Booman has a post up this morning about the Flynn situation.
Flynn is Gone, But the President is Still There
After a very well thought-out précis of what has happened so far, Booman basically concludes that:
… the problem isn’t and never was Flynn. The problem is the president.
As far as it goes, this is a fine idea.
But…it doesn’t go far enough.
Read on for more:
We now have a fourth branch of our supposedly constitutionally dictated, tripartite government. The executive, legislative and judicial branches have been joined…and thoroughly infiltrated as well…by a fourth branch.
Intelligence.
So has the media. Bet on it.
This has been true at least since the JFK assassination and ensuing coverup.
When the intelligence services…with the CIA as their dominant player, bet on that as well…decide that a president is unacceptable, they get rid of him. One way or another, he or she is gone. Ditto potential presidents. This is perfectly obvious now in the cases of JFK, RFK and Nixon, and it is happening today with Trump. Making believe that this is not so on plentiful historical evidence is either stupid, collusive or both.
It appears to me that the possession of even this one set of communications between Flynn and Sergei Kislyak…and God only knows how thoroughly the spooks have been watching this thing build…was enough to tumble Trump’s applecart right back into the sewer from which he has emerged. Before he was inaugurated, and quite likely before he was even elected.
But they didn’t act.
The question is…why?
Here’s my take on it:
They didn’t want either Trump or Clinton to be president. Clinton would have been too expert in using the wheels and levers of DC power to be effectively controllable, and Trump is a loaded, defective loose cannon.
Hmmmm…
What to do, what to do…???
Here is the apparent, emerging solution:
Get a vow of obedience from Trump’s vice-president and then mousetrap Trump after he was elected. Impeach him and sail along happily into the Pence presidency.
Watch.
Will it work?
I dunno.
Does Flynn value his own ass enough to turn state’s evidence on Trump?
Is there surveillance evidence available that will mean that Flynn has no say in the matter? Stuff that will…equally mysteriously…magically appear at just the right moment to pin him?
Watch.
Stay tuned.
Remember…Pence would look great on U.S. currency.
He looks like a bust of himself already.
The “hero” arises out of the manure pile.
Who’da thunk it, Myrtle!!!???
Precisely.
Who’da thunk it.
Me, for one.
Watch.
AG
P.S. From Politico (Yesterday. Quel coïncidence!!!), as thoroughly intelligence-infilitrated a rag as exists in this country as far as I am concerned:
Pence molds the government in his own image
Pence and his team bring an entirely different ethos and set of values to the administration.
Donald Trump never exactly fit the conservative mold — a fact that has unnerved the GOP’s true believers.
But as the Trump administration takes shape, Vice President Mike Pence has used his position atop the transition team and in the White House to install conservative allies throughout several agencies and at almost every level of government, giving the government a more orthodox cast.
“I think this whole administration is replete with social conservatives,” said Peggy Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America, a Christian activist group, who was at the White House with other activists last week celebrating Trump’s Supreme Court pick.
Pence and his team bring an entirely different ethos and set of values to the administration. The vice president’s emphasis on limited government and his conservative social views are distinct from the America First-style populism of Trump or top advisers like Steve Bannon, creating a divide that could influence policymaking on health care, education and social issues.
Members of Pence’s tight-knit inner circle, such as longtime aide Josh Pitcock, now Pence’s chief of staff, hold key positions both in Pence’s office and across the Trump administration. Ex-Hill aide Marc Short is the White House’s liaison to Congress, and Pence political advisers Nick Ayers and Marty Obst are helping to run Trump’s new nonprofit political arm, which was created to boost the president’s agenda, and brought on Pence’s nephew, John Pence, as deputy executive director.
“Vice Present Pence surrounds himself with true conservatives,” said a former staffer from his days leading the GOP House Conference. “He did when he was on the Hill, and again in Indiana. That some of them are now in the administration bolsters the case that conservative principles will significantly undergird the president’s agenda to change Washington.”
Former employees interviewed by POLITICO describe Pence as a manager who values humility, self-discipline and employees who follow marching orders. Pence’s top aides tend to be deeply conservative and, like the vice president, evangelical Christians. Short and Ayers are devout church-goers. Pence also encourages staff to balance work with a focus on family, which stems from his deep faith.
—snip—
Howzat for an enconomium!!!
I especially like the “Vice Present Pence” typo. If that’s what it is, of course. A typo. The whole thing seems almost like a rewriting of something that would have been written in present tense during a Pence presidency future. Spooky.
Caesar is (
almost) dead!!!Hail the new Caesar!!!
Watch.
Update [2017-2-14 13:35:13 by Arthur Gilroy]: P.P.S. From Booman’s own employer, The Washington Monthly
Following Flynn’s Resignation, Questions Remain
by Nancy LeTourneauJust prior to Michael Flynn’s resignation last night, the Washington Post published this report.
The acting attorney general informed the Trump White House late last month that she believed Michael Flynn had misled senior administration officials about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States, and warned that the national security adviser was potentially vulnerable to Russian blackmail, current and former U.S. officials said.
The message, delivered by Sally Q. Yates and a senior career national security official to the White House counsel, was prompted by concerns that Flynn, when asked about his calls and texts with the Russian diplomat, had told Vice President-elect Mike Pence and others that he had not discussed the Obama administration sanctions on Russia for its interference in the 2016 election, the officials said. It is unclear what the White House counsel, Donald McGahn, did with the information.Beyond the salacious idea that the National Security Advisor risked being blackmailed by Russia, what this tells us is that the White House has known Flynn was lying for at least 2-3 weeks. But then there is this tidbit from the report.
A senior Trump administration official said that the White House was aware of the matter, adding that “we’ve been working on this for weeks.”
All of the sudden yesterday, in the swirl of this becoming public knowledge, the focus of the story became that Flynn had lied to Vice President Pence and the two connected for him to apologize. That makes no sense. If the White House has known that he lied for over 2 weeks, why did they wait until yesterday to tell Pence he’d been set up?
It is also true that intelligence sources signaled to Flynn and the White House via David Ignatius on January 12th that they had recordings of his conversations with the Russian Ambassador, prompting Flynn to supposedly lie to Pence. Are we to believe that everyone in the administration simply ignored that signal and waited until the contents were revealed last Thursday?
One way to explain why no one in the White House acted on this information prior to yesterday is that it is yet another example of their incompetence…the right hand didn’t know what the left was doing. Far be it from me to claim otherwise.
But short of an amazing level of incompetence are some troubling questions this raises. The most significant being the the one raised years ago by Howard Baker: “What did the president know and when did he know it?” In other words, was Flynn relaying information the president wanted to communicate to Vladimir Putin about his intent to get rid of the sanctions Obama had imposed for Russian interference in the election?
—snip—
The one thing we’re learning from these recent leaks is that the intelligence community has remained on this case even after the inauguration placed the target of them in the White House. I suspect that Flynn’s resignation isn’t the end of this story.
And the setup continues.
Watch.
This one’s gonna move.
Fast.
Watch.
Good reads:
The Intercept — The Leakers Who Exposed Gen. Flynn’s Lie Committed Serious — And Wholly Justified — Felonies. A sober, factual, and balanced review report. Apparently it’s too difficult to ask others not to be hypocritical, not to lapse into the “commie under every bed” mentality to advance their political/economic agenda, and to be consistent as to principles, law, etc.
More of a “dollar here and a dollar there and suddenly you’re talking about real money: The Unintended and Expensive Consequences of Anti-Russia Sanctions. It also provides a summary timeline of the recent and new Cold War II. Put big money at the front of nefarious USG actions and the explanations aren’t so spooky; although, that’s not the only faction in the “deep state” and TPTB. And it’s been that way long before there was a CIA. However, the factions do work together when it’s in their mutual self-interest to do so. There are no “good guys” in the game, and those in the general public that think there are, are dangerously deluding themselves.
While team Reagan very likely made a deal with Iran before the 1980 election (and that would be flagrant treason), it should not be forgotten that Carter played the “anti-commie” card in 1980 with his grain embargo and Olympics boycott. The former hurt a lot of US farmers and shippers/dockworkers and contributed to the financial woes of farmer in subsequent years. (Farm Aid — the pot smoking DFHs effort to help out.) And the great Christian in the WH didn’t seem to care if it meant that Russians went hungry. Didn’t care about the athletes and their years of training. Carter deserved to lose, and like Obama-Clinton, lost to a bozo.
Glenn G:
I still don’t much trust Pierre Morad Omidyar not to have an undisclosed agenda because all of the tech billionaires have one and they are not on the side of the “people.” But so far, The Intercept editors/writers appear to have been given a free hand. Newest staff addition is Naomi Klein. If there are two people who can’t be bought, it’s Klein and Jeremy Scahill.
Super rich!
Glenn:
It’s as if there’s been a real live “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.”
Take it from one who worked there, Washington is full of pod people.
“Laws” only truly exist when they are enforced. Otherwise they are just words on paper. Selective enforcement is a fact of life…everywhere and in every time. Power writes its own laws. So it goes.
Once power is no longer in power…or perhaps better, when it meets a power that is in some way superior to it…then and only then does selective enforcement stop, and said stoppage only applies to the losing side in that particular competition.
We are butting up against that occurrence now.
Watch.
My bet?
Trump loses.
He won against amateurs and deluded, hypocritical, entitlement-blinded fools.
He won’t win against real power pros.
Watch.
AG
I think you are right, AG. And what will come will be worse. Because if there is anything worse than a wrong-headed incompetent idiot, it is a wrong-headed competent idiot.
The lesson of the 20th century that is usually overlooked as people postulate their fears.
○ Embarrassment to GG, MW of The Intercept: Omidyar Co-funded Ukraine Revolt by Oui @BooMan on March 1, 2014
I quoted Mark Ames on the Ukraine in another recent article – From The eXile – Misinformation Proxy War Ukraine.
New:
○ All the billionaire’s men (Or: Shattered Glenn) by Mark Ames @Pando
Your point? I already know this crap and don’t need reminders.
The list of who isn’t behind the mega-wealth grab in Ukraine (on the road to Moscow) would be shorter. Omidyar’s micro-credit operation in India disgusts me more.
I like Mark Ames — generally, but he’s got a few blind spots that cut into his credibility on certain matters. And me no like at all the money boys behind Pando.
Add Soros–he just made a big buy of Monsanto. Big ag is salivating for that Eurasian breadbasket.
BTW, I’m reading that the Trump-fired acting DOJ Yates managed the ratfu*king of Flynn all by herself. Back in Jan:
The FBI in late December reviewed intercepts of communications between the Russian ambassador to the United States and retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn — national security adviser to then-President-elect Trump — but has not found any evidence of wrongdoing or illicit ties to the Russian government, U.S. officials said.
WP link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-reviewed-flynns-calls-with-russian-ambass
ador-but-found-nothing-illicit/2017/01/23/aa83879a-e1ae-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html?utm_term=.
ee8cc46d8b42
Never-the-less, she drug out the Logan Act and opened an FBI investigation on him that cannot be closed by a presidential order. The gift that keeps giving.
How? Did Soros buy Bayer AG stock? 🙂
This story is really skivvy. Do we know which agency tapped into and recorded the call? Who and what they passed the transcript along to? Somehow within in days the transcript made its way to both State and the DOJ, with both the AG and FBI in the loop.
Then the rumor that Flynn could be a Russian mole and therefore, subject to blackmail. GMAFB — SOP is arrest the guy and sort out the details later. Instead, Yates gave Trump a heads up that Flynn did nothing illegal? Weird.
If I thought he was a Russian agent, I would be more worried about what he did as the Director of the DIA than a phone call to Putin after he was named foreign policy adviser and before it became official when it would have been OK.
Along with other people, I think the Logan Act is unconstitutional.
Flynn didn’t call Putin. It was the Russian ambassador to the US and the call was domestic. Might have a bit of a problem using this evidence to bring any charges against Flynn.
Also, after hearing Democrats claiming for months that Comey was in the tank for Trump, now the FBI is going after Trump?
Who’s on first?
Yeah, I forgot that amid all the screeching about Putin.
Talking to the Ambassador OR Putin would have been perfectly legal after Jan 19, so I can’t be excited about it happening a month early. Now if it had happened before the election…
What’s on Second!
Regarding Logan Act, I think it should be a crime to talk to a foreign government and misrepresent yourself as official if your are not official. But I think the First Amendment trumps (no pun intended) the Logan Act.
Things like telling Vietnam to wait for Nixon or the Iranian cake are d4espicable but so is a lot of speech covered by the First Amendment.
My guess is that the NSA / CIA (whoever did the recording) will say the call was international because the Russian embassy in DC is technically Russian soil (for diplomatic purposes).
Get out the popcorn … we’re not seeing The End yet! 🙂
○ OAO ALFA BANK et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 00-2208 (JDB) CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY et al., Defendants
○ Eighteen Russian Oligarchs Descending On Israeli Desert For Pesach
○ Flynn played crucial role ahead of Netanyahu-Trump summit
○ Corruption Case 1000 – illegal gifts: Police likely to recommend Benjamin Netanyahu indictmant
I thought you weren’t commenting in your own posts. That was quick.
Just trying to avoid the fools.
Like you.
The whole “avoid comments by adding to the original post” thing sometimes gets kinda…clunky.
As do posters like you.
There are only so many hours in the day.
You don’t like it when I do decide to post comments?
Feel free not to read them.
Meanwhile…I’ll do what I damned well please.
Feel free to do the same.
I’ll happily ignore your shit.
You?
AG
You post a high drama diary about the state of affairs here, state directly that you will no longer comment and then begin commenting again just a few days later. Now you attempt to back away from your recent statement. I generally avoid commenting in your posts because of your gibberish/word soup comments. Now you attempt to make it about me. Sure Arthur, it’s never about you. It’s everybody else’s fault. Bet on it.
Awwww…you just don’t like me because I’m not a DemnocRat.
I am honored.
AG
You know, Arthur, it’s true what they say about divorce. At first you feel lousy but feel you had to do it, then, after a while, you wonder why you didn’t do it sooner. I should have left after the “Dean Scream” BS. Instead I held my nose and voted for Kerry. Then I listened to a High School kid and voted for Obama. then I voted for Obama again as the “lesser evil” or “the devil you know”. Feels good to be free now. No more lesser evils. No more spousal abuse.
Do you now why divorce is so expensive?
Because it’s worth it!!!
Here too.
AG
AG, IMO during the 2016 primaries and election you were the most prescient person at the Pond. Therefore, I’m putting my $$ on your newest prediction. Now I have to get back to my card game.
Listened to this interview with Matt Taibbi where he attempted to explain why the MSM SOP takedown of presidential candidates didn’t work with Trump. If Taibbi has an answer, it didn’t come out in the interview. But it did cause me to begin pondering the question. A diary and conversation on this question would be of interest to me.
It worked well with Hillary Clinton, however….
How and when? When in ’08 or ’16 did the MSM go negative on Clinton in one of the following ways:
Dredging up something old and minor or misrepresenting it as important evidence of moral, ethical shortcomings. Something like the rap on Gore for having supported the development of the internet, Kerry’s military record, and Obama’s pastor or acquaintance with Bill Ayers (who has been for decades a more respectable US citizen than most people ever were or will be).
Taking out of context what she’s done or said or completely misrepresenting it.
Negatively inflating anything minor.
Hitting below the belt or blindsiding her. Like this from the Florida Univision debate:
That’s the worst kind of unfair attack and the precise moment when it can have the largest impact. Worse than Univision dredging up a Trump-Miss Universe spat from twenty years ago. (iirc Trump wasn’t first hit with this on in a debate but Hillary did make use of it in a debate.)
Seriously? I mean, fucking seriously? It’s possible to hate HRC (which you obviously do) and worship Bernie Sanders (which you obviously do) and recognize that HRC received more than her fair share of garbage coverage.
You must be living in some alternate universe. The MSM was in the bag for her.
Right. Totally in the tank.
I didn’t request an opinion. I asked for evidence of MSM trashing as I outlined and gave prior examples of.
Thought experiment — if Trump had been captured collapsing and SS agents tossing him into a van, would the MSM have run that loop the way they did the modified for negative effect Dean scream?
I truly feel sorry for those that can’t objectively assess what the MSM is doing in electoral cycles. The manipulation and thumbs on the scales that goes on.
“Negatively inflating anything minor.” EMAILS!!!!
You will have to be more specific. Did the MSM cover it as a news story, which it was once it became known that she’d been using her own server for her communications as SoS and hadn’t turned over those records when she left office, or did they drive it with reporters own investigations and/or steno journalism from anonymous officials that offered no evidence? Not squelching something that has become known about a politician is NOT trashing. (However, the information should be vetted for truth and accuracy and weighed for relevance and if it’s found to be opposition lies, propaganda, etc. that should be the story.)
IMHO — the media did push too hard on the House driven Benghazi event to get Clinton during that stupid three year running battle. (This was after the Romney tried to use it to get Obama, and the MSM and GOP went after Susan Rice as well.) Stupid because the opposition party and MSM never held GWB/Cheney to any level of accountability for 9/11 which happened here in daylight and not thousands of miles away in the dark. However, Benghazi didn’t play a role in the 2016 election other than to give her high marks for her October 2015 House appearance.
Interesting interview. IMO Trump, when compared to the typical politician, was more experienced in dealing with the media and had advice from Bannon, who is no media neophyte either. Another thing different about Trump is that he was not a politician and did not respond as one when the media bombarded him as they would any other politician. The media’s attempt was analogous to a marksman trying to hit a constantly moving target. Now that Trump has to govern, the target won’t be able to move as fast. Just my 2 cents.
AG, you indicate that you expect an effort to get rid of Trump to proceed quickly. Please indicate how you think that will happen: by impeachment? by assassination? or something else?
I’ve been trying to understand how impeachment would possibly unfold. There has to be a majority vote in the House of Representatives to set up a trial in the Senate, where a 2/3 majority is required to remove a president. So…
(1) Who provides votes for the majority in the House? Lots of Republicans would look around at their districts and say, hold on, I can’t win without Trump voters. Lots of Democrats would conclude they were being set up to look like vengeful sore losers if asked to provide the votes to send a bill of impeachment on to the Senate.
(2) If somehow a bill of impeachment reaches the Senate–with 48 Democrats, 52 Republicans–a similar dynamic is going to appear: Democrats won’t want to be blamed for a vendetta against Trump. Republicans won’t want to piss of Trump voters back home.
I just can’t see how–short of irrefutable evidence of Trump engaged in felonious actions–impeachment and conviction will ever unfold.
I’ll let someone else speculate about extrajudicial removal of Mr Trump from office.
You ask:
Damned if I know…
All three, possibly…
What do you think?
AG
I think a lot of Democrats will fear retribution by the voters if they don’t vote for impeachment. The primary campaigns would be obvious. Other Democrats will vote however Goldman-Sachs/Shittybank/Chase tell them to vote.
The Origins of the Overclass
As in this ET thread.
Maybe not impeachment. Maybe they can get him to resign.
I still think “the Lone Gunman”. They can portray him as a Socialist or a Muslim or a Socialist Muslim, whoever they want a pogrom for.
i wonder if Ron Paul as Pres would be facing the same? Libertarians are pretty anti-interventionist, isolationist.
Sanders might have slid–his is a more conventional FP. But how many vacation homes can one buy with campaign funds (hint, hint.
I think we have bottomed out.