Cont: All things Trump + Russia Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Minoosh said:
Well, marketing is manipulation.

As much as I like the idea of these unpleasant individuals turning on each other I wonder if some of these "feuds" are all they're cracked up to be.
Click to expand...

Yep. I think we're on the same page about celebrity feuds/marriages.

Some are just so transparently staged, and it's not a secret that this is a soft collusion among their respective publicists to shove their brands to the front page of the Weekly World News and maintain their clients' currency.

So, yes, sadly, I think we have a TV show producer in the White House, spinning his brand the same way he has been for a decade running The Apprentice. His income is mostly branding - his actual business ventures have been colossal failures. Stick with your strengths I guess: get attention and the money will follow.
 
Last edited:
Minoosh said:
These are all good points. I just have a hard time believing Bannon would be torching the bridge to the White House/Trump presidency without having some backup plan.
Click to expand...

He's a dogmatic believer in his politics. He's a white nationalist that cares deeply about the economic nationalist part that Trump abandoned with the tax bill. He wasn't just in it for the culture war and winning. He's a true fanatic that wants to unleash his vision and Trump is no longer of any use. You saw the start of this with the Moore/Strange endorsements split in Alabama.
 
blutoski said:
I'm also cynical about the media choice... a book.

If Bannon really wanted to cut up Trump, and if he really had evidence (instead of hyperbole and insults) he would have picked up the phone and called the FBI. Instead we're to believe there's something actionable, but he decided to hold off and publish it in a book months later. Nah, he's full of **** as usual.
Click to expand...

Yes but at the moment, there is plenty of evidence - what is lacking is the political will in the GOP to do anything about it. Bannon doing this, and using Brietbart as well might be enough to start a bit of a civil war amongst Trump's core support.

As far as impeachment, the threat of getting primaried is probably currently working in Trump's favour. This *might* be the start of that changing.

I agree that it is of little material importance - unless he has been cooperating with the FBI, though.
 
Minoosh said:
These are all good points. I just have a hard time believing Bannon would be torching the bridge to the White House/Trump presidency without having some backup plan.
Click to expand...

I wonder if he's distancing because he's getting more confident there's imminent danger with being associated with convicted felons and traitors. If the goal is to persuade the public that he's completely uninvolved in Russian skulduggery, provoking the principal suspect to put it in writing like this, for all the world to see, helps.
 
blutoski said:
I think he's trying to sell books, to make money. This 'manipulation' just smells like marketing.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I am wrong, but it is not currently Bannon who's selling a book, but Wolff, who quotes Bannen in said book.
 
Stacko said:
He's a dogmatic believer in his politics. He's a white nationalist that cares deeply about the economic nationalist part that Trump abandoned with the tax bill. He wasn't just in it for the culture war and winning. He's a true fanatic that wants to unleash his vision and Trump is no longer of any use. You saw the start of this with the Moore/Strange endorsements split in Alabama.
Click to expand...
Does this mean white nationalists have to pick a side? Or is that too inside baseball?
 
Oystein said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is not currently Bannon who's selling a book, but Wolff, who quotes Bannen in said book.
Click to expand...

Yes, sorry, I wasn't very clear about that. My impression is that whether Bannon said this or not, it's Wolff trying to sell books.

The questions being: if it's false, wouldn't Bannon accuse Wolff of fabricating; if it's true, why would Bannon be so loose lipped.

Which is why I think there's two layers of ******** here, unfortunately. Wolff is cherry picking a conversation with Bannon, out of context, and Bannon was just ********ting anyway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lc63MvI.jpg
 
Minoosh said:
These are all good points. I just have a hard time believing Bannon would be torching the bridge to the White House/Trump presidency without having some backup plan.
Click to expand...
Machiavelli's famous advice is not to attack the Prince but the Prince's advisors. The Prince cannot back down, but can be shocked - shocked! - to discover the evil being done in his name. Heads roll, and none of them are yours.

Bannon isn't going for Trump directly, he's going for the amateurs in Trump's team. And if Trump suffers from it that's their fault, not Bannon's.
 
Last edited:
CapelDodger said:
Machiavelli's famous advice is not to attack the Prince but the Prince's advisors. The Prince cannot back down, but can be shocked - shocked! - to discover the evil being done in his name. Heads roll, and none of them are yours.

Bannon isn't going for Trump directly, he's going for the amateurs in Trump's team. And if Trump suffers from it that's their fault, not Bannon's.
Click to expand...

“I’m a Leninist,” Bannon proudly proclaimed.

...

“Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.”
 
KDLarsen said:
Wow, talk about throwing Bannon under the bus. And not just your average bus, we're talking bi-articulated, 14 wheels of mauling. I, mean, just wow.

"Just a staffer", "Very little to do with..victory"?!
Click to expand...

Does "staffer" outrank "coffee boy"?
 
Minoosh said:
Does this mean white nationalists have to pick a side? Or is that too inside baseball?
Click to expand...

One side has lost its benefactor.

Bannon has in recent weeks also alienated his main financial backer, Rebekah Mercer, after he told several other major conservative donors that he would be able to count on the Mercers’ financial support should he run for president, a person familiar with the conversations said. The person said

Mercer now does not plan to financially support Bannon’s future projects — and that she was frustrated by his moves in Alabama and some of his comments in the news media that seemed to stoke unnecessary fights.
A person close to Bannon said he was not running for president. Bannon and Mercer declined to comment through representatives.

“The core constituency for Breitbart is what you would call the Trump Deplorables. That’s the audience. And if they’re asked to choose between Steve and Trump, they’re going to choose Trump. That’s clear,” said a person familiar with the company’s ownership.
Click to expand...
 
blutoski said:
Yes, sorry, I wasn't very clear about that. My impression is that whether Bannon said this or not, it's Wolff trying to sell books.

The questions being: if it's false, wouldn't Bannon accuse Wolff of fabricating; if it's true, why would Bannon be so loose lipped.

Which is why I think there's two layers of ******** here, unfortunately. Wolff is cherry picking a conversation with Bannon, out of context, and Bannon was just bulshitting anyway.
Click to expand...

The White House begs to differ:


It's hard to square, "Wolff made this up!" with, "we're demanding that Bannon stop saying these protected things!"

Eta: Link

Eta 2: How does one cease and desist what has been said to the author of a book?
 
Last edited:
It’s amusing, the mutual bus-throwing-under from both of these wretched and treasonous dirtbags.

Actually, Bannon’s appearance would probably be improved by getting run over by an actual bus. He looks like the dried residue of a solution of syphilis and Ripple.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Do confidentiality agreements apply to illegal activities?
Click to expand...
Contracts cannot require a person to break the law or allow someone to break the law. Such contracts are unenforcible.

So, for example, US law requires some employers to provide hepatitis B vaccine to employees. If a contract requires an employee to hold the employer harmless should the employee decline the vaccine and the employee contracts hepatitis B it would be unenforcible because such a hold harmless clause is illegal.
 
Last edited:
Stacko said:
The White House begs to differ:


It's hard to square, "Wolff made this up!" with, "we're demanding that Bannon stop saying these protected things!"

Eta: Link

Eta 2: How does one cease and desist what has been said to the author of a book?
Click to expand...

What happened after The Hair was sworn in is not a matter for Trump lawyers; it's a matter for government attorneys if what he says is related to a NDA he signed as a government officer. No private pledge, has binding on public duty. The phrase is on the cover of the handbook you get issued when you get sworn in. A federal employee cannot have a private NDA that covers the conduct of his public duty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom