President Trump- The Implications

[heironymouspasparagus]

So, the big news leak from Russia about Trump paying hookers to come to his hotel room and pee on his bed... for the most part, that would sound about right except for the fact that he never pays anyone for services rendered, so....busted !!

[cannon_fodder]

Lets pretend that the dossier is totally made up by some kid in Cleveland and that our intelligence services (as well as UK intelligence services) are too stupid to know the difference.  We can still take away information from the press conference:

1) Trump now says Russia probably did hack the DNC.  So it turns out they were right about that, but now that there is more information that appears negative for Trump, it is time to start attacking the intelligence services again.  An important nuisance that the Donald is missing:  the intelligence services didn't say the information was accurate.  They merely advised him that it exists. Still, the pattern of "attack if you feel threatened" remains strong.

Also worth noting that the CIA/FBI/NSA could not more stop this document from getting around than it could stop the fake news from the kids in Albania or the Hillary emails.

2) Again he reiterated that Mexico isn't going to pay for the wall.  Rather we are going to involuntarily loan the money to Mexico and force them to repay us sometime in the future through unknown means.  Basically - we are paying for it, but he still really wants Mexico to pay for it but doesn't know how to make that happen.

3) He is still obsessed with Hillary Clinton.  He brought her up several times in the press conference, out of context.  Usually, "do you think Hillary could do any better?"

4) Trump's man crush on Vladimir remains strong. 

5) He doesn't have any real plans.  Never, in a response to a reporters question, did he even hint that he had a real plan on anything.

6) He is an undignified donkey.  He cut people off, insulted people, and was generally more of an donkey to the media than a pissed off NFL coach.  That wasn't his campaign persona, that's who he is.

[swake]

Lets pretend that the dossier is totally made up by some kid in Cleveland and that our intelligence services (as well as UK intelligence services) are too stupid to know the difference.  We can still take away information from the press conference:

1) Trump now says Russia probably did hack the DNC.  So it turns out they were right about that, but now that there is more information that appears negative for Trump, it is time to start attacking the intelligence services again.  An important nuisance that the Donald is missing:  the intelligence services didn't say the information was accurate.  They merely advised him that it exists. Still, the pattern of "attack if you feel threatened" remains strong.

Also worth noting that the CIA/FBI/NSA could not more stop this document from getting around than it could stop the fake news from the kids in Albania or the Hillary emails.

2) Again he reiterated that Mexico isn't going to pay for the wall.  Rather we are going to involuntarily loan the money to Mexico and force them to repay us sometime in the future through unknown means.  Basically - we are paying for it, but he still really wants Mexico to pay for it but doesn't know how to make that happen.

3) He is still obsessed with Hillary Clinton.  He brought her up several times in the press conference, out of context.  Usually, "do you think Hillary could do any better?"

4) Trump's man crush on Vladimir remains strong. 

5) He doesn't have any real plans.  Never, in a response to a reporters question, did he even hint that he had a real plan on anything.

6) He is an undignified donkey.  He cut people off, insulted people, and was generally more of an donkey to the media than a pissed off NFL coach.  That wasn't his campaign persona, that's who he is.

He's a childish idiot. This is still just so unbelievable.

His approval rating stands at 37% right now and he hasn't even taken office yet. How low can it go?

[AquaMan]

It can go to 30% which is the amount of die-hard republicans that just don't care what he or the party does. Funny, because he isn't really a republican anyway, he's Palladin.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I think they are waiting for inauguration, then "Trump" up an impeachment case and get Pence into the job.

Lots of talk about Article 1, Section 9, clause 8, in particular Emoluments.  He can then make the case that business dealings are not profits from King, Prince, or Foreign State....

[BKDotCom]

Apparently at press-conference:

• He claimed cnn was "fake news"
• Stood next to a stack of fake documents that were purportedly his plans for distancing himself from his businesses
• Took question from his fake-news buddies @ Brietbart

[swake]

I think they are waiting for inauguration, then "Trump" up an impeachment case and get Pence into the job.

Lots of talk about Article 1, Section 9, clause 8, in particular Emoluments.  He can then make the case that business dealings are not profits from King, Prince, or Foreign State....

I don't know about that. I'm sure most Republicans in Congress would love to be rid of him as soon as possible, but Republican voters would be livid.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I don't know about that. I'm sure most Republicans in Congress would love to be rid of him as soon as possible, but Republican voters would be livid.

Probably.  The real Republicans are in a serious bind.  There are no morals, ethics, conscience, or anything resembling human decency in this person (Trump) nor some of the people he has selected so far - how about that Sessions sleaze...?  When one looks and listens to his history over the last 30 years, it is obvious that anyone who feels he is the right choice has set aside all their professed values.  Not only has he obliterated something as relatively simple as the 10 Commandments, he has broken secular law at every turn when given a choice that would enrich him versus not.  One thing ya can't accuse him of is the biggest thing that his supporters who wrap themselves in the "Shroud" are guilty of - hypocrisy.  He tells us - literally - exactly what he is and his apologists give it a pass.  No way to excuse all he says and does without compromising their values beyond all recognition.  Lying to themselves may be the worst of all, but lying to the rest of us about being God-fearing, patriotic, good, honest  Americans is almost just as bad.


Mad Dog is the exception - I don't think he is the right guy for Secretary of Defense, but I think he is mostly a decent person.

[cannon_fodder]

I had the CNN "fake news" line parroted back to me the very same day as Trump's press conference.  The person thought the Russian Intel story was invented by CNN and was all fake news... ignoring the fact that CNN wasn't the first to have the documents, didn't report it first, didn't post the content of the documents, and plainly stated that the content of the dossier was wholly unverified.

CNN:  Intelligence officials have briefed Trump on the contents of an alleged Russian intelligence dossier that contains allegedly unflattering by unverified information on President elect Trump.

Trump supporter:  FAKE NEWS!  Yes, intelligence officials did brief him on the dossier which did contain alleged Russian intelligence bashing Mr. Trump and none of it was verified.  But it's totally FAKE NEWS!

The guy was dead serious.  Wholly failing to understand the difference between A) reporting blatantly false information and trying to pass it off as fact and B) reporting on events that actually happened, documents that actually exist, and things that were actually said and specifically disclaiming the truth of the matter asserted by the actions, contents, or speech.

I then had to explain that difference to him.  That saying "NASA reports North Korea sent a man to Mars," when no such thing has happened is FAKE NEWS.  But reporting "North Korea claims it has put a man on Mars, though there is no evidence to support this and the claim is dismissed by NASA" is not fake news. This was too nuanced, so I had to try again:  Reporting on an statement or event that actually happened is not fake news. 

This failed to convince him.  You see, no one had verified the content of the report, so they were reporting fake news.

While he continued his explanation, I had an internal conversation with myself about whether or not universal suffrage is a good idea.

I do not do well with a lack of facts or logic. When both the facts and logic are mangled, I have a mini strike.

[swake]

Chris Steele, the former MI6 agent behind the Trump/Russia Report is the man who brought down Sepp Blatter and FIFA with a former investigation

http://deadspin.com/the-spy-who-compiled-the-golden-showers-dossier-helped-1791144993

[Conan71]

Chris Steele, the former MI6 agent behind the Trump/Russia Report is the man who brought down Sepp Blatter and FIFA with a former investigation

http://deadspin.com/the-spy-who-compiled-the-golden-showers-dossier-helped-1791144993

Meh, he's a gun for hire and of course MI6 was where the WMD intel in Iraq came from in the first place and we all know how that turned out, right? 

I've been suspicious this has been Trump stirring the pot as usual and trying to discredit others in a pre-emptive strike.  But I don't own tinfoil, honest.

(Total truth here- I know only what I've heard on social media and honestly don't even know what the original story or claim was.  Apparently, I'm doing a great job of avoiding major media outlets lately.)

[cannon_fodder]

Meh, he's a gun for hire and of course MI6 was where the WMD intel in Iraq came from in the first place and we all know how that turned out, right? 

Exactly.  US intelligence when corroborated by our allies is only right like 99% of the time.  They were wrong this one time...   

Actually, the Iraq WMD thing has turned into a very interesting story (once everyone stopped paying attention).  US intelligence was asked for their best assessment of Iraqi programs, having been locked out of actual inspections for 4 years. So they gave their best assessment with all the facts and disclaimers (including disclaiming any link with Al Qaida and that they had no proof that Saddam actually possessed WMDs).

The intelligence services actual assessment has been released, you can go read it, including draft notes. Page 13 is a summary of findings and confidences.  They were highly confident that Iraq was continuing its WMD program and possessed materials to actually make WMDs, but they disclaim detecting any portions of weapons programs.  They were moderately confident that Iraq did not have nuclear capabilities or the ability to make one.  They had low confidence of when Saddam would use WMDs, could use them against the US homeland, or would share them with Al Qaida. They disclaimed actual proof of WMDs, the existence of the same was mostly by exclusion (we know they did have them, we have no proof they have destroyed them, when we ask for proof of destruction we were kicked out of the country).

The RAND Corporation has a really interesting report on the issue, out of 300+ pages one should at least take away that disclaimers matter.  If you ask an intelligence community for its best assessment, you will get it.  But the disclaimers really matter.  If you sell your case completely ignoring the disclaimers, you do so at your own risk.

Its still not clear to me what happened to the WMDs.  Apparently Saddam actually did destroy them, but was willing to be invaded and ultimately hanged instead of letting UN inspectors verify it?  Lots of lesson to be taken away:  a strong president can lead a nation to war if they want, intelligence assessments are complex documents and details matter, and the ultimate assessment of the intelligence community, politicians, and public opinion can be wrong.



In the present matter, our intelligence service has no comment on the truth of the matter asserted.  They briefed the President and President elect on foreign intelligence rumors, which is standard procedure.  That's a far cry from these allegations being supported or verified by US intelligence. The a US Senator asked FBI director Comey if there was any truth to the matter and his response was simply that the FBI doesn't and never will comment on investigations (unless it involves Hillary Clinton).

And they shouldn't.  If Trump hired a bunch of hookers in Moscow, I'd want our intelligence services to know about it as a possible source of blackmail - but it isn't a crime or  a matter of national security so they should not discuss it with the public.  Same for his business dealings in Russia, as long as they are not contrary to US law, US intelligence has no business making them public.  Now, if Trump lies to Congress about it (a la Bill Clinton), then it becomes a criminal matter.  If trump campaign coordinated with Russia, that could be an issue.  But the tabloid stuff is just noise that comes with being in public office.

This was a project for hire - Russia wanted someone to dig up dirt on Trump so if they actually saw their horse win the race, they'd have blackmail material.  It is reportedly a very common practice in Russia and I assume we contract for similar documents on foreign leaders.  Presumably one would include damaging things that are true, things that *might* be true, and things that you have enough evidence to support the appearance of being true (even if they are false).

Finally...

Trump: Obama is a Kenyan! (proven false, repeats the claim anyway)
Trump: Vaccines cause autism! (thoroughly debunked, repeats the claim anyway)
Trump: Ted  Cruz's father was the second gunman on the grassy knoll! (no basis in reality, repeats the claim anyway)

Trump supporters:  ::crickets::

Actual news sources:  A dossier has been leaked with unconfirmed allegations against Trump. (an event that actually happened)

Trump supporters:  "FAKE NEWS, OMG!!! FAKE!!!!"

This is why we can't have nice things.

[Conan71]

So basically Bush was hosed on the WMD issue because Twitter didn't exist yet for him to say: "FAKE NEWS! FAKE NEWS!"

[cannon_fodder]

So basically Bush was hosed on the WMD issue because Twitter didn't exist yet for him to say: "FAKE NEWS! FAKE NEWS!"

Ha!  I have a good deal of respect for GW. I don't think he would have been a Twitter troll, as evidenced by his good sense and desire to fade away once out of office. Nor do I recall him spreading blatantly fake news (he was later proven wrong, but that's not the same thing).  While I have issues with him - I'm not a Bush hater, never was.

I think by the time the intel report got to GW it basically said enough to support his preconceived notions.  I can't fault him too much for making decisions he did with the info he was presented with.  Not even for the invasion itself (while acknowledging in hindsight it was a huge mistake).  I do place a huge amount of blame on those who planned the aftermath/transition of the invasion... which went about as badly as it possibly could have.  Ultimately, I suppose that is on GW... but I don't dilute myself into thinking the President had knowledge of how to handle a post invasion country or did much by the way of actual planning.

Short answer:  GW acted with the best knowledge he had, and got it wrong.

[Townsend]

I was waiting on the light at 101st and Sheridan and a newer model  dark blue Ford F250 diesel with a lift blew by me on the shoulder on the SE corner.

There was an enormous "TRUMP, make America great again" bumper sticker taking up 1/3 of the back window.

The driver floored the truck turning East.  Black diesel smoke billowed out, the rear tires chirped a bit going around the corner and some trash flew out of the bed of the truck.

This is what has gained control in the federal government.  It will appoint new Scotus, it will make decisions that our kids and grandkids will suffer through.

The United States has been Oklahoma'd.  The people who've been making decisions in Oklahoma's state government now have comrades running the country.

The implications are frightening.