have bad knees…if not…well…if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.
https://twitter.com/smurfresh/status/862381033068658688/video/1
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@MaryL: That might be part of the Comey firing – Trump is acting tough to win back his audiance.
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
Again, we still have actual laws in this country. There is an actual process for doing this, and even I know it’s more complicated than the 30 seconds of it you see on “Law & Order.”
No one has ever successfully brought criminal charges against either of the Clintons for anything, because they’ve never actually committed any crimes. Every bit of legal harassment they’ve been subjected to over the past 20 years was always a civil case, because the rules of evidence are different there.
So, sure, let them try to build a criminal case against Hillary. I’m happy to have them waste time and resources on that, because there is nothing for them to find.
Baud
@TenguPhule: In this case, no FBI agent would have reasonable grounds to believe that a felony has been committed in the absence of an indictment.
Elie
Trump and his regime are spinning out of control. They might try some weird bullshit to distract, but he is in the phase where that would just dig him in deeper. Man is in deep shit and its rising. Each time, he makes his own situation worse, not better. For him to command a totally outside the box strategy such as arresting Hillary would put us out in the streets and escalate civil unrest. It would only get worse from there.
I do not know if he is on any medication or if anyone can reach him. It IS interesting that Kushner and Ivanka haven’t been at least obviously intervening. Who is he talking to these days? Is Bannon still submarining around the WH? Who is in charge? The old man is clearly nuts. If he keeps up, I see the Republicans starting to peel away. This may be difficult for some of them who are implicated in corruption, but there will be some shifting starting. No one has a model for how this will go — or even should go.
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
But all Trump would need is to have her arrested. The media would do the rest of the heavy lifting for him.
And he can do it. All he needs is one pliant FBI agent in the New York Branch willing to piss their job away in exchange for a promising position in the White House.
JWR
@Amaranthine RBG:
I’d forgotten about that one. ;-) The sweep of history, I suppose.
Elie
@TenguPhule:
Man, you are just trolling right now. Quit it. Just quit it. Take five and go cut yourself for a few minutes. That should make you feel better — for a few minutes anyway.
Miss Bianca
@TenguPhule: and that was only because they’ve been conditioned to think all non-white immigrants have something shady about them and should be kept out of the country. If it was wealthy Russian or Romanian investors being offered E-5 visas, no problemo, probably.
Ugh. I can’t believe I even typed that. : (
(Ful disclosure: I used to work for an investment banker who dealt with extremely wealthy Asian investors – mostly Korean, but some Chinese – who were definitely being offered E-5 visas as bait to get them to invest in American projects. While I may have thought it was slightly sleazy, it was certainly not illegal. Then again, my boss was a private citizen, not the freakin’ POTUS.)
Yoda Dog
@Baud: Has he even shown his cowardly disgusting grill once yet outside of carefully groomed and pre-scouted venues? What would the neanderthal toddler even talk about? How to fuck people over and use one’s mouth as 24-7 bullhorn for bullshit?
TenguPhule
@Baud: Yes, but that’s determined after the fact of the arrest. Which is all Trump would really need. Spin a little smoke as she’s released and his base will never doubt that the evil liberal judges took a bribe to prevent her from going to jail for her “crimes”.
Lapassionara
I am not hitting any links re HRC and criminal charges, but I want to list out what I learned from Adam here, and at other blogs, and also what I know from experience, and see where anyone in his or her right mind could think of criminal conduct.
1. The regular State.gov email account is not a “secure” account. If HRC had used a state.gov account for the emails someone NOW considers classified, then the criticism of her would still be “omg, she used a non-secure account for some emails we now think should have been sent over the secure state dept. transmission process.” They were retroactively classified, but not at the time sent.
2. The fact that she used her own already existing account instead of a state.gov account for communications she believed to be appropriate for non-secure accounts should be a big nothing burger. Does anyone think it was hacked? Any evidence at all?
3. I have done numerous email productions. There is NEVER only one copy of an email. There is always a sender and a recipient. At least two, then there Are the replies and also forwards in many cases. A sent email stays in the sent box, then may also end up in a deleted box. A received email is in an in box, and if replied to, in a sent box, then maybe also in the delete box.
4. I know lawyers like Trey Gowdy. They are not interested in substance. They are interested in discovering that some document somewhere did not get produced, even if they have the same document from another source. So, he would be looking at an email from HRC in someone else’s possession, and asking where the one from HRC was. HE WOULD ALREADY HAVE the email, just not the one from HRC’s outbox. So this was not about substantive information. It was an attempt, successful unfortunately, to make it look like someone was not giving the committee everything requested.
That people are still using the word criminal in conjunction with HRC is heartbreaking.
TenguPhule
@Elie: I simply pointed out that Mnemosyne is wrong. Don’t trust everything you see on law and order.
Amaranthine RBG is wrong on the reaction, but has a point that Trump could do it.
Chet Murthy
@Doug!: When this is over, we’ll go back to opposing her. But I suspect I’m not the only one who will remember that, unlike a lot of other Rs, she’s an opponent, and not an enemy. Yertle? ZEGS? (list goes on)? enemies.
DougJ
@Chet Murthy:
Agreed
LurkerNoLonger
That troll really derailed the thread quickly. Back to the topic at hand: call your idiot congress members and ask them, “what the fuck?”
FlyingToaster
@Amaranthine RBG: Wrong.
The thing that you’ve forgotten is that prosecutors want only one thing: to win. This isn’t a civil suit that Alex Jones can bring. You have to convince a career prosecutor to put his job on the line, and he has to be in the jurisidiction of the judge you’ve shopped for.
That could happen if everything fell into place — but without evidence, it’s going to be hard to make it happen. It’s unlikely that the stars will align in time to beat the Trump/Russia investigation.
Dave
@TenguPhule: Who cares? His base basically believes that already. The disagreement isn’t about if he is capable of doing something that asinine, of course he could there really isn’t a limit to that, but if that would benefit him. Media is terrible but not in the way you believe. His base would believe she got away with it? So what they already think she has gotten away with murder. It’s panicking about an idiotic scenario before there are any actual indications that it is.
Mnemosyne
@TenguPhule:
And then Hillary’s lawyers get her sprung immediately.
And then the FBI agent faces prosecution for false imprisonment and kidnapping.
And then Trump pretends it has nothing to do with him and leaves the FBI agent twisting in the wind.
From the FBI’s website under the “victim assistance” tab:
I’m pretty sure that a judge deciding that your arrestee did not, in fact, commit a crime is a really quick way to get your ass fired if you’re an FBI agent.
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
“I called him a pigfucker because I want him to have to deny it.”
They’re not interested in actual legal proceedings, they just want the Clintons to have to deny it. Again.
SatanicPanic
@TenguPhule: It’s not like they could just nab her off the street. All former presidents and their spouses have secret service protection. They’re not going to allow some rogue agent just to take her in.
Steve in the ATL
@FlyingToaster:
Bingo. The only metric prosecutors care about is conviction rate.
Baud
@TenguPhule: I guess he could also order the Seals to take her out. Maybe we should have a thresd worrying about that.
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
Yes, but that would be a small byline on page 7 of a paper several days later. With odds that the Whitehouse or Trump Industries hires them.
“OMG HIllary Arrested” would be front page news.24/7 for at least a week.
It’s not a smart thing to do. But this is Trump we’re talking about here.
He probably won’t do it. But it can’t be dismissed as impossible.
Steve in the ATL
@Baud: I suggest a separate thread for Delta Force as well. And another for SAS because Tony Blair.
Raoul
@Comrade Colette Collaboratrice:
I doubt they are. I’m inclined to agree with whoever upthread said it is Russian money, probably dirty money, that is the core.
But Russia profits from the US being a weaker actor, and we surely that already. 110 days and the Trump Admin is being trolled, live, to it’s face by the Russian Ambassador. In an unstable and unpredictable world, certain ex-Soviet states can be ‘induced’ to return to the orbit of influence Putin wants.
And if that doesn’t work, he’ll just grab some of them, and the US will have lost the authority or ability to execute any meaningful resistance.
It’s a semi-joke, but Merkel (and now Macron) are the leaders of the free world. Not looking good, geopolitically.
Amaranthine RBG
@Mnemosyne:
Were you around when Bill Clinton was impeached, when he settled a civil suit and when he lost his law license for 5 years?
Yes, he was acquitted in the Senate, but it’s foolish to claim that was a Clinton victory.
This ushered in George Bush and the R’s only lost 4 seats in the Senate which they probably would have lost anyway given the slate.
You have to remember here that the metric for “success” is not convicting Clinton of anything. It is having something that can be investigated act as a counterweight to the Russia stories. As in, “Yeah, Flynn talked to the Russian ambassador, but the Clinton foundation accepted 50,000 Kronkites from the Leader of Buttfuckistan, and then the US sold them planes. See? They are all corrupt.”
? ?? Goku ? ?
@Millard Filmore: Donald Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.
Ugh
SatanicPanic
@Baud: OMG OH NOEEESSS!!!
TenguPhule
@Baud: The SEALs don’t have a personal grudge against her. Nor the kind of power the FBI does.
It’s not probable, but it can’t be dismissed as impossible.
Dave
@TenguPhule: The point you are missing is that if he does it will almost certainly not proceed necessarily to his advantage. Christ you vacillate between all is doomed and burn them all rhetoric. If you are real breathe and gain some perspective. If not then get the hell out of her.
TenguPhule
@SatanicPanic: “Shot while resisting arrest.”
Again, not likely. But can’t be ruled out because that’s how far down the rabbit hole this country has gone.
Amaranthine RBG
@FlyingToaster:
Okay, let me ask you this: Were the investigators/prosecutors who spent thousands of hours and who cost tens of millions of dollars working on the Whitewater Investigation motivated only by their potential conviction rates?
Or did they perhaps some other motivation?
Mnemosyne
@TenguPhule:
But that’s not what ARBG’s argument is. His argument is that the Democrats are so afraid of Hillary being prosecuted that they’ll be willing to backpedal on the Trump/Russia investigation.
My point is that there is nothing that Hillary could be successfully prosecuted for, so it’s an empty threat. If they arrest her but there’s no prosecution, so the fuck what? How is that going to pressure the Democrats into dropping the Trump/Russia investigation?
You’re arguing a minor point while ignoring the actual proposed scenario that the Democrats are so afraid of Hillary being prosecuted that they’ll drop the Trump/Russia investigation. And that scenario is 100 percent bullshit unless, like ARBG, you actually think Hillary is a criminal who just hasn’t been caught yet.
Unless Hillary actually committed an indictable and prosecutable crime, it’s an empty threat as far as getting the Democrats to drop their investigation. Which is what the argument is about, not about who the FBI is allowed to arrest and when.
Focus, dude.
randy khan
@TenguPhule:
I wonder if that’s true now. They all think he’s crazy I could see them going the other way completely – calling it an obvious abuse of power.
TenguPhule
@Dave:
Uh no, I was with them on that point. It would be a five alarm fire. But I’m disagreeing with them where they claim that it couldn’t happen..
? ?? Goku ? ?
@Amaranthine RBG: I assume you’re quoting a hypothetical pundit or politician. Neither Clinton can help it if their opposition are deranged lunatics. There’s literally nothing there.
The GOP are the authoritarian party in the US and don’t really care who they steamroll to get and maintain power.
Oh and 2000 was Al Gore’s, Nader’s, and the voters’ faults. Also Jebby and the Supreme Court
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
And I was agreeing with the rest of you that ARBG was wrong there.
Where I’m disagreeing with you is on the possibility that Trump could still actually arrange for it to happen.
? ?? Goku ? ?
@Mnemosyne: And if they did arrest her, it would look bad on Trump. It would not wash well. Even idiot MSM bots would see it for an abuse of power; jailing your political enemy.
Edit: The only group it wouldn’t look completely fucking crazy to are actual insane people, i.e furthest right fringe of Trump’s base
TenguPhule
@? ?? Goku ? ?:
Presume facts not in evidence.
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
So you’re changing your argument now that multiple people have pointed out how stupid it is to think that the threat of Hillary being prosecuted would be enough to get the Democrats in Congress to back off the Trump/Russian investigation?
Amaranthine RBG
@TenguPhule:
Exactly right.
And think of it this way: You are a democrat in Congress or in the Senate. It is January 2018. Would you rather be gearing up for the election a) with an ongoing investigation of Clinton taking place or b) without such an investigation going on?
Anyone who says, “Yeah bring on the investigation because Clinton will be exonerated.” is missing the big picture.
KS in MA
@lamh36: Good for them. (Now, as to who invited her to speak in the first place …)
? ?? Goku ? ?
@TenguPhule: Everybody has a line, a breaking point where enough is enough. People like Trump don’t, but that’s because he’s dangerously mentally ill.
Amaranthine RBG
@Mnemosyne:
Perhaps you should read what I wrote instead of whatever shit you’re making up in your head.
SatanicPanic
@TenguPhule: That’s f*cking ridiculous. Some FBI agent out there is going to go get in a gunfight with secret service on behalf of a guy who just fired the last guy to stick his neck out for him. Right.
AnonPhenom
@Amaranthine RBG:
Interesting, but making Hillary a bona fide martyr to the majority of Americans could have some serious political downside for Trump and the Republicans.
Mnemosyne
@TenguPhule:
Sure, Trump could do it. And he just might be crazy enough to try. But I’m not sure I like the FBI’s chances against the Secret Service in that scenario. Because it ain’t like the Secret Service is just going to let some FBI dudes roll up and take her away.
Chet Murthy
@Amaranthine RBG:
And there were enough people on the right who went along with “blowjobs are a threat to our nation hurr durr durr”. Your point is? I actually wasted my time clicking thru to the link. It’s the same old story as the last two years. And yet even a prosecutor who cut his teeth on Whitewater, couldn’t find anything to indict her. Give it up, hoss.
MaryL
@Amaranthine RBG:
There was no indictment in that case, either, so that actually supports the position that prosecutors generally do their damndest to avoid bringing charges that they don’t believe will stick.
geg6
@Mnemosyne:
That’s his whole MO. Every. Fucking. Time.
TenguPhule
@Amaranthine RBG:
That is not happening. I agree that arrest is not outside the realm of possibility.
But the political wad was shot on investigations after the 9 hours straight last year. Whatever smoke drummed up around the Clintons would have zero effect on any Democrat running. Hell, running as an enemy to Trump would only make them more popular, not less.
Amaranthine RBG
@AnonPhenom:
I’d say that Bill has already been made a martyr with the Whitewater bullshit. But that didn’t damage Republicans much, if any at all.
If they can justify years investigating a bullshit real estate deal and some lucky/shady futures trades or whatever it was, they can surely justify bla, bla, bla, national security bla, bla, bla, classified emails, bla bla bla.
Chet Murthy
@aimai: And the entire 43 admin, ffs. ffs.
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
You mean like when you ended your crazy rant above with:
Because that meeting would end with Democratic leaders saying, “Go fuck yourselves, assholes.”
TenguPhule
@SatanicPanic:
I’m sure the leopards eating faces party is not going to eat my face!
Again, not probable. But not impossible.
Chet Murthy
@Amaranthine RBG: I would submit to you that you don’t understand that Dems put country before party. If it’s a choice between Clinton and country, which do you think any decent American would pick? FFS, grow a conscience.
Amaranthine RBG
@Chet Murthy:
Okay, you can choose to believe that the FBI and the Justice Department under Beauregard Sessions are committed to protecting the constitution and wouldn’t try anything unless it was dispassionately intended to achieve an impartial conviction.
Good luck with that.
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne:
I’d be rooting for the Secret Service myself in this instance.
And ideally this is all fruitless speculation.
Baud
@TenguPhule: Give it up. “Not impossible” covers a lot of useless ground. I thought it was important to respond to the false assumptions of the original theory. Endless speculation about what Trump might do has no purpose or stopping point.
Amaranthine RBG
@Chet Murthy:
A conscience is an impediment when trying to understand what Trump and the republicans are up to.
Chet Murthy
I made a mistake. Tried to read Amaranthine RBG, found myself trying to answer/engage. Big mistake. Pie! Pie! Pie! Love it!
(((CassandraLeo)))
@TenguPhule: I don’t know if you remember, but his threat to jail Clinton during one of the debates was a front-page headline across national newspapers, and it was noted how unprecedented it was and what a threat to democracy it was. It actually was taken seriously. They just forgot it later because they kept fucking the EMAILS! chicken. If he were actually to go through with it, though, there’s substantial evidence that it would wake them out of their stupor. It would quickly backfire, particularly when it became apparent that the charges were, for lack of a better term, trumped up.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@geg6: thank you, I’ve been wondering why people are engaging Steve as if he weren’t Steve
Amaranthine RBG
@Mnemosyne:
No, you not very bright person, read what I wrote. Start with the part where I say this will achieve three things for Trump.
TenguPhule
@Amaranthine RBG: We can’t, your post got wordpressed.
SatanicPanic
@Baud: Seriously. This sh*t it dumb. “Trump might nuke Los Angeles, what are you going to do about THAT huh, huh?”
TenguPhule
@(((CassandraLeo))):
Except when Comey plucked the Chicken in October, the FYNYT was all in on “evil” Clinton.
We can hope they’ve learned better by now. But its a very thin hope.
Amaranthine RBG
@TenguPhule:
I reposted it as 34.
(((CassandraLeo)))
@TenguPhule: I think it got reposted later around #100 or so. I’m not particularly inclined to do a point-by-point rebuttal though, because it depends upon a misreading of American politics that I don’t feel is justified. For starters, our media are insufferable hacks, but even they have a limit beyond which they won’t cover for Republican malfeasance, and I think we’ve already reached that point. If Trumpovich attempted to jail Clinton, they’d melt down.
(((CassandraLeo)))
@TenguPhule: Well, yes. They assumed he wasn’t going to win and thus they considered it an empty threat. It won’t be a mere threat if he actually goes through with it, though. We’ve never seen anything like that before in American politics. They may be shallow, incompetent, and acting in bad faith, but they’re not that shallow and incompetent, and their faith isn’t that horrible. They’ve already demonstrated that they recognise that a threat to arrest Clinton was a transgression against democracy. I don’t see any reason to presume they wouldn’t consider actually arresting her even worse.
Amaranthine RBG
@SatanicPanic: @SatanicPanic:
Yeah, it is just speculation on my part.
I agree with the poster above that Marshall’s Razor is generally the best guide to what Trump is up to — but there is a possibility that somebody actually has a plan – for at least some things.
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
Really, your actual quoted words are “not what you wrote”?
That’s a new one.
AnonPhenom
@Amaranthine RBG:
Bill’s only a martyr to true blue Dems.
If there’s something that could destroy the idea of ‘Clinton Rules’, particularly where the media are concerned, it would be a Trump led ‘Lord of the Flies’ prosecution and conviction of a retired political person who has offered no threat.
FlyingToaster
@Amaranthine RBG: They weren’t prosecutors. They were political hacks appointed as special prosecutors, and went back to their RW-funded academic sinecures afterward. They NEVER filed a criminal charge. The Clintons weren’t arrested.
The only hope Trump has is to somehow get a warrant for Clinton’s arrest, and it isn’t going to happen. The DC circuit judges want to see the evidence, which doesn’t exist, so Jeff Sessions is shit-out-of-luck. So you have to go judge shopping; then within those judges’ districts, find a prosecutor who is willing to lose.
[email protected]Steve in the ATL said :)
TenguPhule
@Amaranthine RBG:
Okay, like everyone else here I think your reasoning is off.
No downsides or threats against the Democratic party in the scenario. If anything this only puts more and dangerous pressure on Trump and Republicans.
“Let’s put this behind us” died in 2008 after Mcconnell shit on Obama’s peace flag of not going after the Bush cartel in order to keep the government functioning.
Amaranthine RBG
@(((CassandraLeo))):
Again, what if they attempted to “just” investigate Clinton. Do you really think that the NYT (which has added even more right wing stooges to its editorial page since the election) would throw a hissy fit? Or would they run a few hundred articles examining the charges and dissecting the leaks that it would be fed?
Mnemosyne
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I have to admit, I love it when he starts whining that the things he said aren’t really what he said and the real problem is that the little brains like me just don’t understand his genius!
I’m also amused that what he (allegedly) did for Hillary’s campaign gets bigger every time he posts.
debbie
Rob Portman (R-OH) said this earlier today:
I don’t believe a word of it.
(((CassandraLeo)))
@Amaranthine RBG: If they arrested her, they’d be apoplectic. Because when Trumpovich threatened to jail her over transparently shallow pretexts in one of the debates, even the FTFNYT was apoplectic. There’s a difference between investigating someone and jailing a political opponent with a transparently political pretext. The fact that you don’t recognise it is rather telling. Even the FTFNYT has demonstrated that it understands the difference.
Also, the editorial department and the news department are separate institutions. This is Journalism 101 here. The FTFNYT’s coverage is still terrible on both counts, but they aren’t Faux News-level terrible.
You’re expecting the entire media to behave like Faux, when you’ve presented no evidence that they’re all that terrible. I’m proposing that the way the FTFNYT acted last year is a reasonable basis upon which to predict its future actions. Hiring a couple of right-wing hacks for its editorial department doesn’t make its past news reporting no longer predictive of future actions. If you have grounds upon which to suggest that they’d cover arresting a political opponent for transparently political reasons nbd, then you have to contend with their past coverage. And their current coverage. They’ve taken the Comey firing fairly seriously as well. You haven’t done that. You’ve just proposed that they’ll behave like Faux on the basis of a couple of columnists.
If they “just” investigated her? People would still recognise it as the sideshow it clearly is. Besides, who even cares? She’s been investigated for 20+ years. Nothing. Trying to investigate her again now when she holds no elected office and shows no signs of ever wanting to hold another government position is a transparent attempt to regain control of the narrative, and will correctly be recognised as a distraction. The Russia/Trump story already has far more legs.
TenguPhule
@debbie: Because his lips were moving.
Amaranthine RBG
@Mnemosyne:
I wrote a number of things and you’ve decided to take one snippet out of context and the ignore the rest. That is your standard M.O. When confronted with anything more complex than a flyswatter you just spooge out your own gibberish and then demand that it be refuted like it was the OPs words.
Go back and look at your posts. You’ll see that you wrote: “where the Republicans can send Hillary to jail based on internet speculation.” Then take a look at my post. You’ll note that nowhere do I say that Hillary is going to be sent to jail. I think that was the genesis of your error.
Mnemosyne
@TenguPhule:
The Democrats are already out of power. What’s the threat — you guys are, like, going to be even more out of power than you already are!
When Bill Clinton was president, Democrats needed to protect a sitting president. When Bush fucked up Iraq, Democrats needed to protect senior Democrats like Dianne Feinstein, who went along with it.
What do the Democrats need to protect in 2017? They don’t have Congress, the Supreme Court, or the Presidency. What do they have to lose in pursuing the Russia investigation?
Citizen Alan
@Amaranthine RBG:
Oh horseshit. I still think of this day that if Gore had simply allowed nasty damage Bill Clinton to campaign on his behalf, he would have cruised to Victory.
Ksmiami
@TenguPhule: cue a bunch of distracting wolves…
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
That’s because the rest of what you wrote is even more asinine than what I quoted.
I’ll ask again: what motivation would the Democrats have to drop their Trump/Russia investigation? They’re already a minority in Congress. Trump is president. Why would they cooperate?
Amaranthine RBG
@(((CassandraLeo))):
Well, we agree on that. I think they ran quite a few stories about all the email nonsense.
TenguPhule
@Mnemosyne: And I completely agree with you.
Amaranthine RBG
@Mnemosyne: Are you under the impression that “the Democrats have … their Trump/Russia investigation.”
You are perhaps even more confused than I had thought.
(((CassandraLeo)))
@Amaranthine RBG: Because she was the presumptive next president of the United States. They also ran front-page stories on Manchurian Mussolini’s threat to jail her when he made them. If you think an investigation of an out-of-office non-candidate gets more coverage than a jailing of a political opponent for a transparently political pretexts or a treasonous collusion with a hostile foreign power to rig an election, you are not thinking clearly. The former may get a page 3 story if the administration is lucky. Either of the latter gets at least one above-the-fold A1 story and possibly a comment or editorial about how the investigation is a transparently political attempt to control the narrative (and an inept one at that).
Aleta
Isn’t it a pity and chilling that almost of Republican Congress is still standing quiet, despite T’s low approval rating, Comey, his past cases of harassment, fraud, bankruptcies, and all his lies and slurs.
No matter what we already know about his intelligence and competence and cheating, he still has so much power over Congress that we have to wait while the press cautiously reports on 2-3 members who *might* support an independent investigation or *might* not vote to dismantle health care protections.
Amaranthine RBG
@(((CassandraLeo))):
Okay, let’s accept what you say is true and the NYT is going to get mighty angry if there is an investigation of Clinton.
Let’s also assume that the investigation of Trump/Russia is going to prove extremely damaging to Trump with (at a minimum) some of his advisors being charged.
Given these two things, what cards does Trump have to play?
Do you think he is just going to patiently and methodically distance himself from previous advisors and keep a low profile? Or do you think he is going to try to throw bombs?
(((CassandraLeo)))
@Amaranthine RBG: I think it’s already clear that he’s throwing bombs. Firing Comey pretty much proved it, particularly now that his mental state has been clarified. He’s clearly in an even more deranged mental state than usual. I just don’t see any evidence that any of the scenarios you suggest will dig him out of his hole. I’m not suggesting he isn’t desperate enough to try them. I just don’t think he would be successful at regaining control if he did.
I’m not worried about him accidentally coming across some masterful political strategy. I’m more worried about him going so over the bend that he decides to nuke some random target that’s pissed him off. I have to hope the IC would take him out before he could do that, but it’s a more realistic scenario than him coming up with some political master stroke when he’s clearly having a rage fit.
The Pale Scot
@Amaranthine RBG:
There’s 14 minutes between this piece being posted and Amaranthine RBG’s 500 + word semantic exercise during which M. Amaranthine RBG wrote two other posts. That smells like a goodly supply of cut and paste ammo at the ready.
So, How’s the weather in St. Petersburg Comrade Amaranthine RBG?
PS Say Hi to Bob From Portland for us.
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
So you admit there’s no way for the Republicans to use an investigation of Hillary against the Democrats since the Democrats have no power anyway?
Bannon is not the master strategist you seem to think he is. Wielding a sledgehammer is not the same as building a house.
randy khan
@Mnemosyne:
There definitely is no love lost between those agencies. A few years ago, I was in a meeting attended by representatives from the FBI and the Secret Service (among many other agencies – it was a really fun project, let me tell you). The Secret Service people came into the room after the FBI people and they literally sat as far away from them as they could (and they had plenty of choices about where to sit). It was hilarious.
Amaranthine RBG
@Mnemosyne:
Look, dumbass, you are the one who posted this:
It isn’t that you don’t know the rules of the game. It’s that you don’t even know what game is being played.
I’m done with you.
Amaranthine RBG
@The Pale Scot:
Yes, comrade you make good sense. Russian hacking of this blog definitely makes more sense than, say, my writing a post for one of the many threads below about Comey and then realizing by the time I finished it that there were already several more threads posted. Da, da, you have found me out.
Mnemosyne
@Amaranthine RBG:
No, really, explain for all of us littlebrains what leverage you think the Republicans have against the Democrats. They’re going to destroy Hillary Clinton? They’re going to make sure Democrats are in the minority?
I wouldn’t be surprised if Bannon and Trump’s plan is what you’re claiming, but it just shows that they’re morons if they think they have some kind of hold over the Democrats.
MCA1
@GregB: Gradually? Sheeeeeeiiiiit. We’re only in Month 4! It’s warp speed.
John Weiss
@Villago Delenda Est: I’m good, too!
The Pale Scot
@Amaranthine RBG: The Russian trolling op sets up hundreds of thousands of straw accounts for the very purpose of influencing political blogs like BJ, as you well know.
John Weiss
@Villago Delenda Est: I’m good, [email protected]Amaranthine RBG: Tell me, how is firing someone without warning and behind her back skillful? Sounds like a low-down chickenshit move to me. Where I grew up, a move like that would forever ban the purveyor from polite society. If it didn’t get you killed.
No One You Know
@Amaranthine RBG: You aren’t spamming? How do you manage to believe what you type? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a post from you that didn’t put down Hillary.
jmw
ProPublica is collecting statements by congress people, you can sort by state:
https://projects.propublica.org/represent/statements/james-comey