Cont: All things Trump + Russia Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Childlike Empress said:
Well, that and Trump's response are indications that the quotes are true. I was commenting on the so far presented evidence, which was no reason to be "sure".
Click to expand...

I know English isn't your first language, so I'm going to charitably assume that you just don't understand the common idiom I used and that your equivocation is not deliberate.
 
10 claims from Wolff's book

3 that I've not seen published elsewhere:

2. One of Trump's earliest campaign aides tried to educate the candidate about the Constitution, but Trump grew too bored to make it past the Fourth Amendment:

"Early in the campaign, Sam Nunberg was sent to explain the Constitution to the candidate. 'I got as far as the Fourth Amendment," Nunberg recalled, "before his finger is pulling down on his lip and his eyes are rolling back in his head.'"

8. Wolff reports that a spokesman for Trump's legal team left the job because he feared possible obstruction of justice related to a statement drafted aboard Air Force One that defended Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016.

"Mark Corallo was instructed not to speak to the press, indeed not to even answer his phone. Later that week, Corallo, seeing no good outcome-and privately confiding that he believed the meeting on Air Force One represented a likely obstruction of justice-quit. (The Jarvanka side would put it out that Corallo was fired.)"

'dope.' The list went on."

10. Wolff also writes at length about former Goldman Sachs executive Gary Cohn, who leads the president's National Economic Council. Cohn has privately disagreed with Trump a number of times in the past year. But an April email that, Wolff writes, circulated around the White House "purporting to represent the views of Gary Cohn" takes this to a new level:

"It's worse than you can imagine. An idiot surrounded by clowns. Trump won't read anything - not one-page memos, not the brief policy papers; nothing. He gets up halfway through meetings with world leaders because he is bored. And his staff is no better. Kushner is an entitled baby who knows nothing. Bannon is an arrogant prick who thinks he's smarter than he is. Trump is less a person than a collection of terrible traits. No one will survive the first year but his family. I hate the work, but feel I need to stay because I'm the only person there with a clue what he's doing. The reason so few jobs have been filled is that they only accept people who pass ridiculous purity tests, even for midlevel policy-making jobs where the people will never see the light of day. I am in a constant state of shock and horror."
Click to expand...
 
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...

Someone else (not Bannon) quotes Bannon in their book talking about insider stuff that went on in the first chunk of Trump's Presidency and it's Bannon who is going after Trump now? Huh? I think that you, and probably a bunch of other people, likely including Trump, are a bit confused.

Of course, I could just be missing important information here, too.
 
blutoski said:
I always wondered how that alliance even came to be. Bannon is antiestablishment, and Trump is pretty much the poster child for The Man. (OK, OK... I need to work on that metaphor)

I keep circling back to the theory that Trump did not want or expect to win... that the future of Trump Media was to be raking it in as a rightwing blowhard on extensive platforms (such as Brietbart, FoxNews, perhaps his own channels) until he had so many strokes his speech was incomprehensible.

Then, uhoh, he's president. Trump's ambition went from paying off his debt with radio op/eds to plans for the first American monarchy. Bannon's dream of partnering up with a cash cow was shattered by waking up one morning as the Little People, and maybe especially Bannon getting the boot because he's not on board with that whole oligarchy thing.
Click to expand...


I more and more am leaning to believe that almost everyone wanted Trump to lose. Obviously, the Clinton campaign did, but I think Donald and many on his campaign didn't really want him to be President. The claim that Trump was running to strengthen his brand and pave the way for a Trump Network is very plausible. It's always easier to criticize from the outside than have to put up or shut up. That's what he really wanted to do.
 
Aridas said:
Someone else (not Bannon) quotes Bannon in their book talking about insider stuff that went on in the first chunk of Trump's Presidency and it's Bannon who is going after Trump now? Huh? I think that you, and probably a bunch of other people, likely including Trump, are a bit confused.

Of course, I could just be missing important information here, too.
Click to expand...

The reason I think Bannon is at least complicit is - ignoring the fact that he probably did say exactly that - in addition Brietbart is all over this, and that's Bannon's work.
 
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...

I'd have to read the details about why it's a cease and desist, but it's likely because Bannon has not denied the accusation, and seems to be pushing the quote on Brietbart. I would not be surprised if there is a parallel request for injunction against sales of the book.
 
blutoski said:
The reason I think Bannon is at least complicit is - ignoring the fact that he probably did say exactly that - in addition Brietbart is all over this, and that's Bannon's work.
Click to expand...

ETA:

the actual request in the cease-and-desist to bannon is as follows:

...stop communicating either confidential and or disparaging information, and preserve all records in preparation for “imminent” legal action.
Click to expand...

Which is pretty fluffy, to be honest. It's mostly a threat of future unspecified legal action, which is very SOP for Trump. ie: bluster.
 
Folks, it's spelled "Breitbart" - first the "e", then the "i".
Try to learn it!
 
Hellbound said:
I've always mentally translated it to "Black Bart"...you know, the over-the-top villain in a western? Twirling his moustache while the girl is tied up on the train tracks?

Maybe that's just me :D
Click to expand...


A German composite word. Bart indeed means beard, while Breit means "broad, wide" (or colloquially "drunk" or "stoned", if you prefer).
 
Hellbound said:
I've always mentally translated it to "Black Bart"...you know, the over-the-top villain in a western? Twirling his moustache while the girl is tied up on the train tracks?

Maybe that's just me :D
Click to expand...

It's not the translation, it's the pronunciation. 'ei' sounds like 'eye' (eg wine is wein) / 'ie' sounds like 'ee'

(German was technically my first language, but I left Europe as a child, so a bit wobbly on dialect... but the ei/ie pronunciation rule about hearing the 2nd letter is pretty consistent)
 
Last edited:
blutoski said:
It's not the translation, it's the pronunciation. 'ei' sounds like 'eye' (eg wine is wein) / 'ie' sounds like 'ee'

(German was technically my first language, but I left Europe as a child, so a bit wobbly on dialect... but the ei/ie pronunciation rule about hearing the 2nd letter is pretty consistent)
Click to expand...

It's consistent auf Deutsch, but in English if it's a word you're unfamiliar with, pronunciation of ei/ie is pretty much a crap-shoot.
 
Polaris said:
It's consistent auf Deutsch, but in English if it's a word you're unfamiliar with, pronunciation of ei/ie is pretty much a crap-shoot.
Click to expand...

Right, and that's all I'm trying to explain, the joke that "Breit" bart is not all that "Bright" in my observation. It was just a play on words.
 
Polaris said:
It's consistent auf Deutsch, but in English if it's a word you're unfamiliar with, pronunciation of ei/ie is pretty much a crap-shoot.
Click to expand...

Even when it involves a surname of German origin. Harvey Weinstein, for instance, is pronounced "Whine-steen", so that the first "ei" is pronounce "aye" (as God intended), but the second "ee".

But I think we've digressed.
 
How ever you pronounce Breitbart, Bannon may soon be calling it "previous employer."

Mercer issues rare public rebuke of former ally Bannon

Washington Post said:
Stephen K. Bannon's main financial backer is formally cutting ties with the former Trump adviser.

In a new statement Thursday, billionaire conservative donor Rebekah Mercer said that she has not spoken to Bannon, the former White House chief strategist, in many months and that she continues to support President Trump.

...
People familiar with the conservative news website said discussions have begun at the organization about potentially removing him from the perch that propelled him to them forefront of national conservative politics.
Click to expand...
 
Hello.

The special counsel has received handwritten notes from Mr. Trump’s former chief of staff, Reince Priebus, showing that Mr. Trump talked to Mr. Priebus about how he had called Mr. Comey to urge him to say publicly that he was not under investigation. The president’s determination to fire Mr. Comey even led one White House lawyer to take the extraordinary step of misleading Mr. Trump about whether he had the authority to remove him.

The New York Times has also learned that four days before Mr. Comey was fired, one of Mr. Sessions’s aides asked a congressional staff member whether he had damaging information about Mr. Comey, part of an apparent effort to undermine the F.B.I. director. It was not clear whether Mr. Mueller’s investigators knew about this incident.

Mr. Mueller has also been examining a false statement that the president dictated on Air Force One in July in response to an article in The Times about a meeting that Trump campaign officials had with Russians in 2016. A new book, “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House,” by Michael Wolff, says that the president’s lawyers believed that the statement was “an explicit attempt to throw sand into the investigation’s gears,” and that it led one of Mr. Trump’s spokesmen to quit because he believed it was obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...
 
Obstruction Inquiry Shows Trump’s Struggle to Keep Grip on Russia Investigation

President Trump gave firm instructions in March to the White House’s top lawyer: stop the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, from recusing himself in the Justice Department’s investigation into whether Mr. Trump’s associates had helped a Russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election.

...

Mr. McGahn was unsuccessful, and the president erupted in anger in front of numerous White House officials, saying he needed his attorney general to protect him.​
 
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