Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

[BlueTX]

Peter Strzok. A name to get to know to keep up with the continuing adventure. I don't think any of you are monitoring NR these days, but it is a center for the never-Trump GOP. The article's author is sufficiently anti-Trump that he considered running for POTUS to stop Trump in 2016, btw.

Peter Strzok’s story will hurt public trust in the federal government at the worst possible time. If the story hadn’t been verified by virtually every mainstream-media outlet in the country, you’d think it came straight from conspiratorial fever dreams of the alt-right. Yesterday, news broke that Robert Mueller had months ago asked a senior FBI agent to step down from his role investigating the Trump administration. This prince of a man was caught in an extramarital affair with an FBI lawyer. The affair itself was problematic, but so was the fact that the two were found to have exchanged anti-Trump, pro-Hillary Clinton text messages. Here’s where the story gets downright bizarre. This agent, Peter Strzok, also worked with FBI director James Comey on the Clinton email investigation. In fact, he was so deeply involved in the Clinton investigation that he is said to have interviewed Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, and to have been present when the FBI interviewed Clinton. According to CNN, he was part of the team responsible for altering the FBI’s conclusion that Clinton was “grossly negligent” in handling classified emails (a finding that could have triggered criminal liability) to “extremely careless” — a determination that allowed her to escape prosecution entirely.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454361/peter-strzok-fbi-scandal-partisan-american-bureaucracy

A nearly identical piece was written in the Washington Post by Hugh Hewitt. Standard feverish fare of a career government (non-elected) official having the gall to express a political opinion that is anti-conservative, which is prima facie evidence of an inability to do his or her job.

Shockingly these standards do not apply to career government (non-elected) officials who express conservative views.

 

[SteveSC]

Isn't this the 2nd time you have posted this tweet?

I love how you post this but then proceed to post snippets from ultra conservative media sources. Kind of ironic really.

Also you mention the NR is a never Trump organisation but still that doesn't matter. All of the conservative media are toeing the same line right now whether they like Trump or not because they control everything. Its all anti democrat, we hate Clinton, the FBI is bad and the Russia thing is fake as is the media in general except their stories.

So its easier for them to jump on board with the wild stories about Clinton, who by the way is a fecking private citizen now who lost. Why they still write about her is beyond me, who cares? The right are obsessed with her and that lanky git Comey.

Get over it, there are more important things to be concerned with. Trump and his administration want us to ignore his indiscretions, his groping allegations, his bs in general and treat his tweets as i don't know inane ramblings and not official.

His adopted party seem to echo that also and judging by a lot of your posts you are on board with that.

 

[ilikecheese]

I wonder if Trump has protested to May about her decision to move the capital of the UK to Belfast?

Doubt he's ever heard of Belfast.

 

[mezzrow]

Isn't this the 2nd time you have posted this tweet?

I love how you post this but then proceed to post snippets from ultra conservative media sources. Kind of ironic really.

Also you mention the NR is a never Trump organisation but still that doesn't matter. All of the conservative media are toeing the same line right now whether they like Trump or not because they control everything. Its all anti democrat, we hate Clinton, the FBI is bad and the Russia thing is fake as is the media in general except their stories.

So its easier for them to jump on board with the wild stories about Clinton, who by the way is a fecking private citizen now who lost. Why they still write about her is beyond me, who cares? The right are obsessed with her and that lanky git Comey.

Get over it, there are more important things to be concerned with. Trump and his administration want us to ignore his indiscretions, his groping allegations, his bs in general and treat his tweets as i don't know inane ramblings and not official.

His adopted party seem to echo that also and judging by a lot of your posts you are on board with that.

Is that all? You'll see it again. I like it that much.

Any media that isn't explicitly "ultra conservative" (love that ultra - we need to light more flares, that's the ticket!) is basically a cabal of Democratic party operatives with bylines. Pay no attention whatsoever to what Trump says. Watch what he does.

 

[LinekersLegs]

Peter Strzok. A name to get to know to keep up with the continuing adventure. I don't think any of you are monitoring NR these days, but it is a center for the never-Trump GOP. The article's author is sufficiently anti-Trump that he considered running for POTUS to stop Trump in 2016, btw.

Peter Strzok’s story will hurt public trust in the federal government at the worst possible time. If the story hadn’t been verified by virtually every mainstream-media outlet in the country, you’d think it came straight from conspiratorial fever dreams of the alt-right. Yesterday, news broke that Robert Mueller had months ago asked a senior FBI agent to step down from his role investigating the Trump administration. This prince of a man was caught in an extramarital affair with an FBI lawyer. The affair itself was problematic, but so was the fact that the two were found to have exchanged anti-Trump, pro-Hillary Clinton text messages. Here’s where the story gets downright bizarre. This agent, Peter Strzok, also worked with FBI director James Comey on the Clinton email investigation. In fact, he was so deeply involved in the Clinton investigation that he is said to have interviewed Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, and to have been present when the FBI interviewed Clinton. According to CNN, he was part of the team responsible for altering the FBI’s conclusion that Clinton was “grossly negligent” in handling classified emails (a finding that could have triggered criminal liability) to “extremely careless” — a determination that allowed her to escape prosecution entirely.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454361/peter-strzok-fbi-scandal-partisan-american-bureaucracy

As it happens I linked a national review article just a couple of days ago.

Obviously there is a danger of people’s personal politics blinding them to getting to a fair decision but it is also possible for people to still look at events dispassionately and logically - we’ll have to see how the story develops, it is certainly on its surface concerning but given these decisons are usually group ones you’d hope that any obvious bias would be identified and corrected for.

As a general point though that is why diversity in workplace is good to help avoid that and provide as wide as possible range of ideas. However forgive me if, after looking at the cabinet leading our country and our congress , that I don’t quite share such a fear that white male conservative views aren’t getting enough representation.

And it also might be worth considering what it is about the party of Trump and Moore that is turning a lot of the civil service recruitment pool away from the Republicans, I doubt it is all down to left wing indoctrination by professors.

 

[LinekersLegs]

Doubt he's ever heard of Belfast.

Lucky bugger

 

[ilikecheese]

Is that all? You'll see it again. I like it that much.

Any media that isn't explicitly "ultra conservative" (love that ultra - we need to light more flares, that's the ticket!) is basically a cabal of Democratic party operatives with bylines. Pay no attention whatsoever to what Trump says. Watch what he does.

He plays golf and eats lots of McDonalds...and incites division. What's your point?

 

[mezzrow]

As it happens I linked a national review article just a couple of days ago.

Obviously there is a danger of people’s personal politics blinding them to getting to a fair decision but it is also possible for people to still look at events dispassionately and logically - we’ll have to see how the story develops, it is certainly on its surface concerning but given these decisons are usually group ones you’d hope that any obvious bias would be identified and corrected for.

As a general point though that is why diversity in workplace is good to help avoid that and provide as wide as possible range of ideas. However forgive me if, after looking at the cabinet leading our country and our congress , that I don’t quite share such a fear that white male conservative views aren’t getting enough representation.

And it also might be worth considering what it is about the party of Trump and Moore that is turning a lot of the civil service recruitment pool away from the Republicans, I doubt it is all down to left wing indoctrination by professors.

Good points. Sorry I missed the NR link, legs.

As much as it seems the party belongs to Trump and Moore, I've often thought that Trump gutted the party and wears it like a skin suit to "fix things" in his Trumpian way. He's the real return (with a vengeance) of the old Perot constituency. They don't mix easily, and you can see that in the visceral recoiling of DC to the injection of Trump. That's as true of the career Repubs as the Democrats. NR is the institutional GOP press, as the Trump movement really doesn't have its own press. Besides, the stupidity of the GOP is illustrated by the fact we're looking at Roy Moore in the first place. They don't want him, either, but they had to back-scratch McConnell with Strange and the base pimp slapped them with Roy Moore. I almost don't blame them by now. In any case, events continue and remain unpredictable.

 

[mezzrow]

He plays golf and eats lots of McDonalds...and incites division. What's your point?

Exactly. The ultra conservative press was religiously devoted to publishing the frequency of Obama's tee times, you know.



Bear = Russia? Updates at 11.

 

[ilikecheese]

Good points. Sorry I missed the NR link, legs.

As much as it seems the party belongs to Trump and Moore, I've often thought that Trump gutted the party and wears it like a skin suit to "fix things" in his Trumpian way. He's the real return (with a vengeance) of the old Perot constituency. They don't mix easily, and you can see that in the visceral recoiling of DC to the injection of Trump. That's as true of the career Repubs as the Democrats. NR is the institutional GOP press, as the Trump movement really doesn't have its own press. Besides, the stupidity of the GOP is illustrated by the fact we're looking at Roy Moore in the first place. They don't want him, either, but they had to back-scratch McConnell with Strange and the base pimp slapped them with Roy Moore. I almost don't blame them by now. In any case, events continue and remain unpredictable.

Are you trying to say that Fox News/Conservative radio/and multiple print outlets aren't the Trump movements' media outlets?

 

[abelard]

As much as it seems the party belongs to Trump and Moore, I've often thought that Trump gutted the party and wears it like a skin suit to "fix things" in his Trumpian way.

The Ross Perot constituency makes some sense, but I don't think this^ is true. What Trump actually does is virtually identical to what the GOP wants/does - just look at the tax bill, which obviously broke at least a dozen Trump campaign promises. This is why the always ethically supple NR wriggled so quickly over to defending him (by and large, that is - it's quite rare to see anything like the infamous anti-Trump screeds in NR these days). Trump is too lazy and disinterested to manage promoting (led alone conceiving of) his own policy agenda, and has mostly just abdicated to the GOP on policy. Trumpism is rhetorical and theatrical, not substantial. And to be fair, this seems to suit his base just fine, so far. They're happy with whatever so long as it feels like owning libs.

 

[LinekersLegs]

Good points. Sorry I missed the NR link, legs.

As much as it seems the party belongs to Trump and Moore, I've often thought that Trump gutted the party and wears it like a skin suit to "fix things" in his Trumpian way. He's the real return (with a vengeance) of the old Perot constituency. They don't mix easily, and you can see that in the visceral recoiling of DC to the injection of Trump. That's as true of the career Repubs as the Democrats. NR is the institutional GOP press, as the Trump movement really doesn't have its own press. Besides, the stupidity of the GOP is illustrated by the fact we're looking at Roy Moore in the first place. They don't want him, either, but they had to back-scratch McConnell with Strange and the base pimp slapped them with Roy Moore. I almost don't blame them by now. In any case, events continue and remain unpredictable.

No worries, I don’t often quote them but I’ve been reading quite a bit of French and McCarthy recently for a conservative legal view on the Mueller stuff. French in particular I’ve agreed with to a disturbing degree lol

Btw talking about being able to take your politics out of a analysis, McCarthy and Preet Bharara came to similar conclusions about the Flynn charge
https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/93783070770302566

 

[mezzrow]

Are you trying to say that Fox News/Conservative radio/and multiple print outlets aren't the Trump movements' media outlets?

Not with the next generation of Murdochs in charge of Fox. The others (ie: WSJ editorial side) are basically institutional outlets. They are also increasingly irrelevant.

They're just for old farts like me who still read paper and watch TV. I'm reading less and less paper and watching less and less TV, though. I don't watch Fox, either. I know what they're saying, but I don't sit and watch.

 

[abelard]

No worries, I don’t often quote them but I’ve been reading quite a bit of French and McCarthy recently for a conservative legal view on the Mueller stuff. French in particular I’ve agreed with to a disturbing degree lol

Btw talking about being able to take your politics out of a analysis, McCarthy and Preet Bharara came to similar conclusions about the Flynn charge
https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/93783070770302566

well, Bharara suggested it could well be true that they have nothing on Flynn beyond what they charged him with, but he also noted that another possibility was that Mueller was “holding back on other charges to which Michael Flynn will plead guilty if and when they form the basis of charging some other folks.”

I really don't know which, obviously

 

[LinekersLegs]

well, Bharara suggested it could well be true that they have nothing on Flynn beyond what they charged him with, but he also noted that another possibility was that Mueller was “holding back on other charges to which Michael Flynn will plead guilty if and when they form the basis of charging some other folks.”

I really don't know which, obviously

Aye just found it interesting that Bharara put far more weight on the first option than most other left leaning analysis and his reasoning was similar to McCarthy’s.

Btw talking about additional charges