... after Trump, at that press conference, predicted that the press would respond with "rants and raves."
I'll say more about the press conference once a transcript is available. I thought it was indeed wild, but in a good way. I hope we get more of Trump working with the press in this mode.
ADDED: Here's the full smoking hot video:
AND: The transcript is now available. I "live-blog" my reading of the transcript in a new post.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
395 comments:
1 – 200 of 395 Newer› Newest»I liked the 15 minutes I saw of it. :-)
"...Trump working with the press..."
Your preposition is wrong. Should be "...Trump working the press..."
The reasons I voted for the guy.
Working ON the press. As in when your restaurant server comes my your table, clearing plates, and asks, "Still working on that?"
You didn't agree that it was "unhinged," Althouse. That was my first thought, in real time, in your open thread.
It was. The rambling, disconnected thoughts. The extreme invective. The casual inaccuracy of his overblown claim of the largest electoral victory since Reagan. (It was the second-closest since Reagan, with only the Bush-Gore 2000 election closer during that time period.)
This is the one thing I don't understand about you. You and I are close in age; we share the same general profession. We even attended the same university, missing being fellow undergraduates by four months. I read your blog in large part because I share so many of your tastes in popular culture.
But I do not understand your blind spot with regard to Donald Trump. I don't presume that this is a failing or some inattention on your part. I presume that I don't have a handle on the way that you are mentally gaming the politics.
Trump's surprise that he was now in fact a politician was amusing.
Heh. I mentioned in open thread it was Trump celebrating Festivus in February: You people disappoint me!.
CNBC calls presser 'Trump airing of the grievances'.
Feats of strength.
Wild in a good way, you have to be kidding; if you watch this and think he is on the level, I have a bridge to sell you. Just one point where he flopped: the Black Caucus members send a letter to him asking for a meeting, which he has not responded to, and instead asks a reporter from NBC to arrange a meeting. Of course reporting this will be labeled fake news.
Next will come the Festivus miracles.
I tuned in at random moments. It didn't appear to be unhinged and wild.
"if you watch this and think he is on the level, I have a bridge to sell you."
How much do you want for it?
We certainly live in alarming times. Apparently everything is dire and we're all doomed. A madman is at the wheel and he's gonna blow up the word. I guess in the context of the Fermi paradox, Trump is the Great Filter.
One of the most insidious memes infecting our public life after WWII is civility, particularly as applied to our Presidents in press conferences. The implicit assumption is that a President showing anger is unhinged, dangerous, not to be trusted with the nuclear codes. This allows the press when it chooses to be adversarial (Nixon, Ford, Bush I and II) to emasculate the President, render him weak and ineffectual, helpless before his enemies.
Trump, by never buying into that assumption during the election, is going to reset the relationship with the press, holding them accountable to the public as they try to hold him accountable. As one who spent his career in a legal system that depends on the adversarial dynamic, I regard this as restoring another value that once made America great.
Can somebody explain the distinction about "classified information" in the Michael Flynn case?
I am not aware of the press revealing any classified information in that story.
I completely agree; it seems clear that the release of that story to the press was likely a felony.
So the gathering of information on Flynn may have been done legally (by the NSA or CIA or FBI under a FISA warrant), but released illegally.
Meanwhile the DNC leaks were stolen, illegally, and then passed on to Wikileaks.
So what's the big deal with any "classified" info? What is Trump's point?
And if Flynn did nothing wrong, why did he mislead Mike Pence? The president must have asked Flynn, and given Flynn a chance to explain. What was Flynn's explanation? Why did Flynn act in such a suspicious manner? If Flynn is so innocent, was it really necessary to fire him?
@roesch,
Let me guess — is it a bridge to the 21st century?
I loved the entire show. He's riveting. Yes, he is a little sloppy with facts, but I don't care. The organized media is far worse than sloppy.
Trump is saying every word I have longed to hear for decades. God bless the man. And to make it better, he's actually DOING what I think should be done. Finally!!
- Krumhorn
Watched almost all of it. Couldn't tear myself away. Great fun.
It was classic Trump. Bold and honest. A Honey Badger.
Just what I voted for-
Trump is awesomesauce. His joking with Acosta about checking the family tree was hilarious.
Just to be clear--I am an independent moderate in terms of my politics. I LOVED Trump in his press conference. He was authentic, said real things (I never heard anything real come out of Hillary's mouth) and made a great deal of sense on each issue he discussed.
I thought what he said about the media was right on the mark. I think the media really is out of control. The NY Times has becomes ludicrous--their story on the Russia contacts has n real content--just a sensationalist headline and some weaselly opening paragraphs.
Hysteria is a real thing that makes people wholeheartedly believe in things that are not real. The media, the Democrats, and a large portion of elite liberals are truly in a state of hysteria.
"And if Flynn did nothing wrong, why did he mislead Mike Pence?"
The transcript should explain that. That's why I would like to see it. I have a feeling about Pence that he is more rigid than Trump and may have felt insulted if Flynn misspoke about the call, not having a transcript.
This is how Fitzgerald entrapped Libby. There is evidence that Russert mis spoke but they were after Bush and Libby was a consolation prize.
The DNC stuff that was released by Wikileaks may have come from non-government insiders and not the Russians. It might have even been the guy shot and killed in DC.
I think Trump decided he had to back up Pence who wanted Flynn's scalp.
We may even learn the truth after a while. I would not be surprised to see Flynn back in some capacity.
"I am not aware of the press revealing any classified information in that story."
-- The press probably didn't do anything illegal, since they don't have security clearances. But, the people who gave it to them should be in for a world of hurt.
"Quiet, quiet, quiet!" Anyone who thinks this was a Presidential level press conference is so bamboozled there really is no hope for them.
Listened to Trump while tuned in to Rush...made my day!
I used to have a fair amount of respect for Tapper - he was relatively impartial - but I am quickly losing that. Someone higher up at CNN must have laid down the law to him.
"And if Flynn did nothing wrong, why did he mislead Mike Pence?"
Could ask Martha Stewart the same question vis a vis her FBI interview. Non-lawyers often go for the easiest exculpatory statement, thinking that will shut down further inquiry. (Which is why we always advise them not to talk without consulting a lawyer.) Or were you asking a rhetorical question Chuck?
I think Trump decided he had to back up Pence who wanted Flynn's scalp."
Whoosh! There goes Pence under the bus. No need to respond.
Poor #55. Apparently suffering from a severe loss of memory. The love fest between Obama and the Press was sickening. And the lifeless monologues were soporific.
I saw and heard the Press Conference and thought Trump was fine.
@Chuck,
But I do not understand your blind spot with regard to Donald Trump. I don't presume that this is a failing or some inattention on your part. I presume that I don't have a handle on the way that you are mentally gaming the politics.
Althouse is seeing things with clarity, you are not.
That is all.
The Press was awful, as usual. Someone needs to take the CNN guy aside and tell him he's not the co-equal of the POTUS, he's just a hack reporter with a microphone.
I love how Trump said the Press would say he was "ranting and raving" when in fact he was very calm and full of humor. He said he loves the back and forth, which he does since he did it every day of the campaign.
Trump sounds a lot better then his words read. One problem is he doesn't signpost his thoughts. He will be speaking about subject X - break - and then continue to speak on subject X - and if you listen to him you understand that. Or he talked about how he didn't mind "bad stories" - if you listen to him, you pick up that he means stories that are bad for him. Not "bad" in the sense of being untrue or biased.
Matthew Sablan said...
"I am not aware of the press revealing any classified information in that story."
-- The press probably didn't do anything illegal, since they don't have security clearances. But, the people who gave it to them should be in for a world of hurt.
I think we agree, Matthew. But Trump's point was all about a difference in the two cases (Flynn v Podesta, for lack of a shorter description) because the Flynn matter involved classified information. Why? What is the point? I am not aware of anybody's having divulged any sources or methods. Maybe the mere fact that our intel services knew about a series of Flynn-Russia calls is too revealing. But I seriously doubt that.
Shep on Fox is in a state of hysteria. Funny to watch.
I can tell that I really really hate the press and the way things are in Washington, because I enjoyed it and I know under normal circumstances I would have wondered what is going on.
But I already wonder that, about our government and press. I'm way too happy to see crazy pushback against the crazy.
I love when members of the mainstream press think of themselves as defenders of democracy and speaking truth to power instead of what they actually are: hatchet men for their globalist bosses.
I'm glad to know Trump is confident that the Illegal leakers will be caught. They should be fined or Jailed for breaking the law.
Trump just can't get through a press conference without lying. The biggest electoral college vote ever!
"Why? What is the point?"
-- I assume, mainly, that Trump, as President, can do something about one set of leaks, but not the other. The FBI offered to look at the DNC's compromised machines and were told no, so what's the point in the administration even trying to follow up on it when the "victims" don't seem to care?
Now, leaking the government's stuff? That they do care about. They care about it bigly.
The issue isn't, did Flynn lie to the public. The issue is, did he lie to his boss? He seems to have misled Pence and the WH staff -- proxies for Trump in that situation. You cannot have a presidential advisor who misleads the president.
Within a few weeks, he'll have lapped Obama's entire 8 years of press conferences. The MSM loved Obama and didn't mind his preaching, his constant self-congratulations (I, I, I...) and when got the chance to talk merely patted him on the back, even though lying, obstruction of justice and illegal actions were running rampant.
With Trump, the MSM has to sit there and just get pounded by Obama.
Its typical that almost all the questions were about the Fake Russian story or were stupid gotcha questions. Why some reporter would waste everyone's time caring about whether trump got the Electoral vote history right is amazing.
"The issue is, did he lie to his boss?"
-- It is refreshing that someone who lied is held to account; something in politics, from local to top levels, that rarely happens.
trump talks like he's at a cocktail party.
NPR and NBC now report that there is nothing inappropriate in the transcripts of Flynn's conversations with the ambassador. Apparently just some remarks about the news about the Russian embassy personnel given such short notice to leave the country, which Flynn quite reasonably would not have considered as "discussing the sanctions" when asked about it.
So Mike Pence changed that a bit by stating that Flynn had assured him nothing related to the sanctions was even mentioned, which resulted in his being embarrassed when the media played it up, and you don't embarrass the vice-president unpunished, whether intentionally or not.
And that seems to be all it was, but count one big scalp for the opposition.
The press- including Jake Tapper- needs to learn to filter what they cover with Trump. They let him lead them astray, or I should say they get too easily distracted.
Why should Tapper make any comments about it being wild or unhinged? He can talk about the issues that were raised and the answers given. The press acts like they'd like to talk about the big issues but Trump won't let them, but they are sentient beings with the ability to cover the issues and not become part of the show. Like today, all the press is on the fainting couch about being delegitimized. But people don't like the press. They just need to do their jobs better. If they did their jobs, then people wouldn't eat this up.
We have no idea what other stuff Flynn may have done to that lost Trump's confidence. The lying to Pence, may have just been one thing they are willing to go public on.
That was amazing work. DJT Press Conferences are morphing into the PM's Question Time in Parliament with the opposing party MPs shouting accusations, and the PM energetically ridiculing them back. It is on CSPAN on Sunday nights.
And like Mr. Bannon says, The Fake Media, which has had 8 years training to be Obama's Palace Guard, ARE now Trump's Opposing Party.
"So Mike Pence changed that a bit by stating that Flynn had assured him nothing related to the sanctions was even mentioned, which resulted in his being embarrassed when the media played it up, and you don't embarrass the vice-president unpunished, whether intentionally or not."
-- Rule #1 of any job: Don't make the boss look stupid.
CNN has Mike Baker, a former CIA Operative on a panel right now and I would like to see more of him. His head is on straight.
rcocean said...
Its typical that almost all the questions were about the Fake Russian story or were stupid gotcha questions. Why some reporter would waste everyone's time caring about whether trump got the Electoral vote history right is amazing.
That's a big part of the story. Nobody asked Trump about the election in the first place. Trump mentioned it in the first place. A reporter only asked Trump about it after Trump brought it up, unsolicited.
And that was the funny part. That reporter from NBC surely knew it was bullshit as Trump said it. And so he threw away the question that he had prepared, and went to his smartphone and looked up the numbers and when his turn came to ask a question, he lashed Trump with the real numbers from past election and cited them in order.
WATCH HOW TRUMP HIMSELF trotted out that line about the size of his hands- er, electoral victory. He raised it on his own, to buttress his own claim that the media was not recognizing the magnitude of his election.
Now, what I wanna know is, who in the "Fine-tuned machine" that is Trump's White House gave President Trump that bogus information. Let's get a name. So that we can keep the White House running like a "fine-tuned machine."
As usual. Michael K is spot on, in my opinion.
Notice how Trump has failed to say that Flynn lied to him, only that Flynn lied to Pence. It is a strong possibilty that Trump knew about Flynn's communications with the Russian and probably did direct him to do it, despite Trump's denial. He admitted that if Flynn hadn't done it he, Trump, would've directed him to do it. That may come back to haunt him. Trump wouldn't have fired Flynn because he lied to Pence. He fired him because the truth was leaked out. Trump couldn't care less about Pence. My opinion.
I absolutely loved this press conference. I loved it more after the reactions came out. I laughed several times. Seriously, I'd recommend watching it over reading a transcript. A transcript won't do it justice. Funny line was, "I'm not going to call you fake news anymore. I'm going to say very fake news"
So awesome.
Trump just can't get through a press conference without lying. The biggest electoral college vote ever!
Do you remember Obama's earlier press conferences? He would talk about how the Republicans really shouldn't get a say in cleaning up the financial mess the country was in, because they were the ones who drove us off the cliff. Do you remember this? It was quite a performance and he added to it more each time....eventually the Republicans were drinking slurpees and telling Obama to clean up the mess they made.
Now, It's a lie that the Republicans were responsible for the bursting of the housing bubble and the plunge of the economy. But it was a lie Obama told over and over. And it was the kind of lie Washington likes. A political lie. A partisan lie.
So lying about electoral votes...yawn. We've seen lies before. You have too. You probably even liked a lot of them
Was it Voltaire who said to find the person you cannot speak badly of, and he is the person who rules you?
That means Mike Pence is ruling the White House. Say something that hurts Pence and you are out of here.
His Indiana smooth friendly ways wins again. Ask Meade.
I didn't watch the entire thing, but what extreme invective?
I did not have sex with that woman.
If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.
I guess Ann's not as smart as you Chuck.
I agree, the reason Flynn's gone is Pence wanted him gone, for whatever reason. An interesting glimpse of the Trump-Pence relationship.
The Professor had a great post on the stolen DNC leaks, Chuck. You should read it.
MayBee said...
Trump just can't get through a press conference without lying. The biggest electoral college vote ever!
Do you remember Obama's earlier press conferences? He would talk about how the Republicans really shouldn't get a say in cleaning up the financial mess the country was in, because they were the ones who drove us off the cliff. Do you remember this? It was quite a performance and he added to it more each time....eventually the Republicans were drinking slurpees and telling Obama to clean up the mess they made.
Now, It's a lie that the Republicans were responsible for the bursting of the housing bubble and the plunge of the economy. But it was a lie Obama told over and over. And it was the kind of lie Washington likes. A political lie. A partisan lie.
So lying about electoral votes...yawn. We've seen lies before. You have too. You probably even liked a lot of them
The Wall Street Journal shot down those lies from Obama. So did the National Review, and the Weekly Standard and lots of conservative voices in the mainstream media. All of the NeverTrump conservative media did.
What is "the mainstream media" anymore?
I actually don't recall the "Trumpian" ever media having done much financial reporting. On things like Dodd-Frank or the earlier mortgage finance crisis. InfoWars and that ilk seemed more focused on daily scandals and alt-right conspiracy theories.
This is Trump playing to his strengths. Watched about half and thought he was very coherent -- repeating his main points, with some venom and humor, putting the opposition in its place, advancing some actual policy priorities a bit. Of course, he is helped by the quality of the opposition -- the CNN guy muttering about Trump harming he First Amendment by attacking the media was particularly laughable. The whole "wouldn't it be great to get along with Russia" bit is maddening, though.
"DJT Press Conferences are morphing into the PM's Question Time in Parliament with the opposing party MPs shouting accusations, and the PM energetically ridiculing them back." Good analogy. He should just offer to do the real thing in the House, on the condition that it is shown live on national TV. Forget the stilted State of the Union. Dare the Dems to show up and make fools themselves. Trump vs. Pelosi: I'd even pay to watch that.
I enjoyed the press conference. But Chuck's comments here after the press conference make me even happier.
"I didn't watch the entire thing, but what extreme invective?"
He probably called a CNN employee a CNN employee. Wouldn't you be insulted?
Flipping back and forth between Fox and CNN right after the press conference.
Fox--"Some people will say Trump is unhinged."
CNN--"Trump is unhinged!"
The following article about the Flynn kerfunkle is worth reading as it ties together reporting from various news outfits, themselves. In short, a) there is no criminal investigation of Flynn by the FBI, and sources within the intelligence community say there is nothing in the transcripts of the conversations between Trump and the ambassador that indicates criminal wrong doing. b) Flynn not only did not lie to the FBI, the FBI stated his interview was "cooperative and truthful," c) Flynn did not talk to Russian intelligence but to the Russian ambassador, and they did not discuss sanctions, but the 35 Russians Obama threw out did come up. What Flynn said was only "Look I know this happened, We'll review everything." d) the office of the DNI says reports that the intelligence agencies are withholding information from Trump are "not true," other sources within the intelligence community backed that up.
Trump has a reason to be ticked at the media organizatons involved in pushing this crap. They're making it up as they go along or it's coming from Obama operatives and they aren't even checking it before they jump on the bandwagon.
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-security/2017/02/15/medias-flynn-russia-narrative-quickly-collapsing-as-fbi-reportedly-clears-former-national-security-adviser/
On a substantive level, Trump is spot-on about Russia.
The Rooskies are not our enemies. They were our enemies during the Cold War. They are not now.
Yes, Putin is a strongman. Yes, they have the psychological scars from several centuries of collective Russian misery. But they are not are enemies.
I also laughed out loud several times. It was a hoot. It was certainly not much like an Obama press conference - more like when your boss calls you into his or her office and proceeds to hold forth about whatever suits him or her, sometimes throwing in a dig at your performance and making no bones about calling you out when you say something s/he thinks is stupid - great theater.
So the deep state got Flynn bounced what it looks like for nothing and everyone is in CYA mode?
Lord, we are living Emily Litella.
jaydub:
With all of that exculpatory info on Flynn, why was he fired?
That was amazing work. DJT Press Conferences are morphing into the PM's Question Time in Parliament with the opposing party MPs shouting accusations, and the PM energetically ridiculing them back. It is on CSPAN on Sunday nights.
Thanks for the reminder, tradguy! My late husband watched it faithfully every week when Parliament was in session. Great entertainment! I haven't had a chance to see Ms May in action, yet. Is she as clever as Tony Blair was?
"The Wall Street Journal shot down those lies from Obama. So did the National Review, and the Weekly Standard and lots of conservative voices in the mainstream media. All of the NeverTrump conservative media did."
To no useful effect. Thats always been the problem. Its easy to be right, its much harder to actually do the right thing.
Listening to the media, both local and national, you'd think this is the first time they've heard Trump being Trump.
To hear them call it "historic, unhinged", I have to believe it is the first time they've heard Trump being Trump.
Maybe they should spend less time getting their news from the news, and more time getting their news from actual events.
Because the Deep State demands a scalp or 2?
It was a Command Performance by Trump. I loved every second of it. As much as the press hates Trump and everything he stand for, you know they're loving the "Theater" of it all.
MayBee brings up some good points. These 'journalists' need to decide if they are doing news or providing analysis & editorial comment. They seem to have confused the two originally separate functions of the press.
I disagee with Bay Area Guy. Russia and China are both menaces, so they are our enemies until they change substantially. WWIII may be around the corner with those two crazies. Rest assured, the Bay Area will be thoroughly destroyed in the even of full-scale nuclear war.
I saw part of the new's conference. Trump held sway as far as I could tell. He's becoming more presidential (meaning more in command of his powerful office). His basic nature won't change, however. Will he become more in CONTROL of his office instead of relying on advisors? I don't know the answer to that, but I think he should.
I tuned in out of idle curiosity and was riveted by that press conference. It will be interesting to see what the neutral (if there is any left) opinion is. I saw one report of people watching it in a gym while they were hard at work spinning and stair-climbing. They were laughing and opining that the press was getting murdered. I heard some excerpts (negatively spun) on CBS. Audio didn't have quite the same impact as TV.
"Chuck said...
This is the one thing I don't understand about you. You and I are close in age; we share the same general profession. We even attended the same university, missing being fellow undergraduates by four months. I read your blog in large part because I share so many of your tastes in popular culture.
But I do not understand your blind spot with regard to Donald Trump. I don't presume that this is a failing or some inattention on your part. I presume that I don't have a handle on the way that you are mentally gaming the politics."
It's because you are an asswipe. And she is not.
Chuck said... Chuck said...
Can somebody explain the distinction about "classified information" in the Michael Flynn case?
I am not aware of the press revealing any classified information in that story.
I would be very surprised if the fact that US intelligence was recording communication of a specific person was not classified information, Chuck. It's one thing to say "I bet the NSA listens to most of person X's calls." It's another thing to read "anonymous sources in the NSA [or wherever] confirm they recorded a call between person X and person Y."
I'm pretty sure that's highly confidential, and most likely classified, info. Confirmation of the existence of a program/intel source/intel method is generally avoided since that fact is usually, you know, classified.
Chaos! Unhinged! Dark, ominous, frightening!
Geez, get a grip, people.
Great stuff. It's quite clear that not only is Trump not afraid of the media hysterics, he's going to deliberately goad them into more. Until they figure it out. Which will likely never happen.
Chuck- I don't really even know what info wars is. Furthermore, I didn't mention the main stream media in my comment.
My point was, complaining about lying in politics is silly, because politics is pretty much organized lying.
I needed this press conference. The resignation (firing?) of M. Flynn discouraged me. Methought, "Is the Trump I know and love going soft? Is he suffering from the same malady all Republicans in Congress suffer from: FEAR OF THE MEDIA/DEM-SHAMING?
I got my answer in a resounding: NO! It was a tour de force.
I especially enjoyed seeing AP's Julie Pace, a pretend neutral reporter, getting Trump-slapped.
Getting along with us might not be a bad idea for Putin if Trump can make him see that.
Russia rules an enormous area, but has only 140 million population, and that is shrinking.
Then look to see the countries surrounding Russia which have long-standing grievances they may wish to do something about if they see an opening.
Some people(s) inside the Russian Federation may not necessarily be all that loyal either.
If the ground feels soft under your feet, it migh be well to look for a friend who might throw you a rope if needed.
SockPuppet#55 said...Notice how Trump has failed to say that Flynn lied to him, only that Flynn lied to Pence. It is a strong possibilty that Trump knew about Flynn's communications with the Russian and probably did direct him to do it, despite Trump's denial.
Notice how Trump DIDN'T say he's really a lizardperson from the plant Xaxos here to steal the essence of Earth's supermodels and female celebrities using his cleverly-disguised proboscis (AKA pussy grabber). He failed to address that issue at all, which I think tells us everything we need to know. Case closed.
@mockturtle,
Google "Questions for the Prime Minister", and get C-Span video library.
Chuck said... [hush][hide comment]
You didn't agree that it was "unhinged," Althouse. That was my first thought, in real time, in your open thread.
It was. The rambling, disconnected thoughts. The extreme invective. The casual inaccuracy of his overblown claim of the largest electoral victory since Reagan. (It was the second-closest since Reagan, with only the Bush-Gore 2000 election closer during that time period.)
Golly Chuck, haven't seen you this fixated on one thing since-oh-I don't know- oh, yeah, since your gal Michelle was man handled so vigorously that it led you to threatened to harm Greta van Sustern.
Chuck, could you please give us examples of extreme invective?
You wrote it.
"Russia and China are both menaces, so they are our enemies until they change substantially. WWIII may be around the corner with those two crazies."
Both are menaces, but China is a far bigger menace.
Russia is rather penny-ante. None of the Russians ambitions are likely to pay out, and I think they know that. Whatever they are looking at is just a long term liability. It does them no good to take over yet another stretch of steppe and some rustbelt towns. Nor even an oil-rich province filled with angry Turks (Azerbaijan). The oil they have in glut anyway, and a new supply wont pay them back for the trouble.
China may cause trouble due to their need for a foreign distraction for an economic downturn, thats the big danger. But they aren't in the market for any conquests, which they already know are going to be liabilities.
Neither is crazy.
> Maybe they should spend less time getting their news from the news, and more time getting their news from actual events.
Heh. Reminds me of long ago when Sam Donaldson was getting all upset about something reported in the news. I was sitting there thinking, "Sam, my boy, chill. Its NEWS. The emanation of a penumbra of opinion of dubious factual basis."
Seeing Red said...
Chuck, could you please give us examples of extreme invective?
You wrote it.
I am going to pull an Althouse. I am going to wait for her to post a link to the transcript. And then we can all read together how Trump wanders from one thing to another and which words he used. Earlier, I was writing in real time while Trump was talking.
As much as the press hates Trump and everything he stands for
The entire flyover portion of the country is part of everything he stands for: the MSM hates us. HATES us. Now we have somebody who can communicate our angry resentment to them. What's not to like?
Again, it is amazing that someone with such political acumen and "expert" political insight as "lifelong republican" Chuck hasn't been asked to run a campaign or two in Michigan.
Those dumb Michigan republicans. How could they overlook such a gem right in their midst?
As for Flynn and Pence, the real interesting part is seeing that DJT is always testing people who work for him for truthfulness. That means DJT has great analytic brain skills, and the SOB is using them on people 24/7.
If you have been around a powerful man like that, you will find yourself put on a pedestile just for being honest in your answers...but that is a precarious place. The half life of that relationship will 4 to 5 years. Because they are too suspicious.
FullMoon said...
...
Golly Chuck, haven't seen you this fixated on one thing since-oh-I don't know- oh, yeah, since your gal Michelle was man handled so vigorously that it led you to threatened to harm Greta van Sustern.
Fuck you, you worm. I am sick and tired of you trotting out this fiction of yours. I never threatened to "harm" her. I proposed to grab her in precisely the same way that Cory Lewandowski grabbed Michelle Fields. Which Greta stated was neither harmful, nor actionable. Great van Susteren is my first witness.
Mead the bridge/wall to the 21st century will cost you upward of 21billion dollars and be full of cracks and corruption that will not be inspected by any government agency to warn of structural failure.
I don't get why people in the press can't get the idea that "the leaks are real and the reports are fake" can absolutely be true.
Jamie: "I also laughed out loud several times. It was a hoot. It was certainly not much like an Obama press conference - more like when your boss calls you into his or her office and proceeds to hold forth about whatever suits him or her, sometimes throwing in a dig at your performance and making no bones about calling you out when you say something s/he thinks is stupid - great theater."
One of my graduate refresher courses featured an older brilliant and accomplished professor who was given great sway in talking about whatever he wished during our class which was ostensibly about some other subject.
But who cared?
He would walk in and simply riff for 2 hours at a shot on whatever came to him.
Brilliant and far ranging discussions never tethered to one main theme or topic.
The resemblance in speaking style between this professor and Trump as well as tone and demeanor is remarkably similar.
BTW, one of the biggest takeaways was that if you have a chance to sit with Chemists or Mathematicians at lunch, always sit with the mathematicians. And the more theoretical the mathematicians the better.
With commentary by Ace of Spades: Chris Cillizza has the vapors
This is really entertaining. Trump uses the tropes of the Bill Clinton and Obama ("What a mess I inherited!"), Reagan ("Peace through strength"), Carter ("I won't lie to you."), political prognosticators ("Let's run through the electoral college projections again."), Abe Lincoln ("I keep my promises."), and Al Smith ("Let's look at the record.").
Trump has made a career out of blustering, bragging, and buffing up the inventory. ("So great."). He isn't changing now. To watch him going after the press and his critics is exactly what his supporters have wanted to see in their president since Nixon got chased out of office. He is in a target-rich environment.
Now, what could go wrong? His Achilles heel may be that as this goes on, he alienates team members who push back based on their unwillingness to appear as patsies to the will of the Donald. Do you think that Reince Priebus, the ultimate insider-let's-find-a-way Republican believes that Trump's tactics are the best way to go all the time? Do you think that he might want to frustrate some of Trump's moves from time to time? And I am sure there are many others who will jump off the ship at some point.
But this is great fun for many of us right now.
It's funny how much people on the left wanted Bulworth but don't like him since he isn't theirs.
Did I explain what "classified information" is under discussion in the Flynn situation to your satisfaction, Chuck? Do you agree that disclosure of specific secret intel. gathering and/or methods, down to the granular level of a specific intel target, almost certainly involves disclosing classified information?
"lifelong republican" Chuck: "Fuck you, you worm."
LOL
Oh, so that's why Chuck is not exactly in "high demand" as a political Sherpa in Michigan.
Boy, talk about unhinged invective!
> roesch/voltaire
Sales isn't your strong point.
The honest laughter from all at Trump's "Acosta isn't related to Acosta" bit was a big tell to me that deep down the press actually likes this guy. They are royally butt-hurt by him but I get the strong feeling there is a chance he will win many of them over eventually.
The 1799 "Logan Act" has yielded one indictment and no prosecutions.
The leaks of the General's conversations, as a private citizen and before President Trump took office are (Felony?) violations of law---And, a violation of his constitutional rights.
HD: "I would be very surprised if the fact that US intelligence was recording communication of a specific person was not classified information, Chuck."
It's classified alright.
In fact, the one thing that has been established beyond any doubt is that felonies have been committed by someone in providing this intel to the Dem/DeepState/"lifelong republican" media.
roesch/voltaire said...Mead the bridge/wall to the 21st century will cost you upward of 21billion dollars and be full of cracks and corruption that will not be inspected by any government agency to warn of structural failure.
I'm sorry, I'm not very good at math: can you please express the cost of a proposal you dislike in terms of its amount relative to the national debt increase under President Obama? Maybe express it in terms of a year or two of the national deficit, instead--that's a better comparison, surely.
$21B/... Help me out, here.
I'm feeling generous; here:
Bloomberg: Obamacare Website Costs Exceed $2B
So a $21B project would be equivalent to ten and a half Obamacare websites. That doesn't sound so bad, roesch/Voltaire.
Trump should do this every day. Fun!
I LOVED IT!! Best press conference I have ever seen!! He called it like it is...He spoke of the mess he inherited, and put them in their places!! They lied to us for 8 years, and now all of a sudden they are about accountability??? Cry me a river!! Trump has done more in less than a month, than any other President ever!! America is great, and it is getting greater!!!
This is why he won and will keep winning.
James Pawlak said...
The 1799 "Logan Act" has yielded one indictment and no prosecutions.
The leaks of the General's conversations, as a private citizen and before President Trump took office are (Felony?) violations of law---And, a violation of his constitutional rights.
So why fire Flynn? That's the question for Trump to answer. When Trump says, "I didn't like the way that he misled the Vice President," then the next question is, "Mr. President, why did General Flynn do that? And why did it lead so quickly to your asking for his resignation? Was there no explanation from General Flynn? Do you not see, Mr. President, how all of this raises many more questions than it answers?"
Chuck - remember the bullshit Clinton and her people tried to pull, claiming that the classification of certain material was improper because what was being classified was "just" open source info (newspaper articles, etc) being shared by high-ranking Admin members? Remember how they were wrong about that, that the fact that they pointed to newspaper articles and agreed that the secret programs discussed there were real--effectively confirming the newspaper's allegations--was confirming/exposing classified programs, and was therefore classified information?
Remember that? The Flynn leaks are doing the same thing, Chuck. You get that, don't you?
@Trumpit,
I disagee with Bay Area Guy. Russia and China are both menaces, so they are our enemies until they change substantially. WWIII may be around the corner with those two crazies. Rest assured, the Bay Area will be thoroughly destroyed in the even of full-scale nuclear war.
Fear monger, much? You sound like Dr. Strangelove in the midst of the Cold War!
First, I never said anything about China. But, if I may, China has made many strides with its attempt to marry Economic capitalism to Political communism. Nixon's opening in 1972 was brilliant -- it created a wedge between these two mammoth evil Communist countries, and set the stage to move them both back towards a more free-market, less jingoist system of governance.
(Yes, they both still oppress their people, and I wouldn't want to live there).
Second, as for Russia, crack open a history book. See how many countries the Soviet Union invaded (directly or by proxy) during their reign of terror. (see 1939 Poland & Finland; 1950 South Korea, 1956 Hungary, 1968 Czechoslovakia, 1980 Afghanistan)
How many countries has Russia invaded since the Berlin Wall fell? Answer - Zero.
Russia does have long-standing issues with its neighbor, Ukraine, so we'll have to wait and see how that plays out.
But Russia also has a problem with radical Islam, as do we. So, we share a common interest there.
There is no threat of nuclear war with China or Russia -- unless and until they start expanding their empires through force. Why would you even raise that spectre of hysteria?
When it mattered, the Left opposed US efforts to fight the Commies during the Cold War -- now, after the Cold War, when it doesn't matter, they get all huffy about Putin. It boggles the mind.
wendybar said...
...
Trump has done more in less than a month, than any other President ever!! America is great, and it is getting greater!!!
Sounds just like something Trump would claim. Like claiming that his electoral victory was the biggest victory margin since Reagan. False.
So tell us what your metric is, on Trump having done more in less than a month than any President ever.
Chuck Todd is on fainting couch telling us "this is not a laughing matter!"
Chuck said...When Trump says, "I didn't like the way that he misled the Vice President," then the next question is, "Mr. President, why did General Flynn do that? And why did it lead so quickly to your asking for his resignation?
T-Rump: Why did he do that? Fuck if I know, ask him. Why did it lead to me asking for his resignation? Because I don't tolerate that kind of bullshit in people who work for me, even very good people that I personally like and think the Media are mistreating. That's what good boss and a good manager does, and that's what I intend to do to run my Administration in the best interests of the American people.
Why do you think this is tough to answer, Chuck?
Notice how Trump has failed to say that Flynn lied to him, only that Flynn lied to Pence. It is a strong possibilty that Trump knew about Flynn's communications with the Russian and probably did direct him to do it, despite Trump's denial. He admitted that if Flynn hadn't done it he, Trump, would've directed him to do it. That may come back to haunt him. Trump wouldn't have fired Flynn because he lied to Pence. He fired him because the truth was leaked out. Trump couldn't care less about Pence. My opinion.
The whole thing has turned into a non-story. Who cares at this point?
@rv,
"Mead the bridge/wall to the 21st century will cost you upward of 21billion dollars and be full of cracks and corruption that will not be inspected by any government agency to warn of structural failure."
Sounds like the Oroville Dam in California:)
$21 billion?
If corps bring those tax $ home, chump change.
And as pointed out, we've already spent that on failed exchanges. Could be fed, could be state, but wasted multi-billions.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
Chuck - remember the bullshit Clinton and her people tried to pull, claiming that the classification of certain material was improper because what was being classified was "just" open source info (newspaper articles, etc) being shared by high-ranking Admin members? Remember how they were wrong about that, that the fact that they pointed to newspaper articles and agreed that the secret programs discussed there were real--effectively confirming the newspaper's allegations--was confirming/exposing classified programs, and was therefore classified information?
Remember that? The Flynn leaks are doing the same thing, Chuck. You get that, don't you?
No, that's wrong. We've not seen any content in the Flynn leaks. Nobody; not even Congressional leaders (yet) have seen the transcripts. "Classified information" hasn't been divulged through the press. Just the existence of the Flynn contacts.
I have already agreed that the release of information concerning the Flynn case was almost certainly illegal. Just like the hacking of the DNC emails, etc., was illegal.
And then we can all read together how Trump wanders from one thing to another and which words he used.
So this equals extreme invective? Wandering from one thing to another, and using certain words?
The TDS has so infected your brain that it's terminal now.
Chuck said... [hush][hide comment]
FullMoon said...
...
Golly Chuck, haven't seen you this fixated on one thing since-oh-I don't know- oh, yeah, since your gal Michelle was man handled so vigorously that it led you to threatened to harm Greta van Sustern.
Fuck you, you worm. I am sick and tired of you trotting out this fiction of yours. I never threatened to "harm" her. I proposed to grab her in precisely the same way that Cory Lewandowski grabbed Michelle Fields. Which Greta stated was neither harmful, nor actionable. Great van Susteren is my first witness.
Gee whiz, Chuck. It was only a few months ago that you threatened to "let her see how it feels". Imagine how Trump and his nominees feel about the press going back thirty years or so, or going through your divorce papers? As mercurial as you are now, I am certain there are (as yet unverified) incidents of actual assault in your past.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
Chuck said...When Trump says, "I didn't like the way that he misled the Vice President," then the next question is, "Mr. President, why did General Flynn do that? And why did it lead so quickly to your asking for his resignation?
T-Rump: Why did he do that? Fuck if I know, ask him. Why did it lead to me asking for his resignation? Because I don't tolerate that kind of bullshit in people who work for me, even very good people that I personally like and think the Media are mistreating. That's what good boss and a good manager does, and that's what I intend to do to run my Administration in the best interests of the American people.
Why do you think this is tough to answer, Chuck?
What colossal horseshit. This isn't Trump managing a golf club. It's national security. If your answer as pasted immediately above were given to me as the Republican Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, I immediately call my committee counsel and say, "Get everybody together, tomorrow, and tonight start working on the subpoenas."
Good presser! One thing Trump said really hit home and that was about the financial media being more honest than the political media. I have observed that for years.
I don't understand why you're beating a dead Flynn, Chuck.
The deep state knives came out, the press did their job, they wanted him gone, DJT gave them the scalp they wanted, and now they want to know why?
Since it really, in hindsight, doesn't seem so bad? Which they already knew and built nothing into hysteria?
The President has things to do. Why waste capital? He needs someone in place. Cut the loss.
Flynn turned to ash in their mouths.
What's great is when they whine about being given what they want.
Listening to the press conference. It's really funny. He's just chatting away, saying whatever comes into his head. Must drive them nuts.
FullMoon said...
...
... As mercurial as you are now, I am certain there are (as yet unverified) incidents of actual assault in your past.
You could think that, and you'd of course be wrong. But you wouldn't just "think" that. In your case, you'd be "certain" of it.
"Certain," like Trump tossing out electoral result histories.
The word "fake" appears 22 times in the transcript.
"Chuck said...
This is the one thing I don't understand about you. You and I are close in age; we share the same general profession. We even attended the same university, missing being fellow undergraduates by four months. I read your blog in large part because I share so many of your tastes in popular culture.
But I do not understand your blind spot with regard to Donald Trump. I don't presume that this is a failing or some inattention on your part. I presume that I don't have a handle on the way that you are mentally gaming the politics."
How in the Hell, Althouse, did you escape the plantation?
That's just a face palm, Chuck. Can you be any more condescending?
Maybe stop being so arrogant and putting people into boxes.
And I'm still looking forward to discussing what you think is extreme invective.
Bay Area Guy:
"How many countries has Russia invaded since the Berlin Wall fell? Answer - Zero."
Hmm. We're counting differently, I guess. You're clearly not counting Ukraine - "long standing issues" is one way to put it - but you're not talking me out of Georgia.
Chuck said...
FullMoon said...
...
... As mercurial as you are now, I am certain there are (as yet unverified) incidents of actual assault in your past.
You could think that, and you'd of course be wrong. But you wouldn't just "think" that. In your case, you'd be "certain" of it.
"Certain," like Trump tossing out electoral result histories.
Very telling how so many MSM and you are fixated on such a minor thing. Hour and a half press conference, and that is the best you guys have? Seems as if Trump is playing you pretty good.
Sounds like the Oroville Dam in California:)
But Californians have spent billions to prevent global warming!
Better than "I" and still fewer than the person who set that standard!
I know how we could cut the cost of the Wall in half. Hire Mexicans to build it.
Bay Area Guy: I should add, I agree with your broader point: Russia is a lot less aggressive and dangerous than the USSR was.
Chuck said... We've not seen any content in the Flynn leaks.
Chuck, I'm typing this slowly: I'm not talking about the content. The existence of an intelligence program to record specific targets' communication is classified. The list of people so targeted is classified. Revealing the existence of the product of that program, and specifying that the product relates to a specific target, is revealing classified information.
My point is that even without discussing the contents of the intelligence the person/people confirming the existence of a recording is revealing classified information. Just like the content of some of Clinton's emails themselves (NYTimes articles about spy prgms, etc) weren't classified, but the fact that Clinton sent them to some other official saying "hey, they know about this" thus confirming that the article's allegations were correct, was classified.
See? I can say "I bet the NSA's got a chip in my radio that records me showering." I haven't revealed any classified info--I'm just guessing. If someone in the NSA tells the NYTimes that they heard some wacky, wild stuff on a recording they took of me using a secret recording device, as part of a secret intelligence-gathering program, then they've revealed classified information even if you never hear a second of my shower singing. See?
So Mike Pence changed that a bit by stating that Flynn had assured him nothing related to the sanctions was even mentioned, which resulted in his being embarrassed when the media played it up, and you don't embarrass the vice-president unpunished, whether intentionally or not.
And that seems to be all it was, but count one big scalp for the opposition.
Yes, I think that may well have been it. Pence was pissed and Flynn was less important to Trump than his VP.
However, Pence may need to be less impatient and needy next time. The transcript should tell us if we get to see it.
Seeing Red said...
I don't understand why you're beating a dead Flynn, Chuck.
The deep state knives came out, the press did their job, they wanted him gone, DJT gave them the scalp they wanted, and now they want to know why?
Since it really, in hindsight, doesn't seem so bad? Which they already knew and built nothing into hysteria?
The President has things to do. Why waste capital? He needs someone in place. Cut the loss.
Flynn turned to ash in their mouths.
Then it is a mark of presidential weakness. A hostile press forces Trump to give up his first and closest national security adviser? Based on nothing more than "fake news"? Flynn was in place. In place, where he didn't even need Senate confirmation.
Nope; there are going to be a lot more questions.
And it will start with a list of names of Trump campaign staffers in contact with Russians. Along with video of all of the Trump people who went on national tv and stated that there were no such contacts.
But you ask about policy, and actual governance. Please understand, I expect to be pretty happy during the remainder of however many more months that Trump is president, with policy and legislation. I expect some very rough times for Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. Not because Republicans will be losing. Rather, because Republicans will be winning. Republicans will control the various investigations of Trump in Congress. Republicans will likely hold the 5-4 majority in the Supreme Court, to review the various legal cases versus Trump.
"Certain," like Trump tossing out electoral result histories.
Your OCD is showing. And it's embarrassing. Please. Take your meds.
Did anyone ask what has delighted him the most so far? No?
HoodlumDoodlum said...
Chuck said... We've not seen any content in the Flynn leaks.
Chuck, I'm typing this slowly: I'm not talking about the content. The existence of an intelligence program to record specific targets' communication is classified. The list of people so targeted is classified. Revealing the existence of the product of that program, and specifying that the product relates to a specific target, is revealing classified information.
My point is that even without discussing the contents of the intelligence the person/people confirming the existence of a recording is revealing classified information. Just like the content of some of Clinton's emails themselves (NYTimes articles about spy prgms, etc) weren't classified, but the fact that Clinton sent them to some other official saying "hey, they know about this" thus confirming that the article's allegations were correct, was classified.
See? I can say "I bet the NSA's got a chip in my radio that records me showering." I haven't revealed any classified info--I'm just guessing. If someone in the NSA tells the NYTimes that they heard some wacky, wild stuff on a recording they took of me using a secret recording device, as part of a secret intelligence-gathering program, then they've revealed classified information even if you never hear a second of my shower singing. See?
So you are saying that Russian military and intelligence will be shocked, shocked to find that there is gambling going on in the casino.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME
@LimitedBlogger,
Chuck Todd is on fainting couch telling us "this is not a laughing matter!"
Hmmm -- our Chuck may be Chuck Todd!
"How many countries has Russia invaded since the Berlin Wall fell? Answer - Zero."
Chechnya
Georgia
Ukraine
All have been quite limited in scope. Limited resources, and I think plain disinterest in going for it. Chechnya is an exception as, though it is entirely useless, it was far too troublesome to leave alone.
They have retained bases on foreign soil elsewhere, but I'm not sure that counts.
Trump wanders from one topic to another?
My God, you and your friends must be boring.
Are you and your friends so regimented or detached from real life that you only talk about one topic at a time?
He talks like real people.
I can change topics or WANDER on a dime and after 3 decades of marriage, hubby still plays catch and gets irritated.
LISTEN and try and keep up.
Unhinged and wild? No.
Rambling. It is hard to follow him.
Well, I guess Althouse is more balanced today in its left vs. right balance.
Since Chuck now bats lefty.
so, how many months before Trump goes down?
OTOH,, with all the leaks, we might find out by the end of next week!
Chuck: "With all of that exculpatory info on Flynn, why was he fired?"
I am humbled that you would ask for my opinion on this, but I'm disappointed you didn't already know the answer, you being Chuck and all. IMO, it likely involved his supposed exposure to blackmail, and since there was nothing in the whole Russian affair for which he could be blackmailed, something in his private life may have made him a risk - probably something like paying Russian prostitutes to urinate on a bed that Obama had slept in as that seems to happen a lot in Moscow.
Either that or Trump just found out he was not a life long Republican.
Blogger gerry said...
"Certain," like Trump tossing out electoral result histories.
Your OCD is showing. And it's embarrassing. Please. Take your meds.
Fuck off, you asshole. Althouse should ban anybody who engages in personal attacks along the lines of accusing other commenters of some sort of mental disease (a per se defamation under the common law).
And in honor of your comment I am going to lean in one more time and rub it in, how Trump went off on that bogus electoral college history. Again, just for you, I want to point out that Trump was using that made-up fact to try to use it to suggest that the press hadn't done a good job, and was not getting it right, that his electoral victory was Yuuuge. All the while, a roomful of the reporters who were being insulted by Trump were thinking, "This asshole doesn't know what he's talking about; that's not a true story about electoral results."
I am looking forward to the transcript of the NBC reporter's question on that issue. The guy obviously did a search of the results (or someone texted him with the real numbers) and then scorched Trump with them.
Regarding Flynn lying,
"The whole thing has turned into a non-story. Who cares at this point?"
Really?
WaPo is reporting that Flynn lied to the FBI. Isn't that a felony?
It's funny how much people on the left wanted Bulworth but don't like him since he isn't theirs.
Spot on.
Chuck said...What colossal horseshit. This isn't Trump managing a golf club. It's national security. If your answer as pasted immediately above were given to me as the Republican Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, I immediately call my committee counsel and say, "Get everybody together, tomorrow, and tonight start working on the subpoenas."
Subpoena away, Chuck. Who are you going to grill? Flynn? Pence? Pence's answers are easy: Flynn told him one thing regarding talking with people in Russia, that turned out not to be true, he told Flynn he couldn't trust him and that mistake was hurting the Administration, he recommended Flynn resign. Flynn resigned.
What do you think Flynn's going to say? "I spoke with these people, we discussed a lot of things, I don't remember making any specific promises or threats, but I spoke with a great number of people as most members of incoming administrations do. I admitted in my resignation letter that I gave the vice president incorrect info, my mistake was an honest one but it embarrassed the administration and undermined confidence and in my more than 3 decades of service to this nation I have always done my best to support our national security so I tendered my resignation."
Did you talk to person X on day Y for 23 minutes? "you know, senator, I really don't remember each conversation in detail. The newspapers say you have recordings of my private phone calls, so why don't you tell me? In fact, why dont' you put the entire transcript in the record, right now?"
OR: "Since I can't remember all the details of all my phone calls over the last 6 months with the precision you fine people demand, on the advice of my counsel I decline to answer any questions about the specific contents of my private phone calls."
He's out already, Chuck. What do you expect your subpoenas to accomplish?
SockPuppet#55 said...
Regarding Flynn lying,
"The whole thing has turned into a non-story. Who cares at this point?"
Really?
WaPo is reporting that Flynn lied to the FBI. Isn't that a felony?
Go away. We are arguing with Chuck, who is way more interesting, and fun.
Chuck is starting to sound like a Cub fan. Instead of wait until next year, it's wait until next month!
Unhinged? Ha. Trump was fully hinged. It's those members of the media that lost their bearings (and Bushings). Why George Bush wouldn't treat us like that.
Chuck to Althouse: "But I do not understand your blind spot with regard to Donald Trump."
My first impulse is to say, "Pot, meet Kettle." However, Chuck's blind spot is such that he fails to comprehend that which Althouse seems to: Donald Trump is our President; the dishonesty of the news media is actively impairing his ability to do his job; the collaboration of the news media with felonious leakers endangers the country and is probably a crime in itself; the willingness of otherwise honorable people to accept or condone dishonorable or dishonest behavior intended to impede Trump portends crisis for the country; Trump was not elected to be "like the other guys."
Forgetting style points, what, exactly, has Trump done since election to get your panties in such a twist, Chuck.
Sockpuppet: "WaPo is reporting that Flynn lied to the FBI."
LOL
@Buwaya,
How many countries has Russia invaded since the Berlin Wall fell? Answer - Zero."
Chechnya
Georgia
Ukraine
All have been quite limited in scope. Limited resources, and I think plain disinterest in going for it. Chechnya is an exception as, though it is entirely useless, it was far too troublesome to leave alone.
_____________________
That's fair - but I classify those as "neighborhood" problems - in contrast to the overt international menace that the old Soviet Union posed. I'm almost positive you agree with this.
"Fuck off, you asshole. Althouse should ban anybody who engages in personal attacks along the lines of accusing other commenters of some sort of mental disease (a per se defamation under the common law)"
You're batshit, Chuck. No sane person would try to milk this Lifelong Republican troll as long as you have and to so little effect (other than our delight).
The question I found most strange was the reporter who earnestly asked for an explanation on the seeming contradiction between reporting on leaks which are real, and fake news. There are reporters in the White House who don’t know the difference? Seems obvious to me: the fake news is the media’s obsession about a suspected conspiracy between Trump and Russia.
People would like to have genuine informative questions, IMO Trump is correct about that. The press seems to be completely oblivious. For example, why were there no follow up questions on the progress of Gorsuch's nomination? Why no questions on how Betsy DeVos is handling her department? There are many areas to explore that are real and important to the American people.
The fact the the media remains fixated on attacking Trump makes them less than worthless, makes them irrelevant.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
...
He's out already, Chuck. What do you expect your subpoenas to accomplish?
Pretty much the same thing that the Senate Watergate hearing produced. In the summer of 1973. When virtually no one in the country knew who John Dean, Jeb Stuart Magruder, or Alexander Butterworth were.
It made heroes out of three congressional Republicans; Senator Howard Baker, counsel Fred Thompson, and Senator Lowell Weicker.
Hombre: "Forgetting style points, what, exactly, has Trump done since election to get your panties in such a twist, Chuck"
Trump's victory publicly exposed "lifelong republican" Chuck's psychotic delusion that he knows all that much about politics.
Trump's victory resulted in a Chuck psychotic break and nothing short of a Trump impeachment or resignation can restore Chuck's whacko belief in his own political infallibility.
Thus Chuck continues to lash out at each and every Trump statement or action and leads to "lifelong republican" Chuck finding commiseration and solace amongst the most fevered of lefty fever swamps and conspiracies.
I think a lot of the stories being written about the Flynn situation are wrong, as many written so far have proven to be. WSJ front page story today on intelligence methods being withheld from Trump was a joke, an obvious plant from Obama holdovers and IC neverTrumpers. Gerry Baker should be embarrassed that he let that one run, and he ought to send those two reporters for re-training. It belonged on Salon.
WAPO and NYT keep thinking "Watergate! Watergate! Watergate! It must be Watergate!" just like Jauvert in Les Miserables. Of course, Jauvert ended up killing himself. WAPO (Jeff Bezos) and NYT (Carlos Slim) may be headed down the same rabbit hole.
Why would I care if Flynn lied to the FBI?
One can lie to Congress with impunity and nothing will happen.
There should have been heads rolling at the EPA and IRS, but Bupkus.
This is what happens when the bar is lowered.
Pence is Trump's liaison to Congress. That's why it was brilliant of Trump to pick him as VP.
Make no mistake, Pence is the COO, Trump is the CEO.
Pence has one job-
Get the tax cuts passed through Congress. That is the most important thing.
That said, I think Trump understands the firing of Flynn was premature. Lessons learned.
Chuck's 4:19 comment illustrates my point completely.
#Sad!
SockPuppet#55 says...WaPo is reporting that Flynn lied to the FBI. Isn't that a felony?
Flynn says he talked to the Russian ambassador about the expulsion of Russian diplomats (the diplomats were kicked out in late Dec 2016). Flynn's interview with the FBI was in January. Flynn apparently said in his interview with the FBI that he didn't talk about Russian sanctions. Apparently the lie you people are claiming Flynn told is that the ambassadors getting kicked out was part of the sanctions against Russia, so Flynn saying he didn't talk about sanctions is a lie. I'm pretty sure if I was Flynn's lawyer I would say that Flynn understood the term "sanctions" as used by the FBI questioner to mean the various economic sanctions that have been put on Russia since 2014 (asset freezes, trade suspension, etc) in response to Russia's military incursion into Ukraine/recognition of an independent Crimean state. I'd point out that none of those sanctions were a part of the discussion, at all, and that at worst my client honestly misunderstood the scope of the term the FBI was using (when they said "sanctions").
But hey, you wanna smear the guy, smear away. He's not a part of the Trump administration any more.
Full Moon,
You're a dull knife.
I didn't watch the press conference. My wife did--and she loved it. Said The Trumpster took questions from everyone--including those SOBs at CNN and MSNBC. I came in from working outside just in time to hear Shepherd Smith on one channel and Jake Tapper on another channel like five years olds whose tricycles had been stolen. I figure that exploding heads in the MSM constitute a good start.
I didn't favor a presidential candidate last November, but one nice thing about the result is that the winner is not a member of a designated group that cannot be criticized because the press is afraid of offending oppressed minorities.
Now we don't have to ask what Washington Post reporters or CNN's talking heads think of the president. They tell us every day, many times every day, in fact. Good for them, good for us.
Another fun thing about the election result is watching Trump make Serious Journalists' heads explode.
I do, too, Browndog.
I think they jumped the gun but
If he stayed, the mecia wouldn't have given an inch.
They got what they wanted and I don't think it turned out quite like they hoped it would.
Chuck said...Pretty much the same thing that the Senate Watergate hearing produced.
Jesus Christ, Chuck. I have tried, man, to work with you here. Do you really think this way? Is this an act--is this for effect? Do you honestly believe there's a Watergate-level criminal conspiracy to be uncovered here, in the Trump administration?
I hope you recognize how silly that idea is, Chuck. If the Flynn intercepts had anything damning (an explicit quid pro quo, specific promises, etc) we'd have heard about them, don't you think? For God's sake, the Trump administration hasn't had TIME to commit the kind of crimes you geniuses apparently think he's committed!
Seeing Red said...
Why would I care if Flynn lied to the FBI?
One can lie to Congress with impunity and nothing will happen.
There should have been heads rolling at the EPA and IRS, but Bupkus.
This is what happens when the bar is lowered.
Personally, I'm not convinced yet that Flynn lied to the FBI. But let's set that aside.
When you say that heads should be rolling at the EPA and the IRS, you'd be following the lead of the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard and the National Review. There's a whole world of conservative media out there, doing thoughtful criticism of the Democrat left, and the media outlets who support that faction. They have been doing it for a long time.
Bubba didn't leave after being impeached.
The country has become more sophisticated.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
Chuck said...Pretty much the same thing that the Senate Watergate hearing produced.
Jesus Christ, Chuck. I have tried, man, to work with you here. Do you really think this way? Is this an act--is this for effect? Do you honestly believe there's a Watergate-level criminal conspiracy to be uncovered here, in the Trump administration?
All that I think is that a Watergate-like investigation is warranted.
But hey, I have to admit: I can't prove there's NOT some secret hidden conspiracy and criminal enterprise on par with Watergate going on right now, so there's no way to disprove Chuck's comparison.
I mean, sure, that's the same reasoning the Pizzagate people use, and I doubt Chuck thinks very highly of those rumors/allegations...but yeah, that's the standard.
It's Watergate, that's it, Watergate 2.0. RuskieGate, that's the ticket--can't wait for Trump & Co to be frogmarched out, perp-walked in front of the cameras, just like Rove & Co were. Yeah, let's get 'em!
Chuck said...All that I think is that a Watergate-like investigation is warranted.
Well, why the fuck not? Let's set up permanent investigation committees, staffed with people hostile to the Right, make sure they have access to all sorts of secret and classified info they can leak to an eager Media, and let 'em rip. Hell, let's make 'em a 4th, co-equal branch of government--I can't see any problem with that.
The WSJ is NOT conservative. The editorial page might be, but the rest of the paper, no.
and thank you for pointing out why no heads rolled.
No power. If the media were as hysterical then as now, then heads would have rolled.
They laid down with the dog, they have fleas and embedded ticks, and we are watching the painful removal of said ticks one leg at a time.
I got a tingle up my leg watching that!
Now I just need one of the press to ask him what his favorite color is and whether it's boxers or briefs.
You know, for old times sake.
Don't forget waxing lyrical about the crease of his pants!
We have so many sock puppets they have numbers to keep themselves straight. Or maybe it is all just AI in action.
Chuck: "So you are saying that Russian military and intelligence will be shocked, shocked to find that there is gambling going on in the casino."
Is it your professional opinion then, Chuck, that the person or persons indicted for leaking the classified information can defend by asserting that the Russians probably knew anyway?
If you are baffled by Althouse not jumping on your anti-Trump bandwagon, we are baffled by your indifference to leaks of classified information by the intel community and the possible eavesdropping of the President's telephone conversations. Also, your concern about the bogus Russian connection is decidedly lefty.
If this Russian ruse keeps up, Trump needs a diversionary tactic. "Lock her up.." would sure be fun.
Maybe alt. right should start a petition,.
It's a weird hunch, but I kinda get the feeling that some of the people calling for "Watergate-like investigations" into an administration that's been in office for all of a month...some of those people might not be speaking in good faith. You know? It's almost like those people really dislike Trump and want to argue that his election was illigitimate, and are happy to use any excuse to pursue actions to harm or destroy Trump's presidency. Almost like some of them will make facially ridiculous comparisons and make really stupid assertions (undermining their own credibility in the process) as long as they can take a shot at Trump in the process.
Naah, pretty far-fetched, doesn't ring true, no sir.
POTUS Trump needs to do this at least once a week. He can call it: I talk, you listen. Fuck the media and the entrenched Government workers, who only think about themselves.
A big middle finger to you all.
OK, my curiosity piqued by comments here, I broke down and listened to an hour and change of this while I scrubbed my kitchen. I must say, I was deeply disappointed on the "wild" and "unhinged" front. Nothing wild was going on, and the closest thing to "unhinged" was the self-important self-deluding "reporter" (don't know who it was) sniveling about Trump destroying the public's confidence in God's anointed, the Holy Fourth Estate. That's some delusional ideation right there, but he wasn't getting wild about it or anything.
Do I have to watch it to the end to get to the red hot smokin' president on press action? 'Cause I finished scrubbing my kitchen, and I was getting pretty bored.
Chuck may out-Nixon Milhouse at this rate.
Guys, this is fun to watch and all with the banter and what not.
But picture this same press crowd today after Trump replaces Ruth Buzzi GinandTonicberg with one Theodore Cruz.
Soiled panties all around.
Chuck said...So you are saying that Russian military and intelligence will be shocked, shocked to find that there is gambling going on in the casino.
Ok, let's work this point, Chuck. It kinda sounds like you're arguing "well, it's a classified program and both confirming the program's existence, capabilities, and specific targets is revealing classified information, but since lots of people assume that program exists anyway it's not a big deal." That's a stupid argument, Chuck, so I hope that's not what you're actually asserting--especially since even that undercuts your own "How is this revealing classified info?" point.
So:
1.) Do you agree that the United States doesn't publicly acknowledge intelligence programs to clandestinely record the private communication of US citizens?
2.) Do you agree that revealing both the existence of such a program almost certainly means revealing classified information?
3.) Do you agree that revealing specifics about such a program, like its specific capabilities, scope, and specific targets--all of which must be highly-guarded secrets--would be revealing classified information?
4.) Do you agree that the Flynn leaks so far have done all, or some, of the above?
If so how could you deny that classified information has already been released? Maybe you want to argue that this specific classified info is no big deal, so its release doesn't really matter. Fine, if that's the case, say that. Don't say that you don't see how this could be a release of classified info--I just showed you that it is.
HoodlumDoodlum: It's a weird hunch, but I kinda get the feeling that some of the people calling for "Watergate-like investigations" into an administration that's been in office for all of a month...some of those people might not be speaking in good faith. You know?
I hope so. Otherwise I'd have to believe that there are a lot more completely batshit people running around out there than I had hitherto understood to be the case.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
...It's almost like those people really dislike Trump [CORRECT!] and want to argue that his election was illegitimate [NOT ME!], and are happy to use any excuse to pursue actions to harm or destroy Trump's presidency. [Lemme think about that. Okay I thought about it. I want only the very best, most reliable, most irrefutable evidence for which to destroy Trump. Something that even the Trumpkins can't fight about.] Almost like some of them will make facially ridiculous comparisons and make really stupid assertions (undermining their own credibility in the process) as long as they can take a shot at Trump in the process. [Trump is such a target-rich environment. Solid assertions, like what sort of narrow electoral victory Trump really had, are all that is necessary.]
This guy smiles less than a constipated potato.
How can you embrace such a telltale sign of mental instability in a president?
Here's a hypothetical: let's say you're a government official. You know foreign governments would love to get your communications. You practice safe communication tactics, as outlined by your own intelligence/counterintelligence agencies, and you assume that if you follow the rules you know that other governments probably can't get your comms. You use a scrambled phone, say, or use a private network, or rotate phones/comm sources frequently--whatever. You know they want to get you but you think your countersurveillance scheme X is probably successful.
This morning you read in a public newspaper that a foreign government recorded a call you made. You know exactly where you were, exactly when the call was made, and exactly what methods you were using at the time. Your intelligence agency now knows that those methods don't (always) work. That's VERY valuable information! Using what you know about your call your intelligence agency may be able to figure out how your comms were intercepted. That's VERY valuable information! You side knows scheme X doesn't work, so now they know anyone else using scheme X is vulnerable, so now they know to switch everyone off scheme X. That's VERY valuable information!
Do you see, Chuck? "Sources and methods" are highly protected for exactly that reason, Chuck. Leaking specific information that can help others identify sources and methods, when related to classified programs/activity necessarily means you've given away classified info--even if the contents of the captured comms is not revealed to anyone. Ok, Chuck?
Post a Comment