Posted on 05/07/2018 5:20:20 AM PDT by EyesOfTX
Today’s Campaign Update (Because The Campaign Never Ends)
The NRA held its annual convention in Dallas over the weekend and President Trump was a featured speaker. But that wasn’t the big news. The big news came when failed actress and failing anti-gun activist Alyssa Milano showed up to stage a protest in a park across the street from the convention center, complete with a small army of body guards who were – you guessed it – clearly carrying firearms. Seriously, if liberals didn’t exist, you could not make them up.
Two headlines on the Drudge Report this morning caught my eye:
- “With no letup in home prices, California exodus surges;” and - “California to require solar panels on new homes.”
Cause, meet effect.
“Here’s our new poll showing President Trump’s popularity rising dramatically. We apologize for the findings of our new poll and will try to do better faking our data in the future.” – The new Reuters/Ipsos poll is out, and it shows a dramatic rise in the public’s job approval for the President, to 48 percent. Hilariously, the leftwing lunatics who conduct this poll included the following disclaimer along with the poll results:
“This week’s Reuters/Ipsos Core Political release presents something of an outlier of our trend. Every series of polls has the occasional outlier and in our opinion this is one. So, while we are reporting the findings in the interest of transparency, we will not be announcing the start of a new trend until we have more data to validate this pattern.”
So, if you were entertaining the thought that the people who run the Reuters/Ipsos poll did so in a sincere search for accurate findings, you can now put that thought out of your mind. No need to thank me for this public service announcement.
You have a point, but why have you waited until now? – House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes told an interviewer on Fox News yesterday that he is planning to move to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions in contempt of congress this week. The issue at hand is the Justice Department’s and FBI’s ongoing refusal to comply with his committee’s information requests in a timely manner.
It’s a valid point, and House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, who is one of the candidates to succeed Paul Ryan as Speaker of the House, expressed his agreement in a later interview on the same network. My only question, though, is why has Nunes waited until now to threaten such action? It’s not as if this stonewalling on the part of DOJ and the FBI is something new – it’s been going on since last summer.
One of the big problems Nunes and the rest of the Republicans in congress have in such situations is that they are viewed by those in the executive branch as paper tigers, people who make a lot of noise for the television cameras but who, when push comes to shove, can always be counted upon to back off at the first sign of negative media coverage of their actions.
Obama Attorney General Eric Holder no doubt laughed his butt off when he saw Nunes’ threat. After all, Holder was held in contempt of congress way back during Obama’s first term in office, and what difference did that ultimately make to anything? None, because the Republicans running congress then were not willing to take the next step and send the Capital police over to DOJ and take Holder into custody. So Holder was able to just continue on his merry way.
But here’s the thing about the Nunes threat on Sessions: It may not be what it appears to be. Think about it for a minute: First of all, why target Sessions and not the person who is the real problem, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein? Sessions is recused from the whole Russia Collusion fantasy play – it’s Rosenstein who has been leading DOJ’s obstruction efforts with the various congressional investigations.
Second, again, why now? Why take this action just when we are reportedly about to finally see the report from DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz made public? I fully understand Nunes’ frustration, if that’s what it really is, but making this particular threat at this particular time against this particular target doesn’t really seem to make much strategic sense in the context of all these other events swirling around.
Here’s a thought: Maybe Nunes is taking this action in order to help cement Sessions’ – and by extension, Horowitz’s – independence in the public’s mind in the weeks leading up to the release of the Horowitz report. Nunes, after all, has been widely (and unfairly) portrayed as a shill for the Trump White House, so what better way to emphasize Sessions’ independence from all of that by going after him personally with a contempt of congress citation?
Why, I wouldn’t be surprised if we also see a nasty Trump tweet, or two, or three, targeting Mr. Sessions in the coming days. Think about it – things are not always as they seem.
Just another day in you couldn’t make this stuff up if you wanted to America.
That is all.
Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon
Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.
Plausible.
Ah yes, waiting for the IG report that has been delayed again until ... who knows.
“Why, I wouldn’t be surprised if we also see a nasty Trump tweet, or two, or three, targeting Mr. Sessions in the coming days. Think about it – things are not always as they seem.”
______
He’s saying not to take Trump at his word.
This is malicious garbage.
Thanks for an interesting alternative take on this.
Perhaps Nunes is targeting Sessions rather than Rosenstein, because Sessions is not recused from the subject of Nunes’ April 24, 2018 classified letter.
In my dreams, Nunes is trying to force out evidence he knows to exist that Christopher Steele and/or Sergei Skripal were working with the CIA at the time they were creating the Steele Dossier. In reality, Nunes’ committee has closed its Russian Collusion investigation. The subject of his inquiry might or might not involve anything currently on the “public” radar screen. What other investigations does the committee have open?
Nunez is looking into the Fisa court abuses that lead to the this whole “Russian Collusion” nonesnese.
Nunez is taking an axe to the root of this clown show and Session needs to wake up and start doing his job.
The IG report better result in common sence and comprehensive DoJ reform as it is now just another overbudget and late gov’t make work project for 500 Very Special FIB Agents.
The author is saying we should not take Trump at his word.
He is siding with Sessions against the President.
DB’s good on lots, but not this. He must have drank the Qoolaide. Turns reasonable folks into blathering idiots.
It is exactly what it appears to be: Ongoing Seditious Conspiracy to remove the duly elected President. And it will continue, until the DOJ shuts it down. Which it will not do, with Sessions as AG.
Period.
There. Is. No. Plan.
‘He’s saying not to take Trump at his word.
This is malicious garbage.’
Absolutely. The theory that every time Trump criticizes Sessions he’s lying/spreading disinformation is psychotic.
“The author is saying we should not take Trump at his word.
He is siding with Sessions against the President.”
Are you saying Trump would never use misdirection as a strategy? That’s just silly. We all use misdirection every day - even though we are basically honest people.
For example, when I make a big purchase, I often ask questions I already know the answer to, feign disinterest, or let the seller believe I have other purchase options, in order to sweeten the deal. When I’m out with friends or loved ones, and I’m dead tired, I do my best to pretend I’m having a great time.
If I were Trump, awaiting the final results of various investigations - Horowitz, Mueller, and others - my instinct would be to stand ready to either discredit them as a witch hunt, or praise them as a thorough and honest investigation, depending on whether they condemn me or vindicate me.
That’s just a common sense political or business tactic - it’s done all of the time. And in order to be prepared for either outcome, I would have to have cultivated two opposite arguments, with two sets of PR talking points. There would very likely be administrative spokespersons and other supporters out there shilling for me - already defending either conclusion so I could appear to have been saying it all along.
November 8, 2016, I bet Trump had a concession speech prepared as well as a victory speech. It’s standard operating procedure.
That’s why you’ll hear Trump and his people talking about the unfair witch hunt, but they never actually do anything to stop it. Nobody gets fired or demoted - and they even say supportive things it at times. They are hedging their bets so that if it vindicates Trump, they can validate it, and if it condemns trump they can discredit. No matter what happens, the shills assigned to carry their particular message will be able to say “see I told you - I’ve been saying all along it was a witch hunt”, OR “see, I told you, I’ve been saying all along that this fair and thorough investigation would be a vindication”.
To think that a businessman or politician never chooses his words for strategic effect is naive.
And I’m not saying 4D chess, I’m just saying common sense street smarts.
Some of y’all might want to note that President Trump sent out the post below about 50 minutes after I posted today’s Campaign Update:
“Lisa Page, who may hold the record for the most Emails in the shortest period of time (to her Lover, Peter S), and attorney Baker, are out at the FBI as part of the Probers getting caught? Why is Peter S still there? What a total mess. Our Country has to get back to Business!”
Now, who do you think that tweet is targeting? Hint: It isn’t targeting Lisa Page or Peter Strzok.
And my update today is not an “attack” on Trump - it’s actually an aknowledgement of the reality that he uses misdirection as a tactic pretty much every day of the week. Go read his book if you don’t believe me. This is not exactly a well-kept secret.
The insane theory that every time Trump criticized Sessions it’s 4DChess is a mental illness. I am 100% convinced of that.
Sessions is recused from all of the Hillary connected stuff, not just the Russian stuff. So I'm not sure what you think might be the subject of the classified letter.
“The theory that every time Trump criticizes Sessions he’s lying/spreading disinformation is psychotic.”
Trump is one of the good guys. We don’t accuse the good guys of “lying/spreading misinformation”, it’s called STRATEGY.
And it’s hardly “psychotic” to think it’s happening - it happens all the time in business and politics. Standard operating procedure.
You’d have to be wet behind the ears to think nothing the POTUS says is strategic.
And this isn’t even a sophisticated strategy. Think about it:
If the Trump administration does anything to block or disrupt the investigation - any firing, any DOJ foot dragging, any show of executive force via the AG, the impeach Trump forces will immediately claim obstruction.
If the investigations fail to prove Trump guilty of Russian collusion, (which they must, since there was no Trump/Russia collusion), the impeach-Trump forces will immediately try to discredit the results by calling the investigators shills for Trump and cried “whitewash!”
So, when that happens, and Trump gets vindicated, as he must, ask yourself which investigators the impeach Trump forces will have an easier time calling shills and accusing if whitewash? Horowitz will be the easiest for them to dismiss as a Trump shill, because leaks and peeks of the results have raised expectations that the report will not target Trump but will rather implicate his enemies in the deep state.
Mueller, Rosenstien - not so much. The impeach-Trump forces will have a hard time discrediting them as shills, because they are widely reported to be hostile toward Trump - their creds as Trump adversaries actually works to Trump’s advantage if their report vindicates Trump (as it must), since the left can’t easily dismiss them as shills.
Whatever reports come out, they all come out of the DOJ, so the way the DOJ and its chief, the AG are perceived will impact whether reports vindicating Trump will be received. The Republican led House Ethics a Committee or any other such Republican led committee can clear Trump and the results will (or have already) been dismissed as Republican whitewash. If Jeff Sessions (Trump appointee) had not recused, or had fired Rosenstien, or fired Mueller, or refused to hire an investigator - or had hired a less adversarial investigator - “whitewash!”
So, if you are Trump, and you know you are innocent and will eventually be vindicated by any reports coming out of the DOJ, would you want the perception that your entire DOJ and your AG are just giant shills and fixers out there to make you look good? Of course not. And how would you avoid that perception? By making sure your DOJ and AG didn’t behave like shills and fixers.
That’s all Trump is doing - keeping at arms length and avoiding being the slightest bit chummy with the DOJ, AG, etc., so that when the findings vindicate Trump, they will not be so easily dismissed as a whitewash.
Remember, the worst case scenario is not what’s happening now (a year long witch hunt bound to come up empty handed). The worst case scenario is that when Mueller finds no collusion or obstruction, Trump’s enemies simply dismiss the results, saying “of course an investigation from within Trump’s own DOJ would absolve him, it means nothing - it’s just a whitewash”, and force a new Watergate style investigation truly independant of the executive branch.
Trump has been very smart to keep the DOJ, AG, assistant AG and Mueller at arms length - not interfering, not firing anyone, not appearing friendly.
Think of it this way: If you are selling your house or borrowing against it, and you need a market appraisal to estimate the fair market value, would you want the buyer or the banker to think the appraiser was your friend? No! You would want them to know the appraiser is an objective processional with no stake in the outcome either way. That is how Trump wants the DOJ, AG, assistant AG and Mueller to be perceived. He would have gained nothing and lost everything if he’d sent Jeff Sessions into battle as his knight in shining armor - it would just assure that any vindication of Trump is immediately dismissed as a whitewash,
You’d have to be insane not to know how disappointed Trump is in Sessions. Giuliani, who’s closer to Trump by orders of magnitude than you are, says Trump is heartbroken over Sessions’ betrayal. Only psychosis would enable a person to believe that is disinformation.
I’m not sure exactly for which Clinton-related matters Sessions has actually recused himself. In confirmation hearings he stated/implied he would recuse from Clinton Foundation matters, and things related to the 2016 campaign. Hillary’s email server crimes might fall outside of that.
I have no idea what is in Nunes’ classified letter, beyond the implications of Stephen Boyd’s response to it.
Nunes or his staff presumably know the exact scope of Sessions’s recusals, and likely have them in writing. Unless Nunes is stupid or a glutton for embarrassment, it would be illogical for him to rattle the “contempt” saber (more aptly, pen-knife) at Sessions over something Sessions is recused from touching. That implies that the subject matter is something Nunes believes Sessions is NOT recused from. From that, I am projecting that it might turn out to be something unrelated to the anti-Trump coup or Hillary issues most of us are focused upon. Based on Nunes comments on Fox, there is speculation that it relates to the FISA abuse problem, and the identity of the approving judge. That’s a Russian Collusion situation and thus recused, plus Nunes has concluded his Russian investigation. Leaves me at a loss.
“Giuliani.... says Trump is heartbroken over Sessions’ betrayal.”
Was that part of the Hannity interview? I was aware Giuliani said some controversial things - but I haven’t wached the whole thing.
“You’d have to be insane....”, “Giuliani, who’s closer to Trump by orders of magnitude than you....”, “...only psychosis would enable a person to believe that.....”
FW, these are not rational arguments, they are called logical fallacies - ad hominems - appeals to authority, post hoc, etc.
To zen an argument you shouldn’t have to call your opponents insane, ignorant or psychotic - just present your argument!
And before you call me thin skinned again - it’s not that - I’m just saying relying on logical fallacies is ineffective.
I spent hours I didn’t have presenting you with facts and evidence. You brushed it all aside as if it wasn’t even there. Now you point out that I’m not going through the entire routine a second time.
That’s one thing we agree on. Pouring all that time and effort down the rathole once was one time too many. Don’t hold your breath for an encore.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.