digging some dirt — Agustino

What's dirt? At this point there is suspicion of actual crimes. That doesn't seem like dirt but a serious issue. Personally I think justice is fun and if these are crimes then I'm going to enjoy Trump's downfall. If these are crimes and it doesn't bring him down, I'll be disappointed both in the legal and political system of the USA. If there is no crime, I still think he's unfit but there shouldn't be any consequences.

We are allowed to have favourites here without that being stupid and that goes both ways. You are a bit of a Trumpet, I'm obviously not. That's fine, we can still talk about what he does even if we have certain preconceptions about the person - especially if we're open about them.

What's dirt? — Benkei

Unproven allegations. Trump may be guilty, but the ridiculousness of this situation is that Wayfarer has, for more than a year, been like a little child, and every time he reads something negative about Trump he immediately believes it and jumps cheering anti-Trump slogans. It's almost as if his heart skips a beat... That's the annoying part, not the part that he just dislikes Trump. Many people dislike Trump, and in certain regards, I dislike him too, but there's a difference between disliking someone and acting the way Wayfarer does.

If these are crimes and it doesn't bring him down, I'll be disappointed both in the legal and political system of the USA. — Benkei

Hmmm... do you think the legal system is capable to deal with those who have real power? I don't really think so.

We are allowed to have favourites here without that being stupid and that goes both ways. You are a bit of a Trumpet, I'm obviously not. That's fine, we can still talk about what he does even if we have certain preconceptions about the person - especially if we're open about them. — Benkei

Sure, and I actually quite agree with a lot of the analysis you posted in the previous comment.

Nevertheless, I think there's a real possibility that nothing will come of this with respect to Trump even if he directed Flynn and others to contact the Russians. — Benkei

Yeah, I agree. I think even if Trump is guilty of collusion, he was smart enough in doing it, and it won't get back to him anyway.

Wayfarer has, for more than a year, been like a little child.... — Agustino

I mention Trump's nefarious and destructive hijacking of 'The Office of Presidency' in this thread, and also the post-truth thread, from time to time. I don't know why it pushes your buttons, you seem otherwise an intelligent enough person but around this issue you're simply hysterical, for some reason.

The story this morning (AU time) is 'US President Donald Trump said on Saturday there was "absolutely no collusion" between his campaign and Russia, his first comment over a guilty plea by his first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, to lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

"What has been shown is no collusion, no collusion," Trump told reporters as he departed the White House for fundraising events in New York."

The problem with this is that what Flynn was lying about, was meeting with Russian representatives in order to influence Russian government activities. Trump is obliged to acknowledge that Flynn was lying, but he can't admit what he was lying about.

My guess is that in closed door, off the record meetings, the President and his lawyers/advisors are probably frank and honest about the progress of the war, the defense against the investigators, the pursuit of the terrorists, or what have you. — Bitter Crank

I disagree Bitter.

Everybody else might be frank and honest, but it's obvious that this President really does have genuine problems in understanding his situation or things in general. It's not just biased media wanting to portay Trump in a dubious light. It's not just what is leaking by a multitude of people, but the simple things he clearly has done. Like the fact just how Trump got to have Mueller investigating this whole fiasco in the first place.

Here's (just one) example that has me totally convinced that Trump has serious problems. After doing a extremely stupid move of firing James Comey, Trump couldn't even go with the figleaf excuse that his administration made up for him (that the reason was how Comey had handled Hillary Clinton). No, he had to publicly on television say that he fired Comey because he wanted the Russia investigation to go away. Now this forced the acting attorney general to put Mueller to investigate this.

Who the Hell does that kind of thing? A small child might rebel against his or her parents by saying exactly the opposite. Now you have these kinds of events with Trump far too often, so I really am starting to think that this old petulant guy is losing it (if he had anything before).

And the likely reality is that the KGB got him at very early stage, the Russian intelligence services continued the contacts and got to him especially when he was in financial distress. It wasn't like a recruitment to betray your country, but things just dressed up as business contacts. And likely Trump was a willing partner here. No pee-pee tapes needed. Trump was incapable of understanding that getting help from Russian intelligence services would put him against the Intelligence Community and the FBI as the latter has as one of it's top mission to counter operations of foreign intelligence services in the US.

Hmmm... do you think the legal system is capable to deal with those who have real power? I don't really think so. — Agustino

Judging by our conversations in the past, I don't think you know what "having power" means. So this statement is kind of meaningless.

I'm no fan of Donald Trump -- wasn't from the get go. I don't think any of his policy or program actions have been positive. His public persona is that of a rich rube. But...

Trumps public performance is worse than all 20th-21st century presidents since Warren Harding. It isn't vastly worse, only because other presidents haven't always performed superbly either. Narcissism is probably a prerequisite to anyone who aspires to high national office. We know that behind close doors, Richard Nixon wasn't cooly rational. Kennedy was an active philanderer. (I don't hold it against him, just that he wasn't a model of probity. Johnson behaved like a professional ;;politician: effective in managing congress, unsuccessful in managing the Vietnam War. I never thought Reagan was a great communicator, and I don't think he was a 'big picture' thinker, so to speak. The reputation of Clinton's presidency may very well deteriorate over time. He also had sexual improprieties, but succeeded in passing some neoliberal programs (like ending welfare as we know it) that did the poor no great good.

I loathed George Bush II. His war on terrorism is a lingering blight on this country and the Middle East. Obama seemed pretty upright. No huge scandals, no big frauds, no hands in the wrong place, and so on and so forth. And then there's Trump.

Trump's policy objectives don't require him to be especially statesmanlike. To the extent that he is something of an isolationist, why bother being nice to other countries' leaders? If you don't really care what most Americans think, (he got elected), there is no need to now project patrician sophistication. He can afford to project, "I'm a rube, you're a rube, but I'm a lot richer than you are."

I'd like to see Trump impeached and convicted out of office. I just don't see him contradicting himself.

I just don't see him contradicting himself. — Bitter Crank

He just has. He has acknowledged that he had to fire Flynn for lying to the FBI and the VP. And he says in the next sentence, that there was no collusion with Russia. But what was Flynn lying about? Why, he was lying about colluding with Russia. I sense there is a very major drama imminent.

The basic point about Russian involvement in the US election is, I think, beyond dispute. Russia wanted Clinton to lose, partly because Putin hates her, but also because I think that Russia thinks she would have been a much tougher adversary. Whereas Trump - all you have to do is flatter him, and he'll think you're terrific (if he perceives you as a powerful man, someone whose flattery is significant.) Putin plays him like a fiddle; Trump is obnoxiously rude about almost everyone, including people who work for him, and people on his own side of politics. But notice he will never say anything negative about Putin, whom he accords great respect. After the G7 meeting, he said he believed Putin over and above his own intelligence agencies (a claim he was later obliged to retract.)

Let's really hope the shit well and truly hits the fan before too much more damage is done to America and the rest of the world.

Let's really hope the shit well and truly hits the fan before too much more damage is done to America and the rest of the world. — Wayfarer

I don't think more new damage is going to be done... other than Trump just himself creates.

The Trump administration:

- didn't lift the sanctions. (The primary objective for Russia)
- didn't change course with NATO.
- hasn't de facto changed course with Russia (even if the President adores Putin).

Hence the response of the US administration and government can be seen from the inquiry itself and that the most pro-Russia ideas that Trump has floated have been shot immediately down.

The shit will likely hit the fan. Actually, it won't be pretty.

It seems pretty likely that the Trump and the Russians have had some kind of relation for some time, so it will have consequences if everything is displayed publicly. Likely Trump will resign just as Nixon did. The FBI and the Intelligence Community actually do not want to go through this because it will look so bad. After all, this is the greatest intelligence operation ever done in history,

The Pence administration then will be harassed with just how much in the loop Pence was on this thing. And likely Pence as your traditional conservative won't get the racists so excited as Donald, so it's going to be a repeat of the Ford administration.

You're both dreaming. I highly highly doubt that Trump will resign or that he will be impeached. Even if you are right, and there was collusion, it will be impossible to prove it. Trump will go and testify before Congress, saying that he personally never met with any Russian official, has no idea about it, that he only once directed part of his campaign to discuss how to deal with ISIS in Syria with the Russians. Then he will say that he wasn't aware of what other people from the campaign were doing, and that will be it. They'll easily let him go.

You people really have no understanding of politics. You think it's so easy to get caught with something like this. At that level, if they're smart, it's almost impossible.

The basic point about Russian involvement in the US election is, I think, beyond dispute. Russia wanted Clinton to lose, partly because Putin hates her, but also because I think that Russia thinks she would have been a much tougher adversary. Whereas Trump - all you have to do is flatter him, and he'll think you're terrific (if he perceives you as a powerful man, someone whose flattery is significant.) Putin plays him like a fiddle; Trump is obnoxiously rude about almost everyone, including people who work for him, and people on his own side of politics. But notice he will never say anything negative about Putin, whom he accords great respect. After the G7 meeting, he said he believed Putin over and above his own intelligence agencies (a claim he was later obliged to retract.) — Wayfarer

And if he was colluding with Putin, you think that he would be praising him?! Are you people so dumb?! If I'm colluding with someone, I don't want the public to know that, do I? So what will I do? I will say in public that the respective person is the absolute worst, while behind closed doors doing his politics. If he really was colluding, you think Putin would want him to get ousted from the White House? A puppet President is almost his dream.

Trump is obnoxiously rude about almost everyone — Wayfarer

That's not true. He's not been rude to important leaders of state like China's President, etc.

Interesting article by Alan Dershowitz

The second question is why did Mueller charge Flynn only with lying? The last thing a prosecutor ever wants to do is to charge a key witness with lying.

I don't think that article really gets to the point. The issue is just what are the matters which were discussed with the Russians, which have most likely not yet been revealed. If one had discussions with the Russians concerning things not illegal to discuss, then there was no need to lie about such discussion in the first place. But If lying about having discussions is exposed, then the natural thing for the liar to do is to claim that the discussions were not concerning anything illegal. But then the question is, why did the individual lie in the first place. Obviously, it's just a matter of the lying continuing. If you're caught lying about a meeting, then you proceed to lie about the subject matter of that meeting.

What is implied by this, is that the subject matter of the discussions is not as innocent as what is being claimed. Remember, Trump stated in public, during the campaign, an invitation to the Russians to hack Hillary's computer. If he stated such a thing in public, who knows how much further he went in private. We don't know if Flynn has decided to come clean and expose the real subject matter. It is likely that some things will remain concealed.

You people really have no understanding of politics. You think it's so easy to get caught with something like this. At that level, if they're smart, it's almost impossible. — Agustino

I think we do. A Republican majority Congress will only impeach Trump if they collectively come to the conclusion that siding with Trump will make them lose big (or should I say bigly). And that to happen there obviously should be more shown than now is precented. And things like Trump firing Mueller. After the Midterms if the DNC takes charge (again an if), it's a different thing.

Any politician with even the smallest amount of clear thinking could avoid this scandal, but Trump simply doesn't think clearly. How stupid was it to fire James Comey and then say publicly on TV that he fired him "because he wanted the Russia investigation to go away". What kind of politician does that. It's not some kind of 3-D chess, but simple ignorance and stupidity. He is a Moron, as his Secretary of State has said, even if he is very gifted at getting racists all hyped up.

And if he was colluding with Putin, you think that he would be praising him?! Are you people so dumb?! If I'm colluding with someone, I don't want the public to know that, do I? — Agustino

Agustino, it's totally obvious Trump clearly didn't understand that things that he was doing with Russians would be anything illegal or something that would create a shitstorm. And clearly the thing wasn't presented to Trump as something treasonous, that he would now be betraying his country. It was more like, you get multiple things done with one smart stroke.

You see for Trump it was a win-win: Russians help him, he helps Russia and gets a diplomatic breakthrough. Everybody wins. He was even having backchannels on building a Trump Tower in Moscow at the start of the campaign. So everything would be fine. Or so he thought. That the FBI would basically have to look at this likely didn't come to his mind. . Just as Metaphysician Undercover above states, Trump publicly stated Russians to openly to look for the e-mails, so basically he was totally ignorant what it would mean.

Trump himself is his worst enemy.

For Trump it was a win-win: Russians help him, he helps Russia and gets a diplomatic breakthrough. Everybody wins. Or so he thought. That the FBI would basically have to look at this likely didn't come to his mind. He was even when the campaign was on having backchannels on building a Trump Tower in Moscow. Just as Metaphysician Undercover above states, Trump publicly stated Russians to openly to look for the e-mails, so basically he was totally ignorant what it would mean. — ssu

No, if he had been totally ignorant, he would have gone himself to meet with Russian officials. Why didn't he?

No, if he had been totally ignorant, he would have gone himself to meet with Russian officials. Why didn't he? — Agustino

Remember that before the whole mess he was actually contemplating meeting Putin when he still was a candidate. And meeting him even before the inauguration. So Trump was very eager to meet Putin. Naturally people like Manafort understood keep a low profile, because they understood that these actions have to be made behind closed doors.

And it's notable the absolute denial at every stage that the Trump campaign and his administration has said, which have been shown to be false.

Besides, when someone tells on email that Russians close to Kremlin have information on Hillary Clinton and Don Jr replies "I love it", just how evident is that absolute cluelessness of what people are doing.

I've allways said and will repeat it: If Putin was an American Billionaire and the Russian Intelligence Services a sleazy Superpack, political people in the US would be writing books on how phenomenal the Trump campaign was and how groundbraking pioneers they were in showing how 21st Century US Presidential campaigns are run.

Remember that before the whole mess he was actually contemplating meeting Putin when he still was a candidate. — ssu

Yeah, saying he wants to do it vs actually doing it are two different things. As far as things go, and apart from the Comey firing (which wasn't due to just the Russia thing, though that certainly played a part), Trump, even if he has colluded with Russia, has played his cards in a very smart way.

And I'm not talking about tweets and things he says. Yes, he clearly cannot control his mouth. But he hasn't shown that he's incapable of controlling his actions.

And I'm not talking about tweets and things he says. Yes, he clearly cannot control his mouth. But he hasn't shown that he's incapable of controlling his actions. — Agustino

Basically actual Trump administration policy towards Russia hasn't changed much. (Even if Trump made a strange purposal of having an US-Russian “impenetrable Cyber Security unit” to address issues like the risk of cyber meddling in elections.) That's because his administration, people like Kelly, McMaster and likely even Tillerson aren't so pro-Russia. (Yep, likely Tillerson understands that he's in a different position that CEO of an oil Company.)

The most pro-Kremlin people were quickly dismissed, fired, and now targeted By Muellers probe.

I'm not so sure just how capable Trump is. I think there is a possibility that if Mueller goes after Kushner, Trump might fire Mueller. Which would create even a bigger shitstorm.

it's notable the absolute denial at every stage that the Trump campaign and his administration has said, which have been shown to be false. — ssu

This is true. First of all there was a blanket denial, and then news of the Donald Jnr meeting came out, and it was like 'oh, that. Well that wasn't important'. Whenever some claim has been shown to be false, Trump or his spokespersons will just present 'alternative facts', which are then disseminated by the Alt Right media. Truth doesn’t matter - only the narrative matters, and the narrative always must be Trump Wins.

But, it’s getting very hairy - he’s now come out and accused James Comey of lying about Trump asking him to lay off Flynn. And Comey doesn’t strike me as the kind of guy who’s going to lie, especially about something as critical as this. I think this will be the kind of thing that will bring Trump down; he’s not doing back room business deals now, it’s the real thing, involving real claims of perjury, lying and obstruction of justice, in matters which directly affect the security of the United States.

I think this will be the kind of thing that will bring Trump down; he’s not doing back room business deals now, it’s the real thing, involving real claims of perjury, lying and obstruction of justice, in matters which directly affect the security of the United States. — Wayfarer

And the real question is why he is doing all that? If it would be that they just got help from Russians, because they hated Hillary, why all the denying and obstruction of justice?

It's simply far too improbable that it's just a coincidence. It's obvious that the KGB kept taps on the guy right from the moment he started thinking about making business deals in Russia. The obvious fact about this comes to light how he went to Moscow in the first Place:

As Trump tells it, the idea for his first trip to Moscow came after he found himself seated next to the Soviet ambassador Yuri Dubinin. This was in autumn 1986; the event was a luncheon held by Leonard Lauder, the businessman son of Estée Lauder. Dubinin’s daughter Natalia “had read about Trump Tower and knew all about it,” Trump said in his 1987 bestseller, The Art of the Deal.

Trump continued: “One thing led to another, and now I’m talking about building a large luxury hotel, across the street from the Kremlin, in partnership with the Soviet government.”

Trump’s chatty version of events is incomplete. According to Natalia Dubinina, the actual story involved a more determined effort by the Soviet government to seek out Trump. In February 1985 Kryuchkov complained again about “the lack of appreciable results of recruitment against the Americans in most Residencies.” The ambassador arrived in New York in March 1986. His original job was Soviet ambassador to the U.N.; his daughter Dubinina was already living in the city with her family, and she was part of the Soviet U.N. delegation.

Dubinin wouldn’t have answered to the KGB. And his role wasn’t formally an intelligence one. But he would have had close contacts with the power apparatus in Moscow. He enjoyed greater trust than other, lesser ambassadors.

Dubinina said she picked up her father at the airport. It was his first time in New York City. She took him on a tour. The first building they saw was Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue, she told Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper. Dubinin was so excited he decided to go inside to meet the building’s owner. They got into the elevator. At the top, Dubinina said, they met Trump.

The ambassador—“fluent in English and a brilliant master of negotiations”—charmed the busy Trump, telling him: “The first thing I saw in the city is your tower!”

Dubinina said: “Trump melted at once. He is an emotional person, somewhat impulsive. He needs recognition. And, of course, when he gets it he likes it. My father’s visit worked on him [Trump] like honey to a bee.”

This encounter happened six months before the Estée Lauder lunch. In Dubinina’s account she admits her father was trying to hook Trump.

(see The Hidden History of Trump’s First Trip to Moscow)

From the above one thing is evident, even only from Trump's "Art of the Deal", that it was an Russian high ranking official that made the initiative. Not that Trump had otherwise somehow the bold idea to build something in Moscow by himself. Needless to point out, even after the times Trump has been to Moscow, no Trump Tower has emerged there. Yet Trump sought this for a long time until January 2016 (see Trump’s business sought deal on a Trump Tower in Moscow while he ran for president)

That Russian Intelligence Community sought to get a connection of a foreign businessman isn't itself alarming as typically every more important businessman going to the Soviet Union had a KGB file on them. But when you add to the fact that Trump has gone bankrupt and has had to go to other financiers than American, and that Russians have played here a part, then it seems like something that should be investigated. And of course Mueller seems to have gone this way, so likely we will find out later.

So it's going to be interesting...

So, I correctly guessed Manafort then Flynn. Let's see if I can make it three for three. Next is Kushner.

I think there is a possibility that if Mueller goes after Kushner, Trump might fire Mueller. — ssu

Likely yes and we've already seen the legal groundwork for that possibility today : a president cannot obstruct justice according to his lawyer.

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/05/568564737/subpoena-for-deutsche-bank-may-put-mueller-on-collision-course-with-trump?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=202905

So, I correctly guessed Manafort then Flynn. Let's see if I can make it three for three. Next is Kushner. — Michael

Yeah! I hope you're right. I know that the media is full of spin masters, who will edit video to portray whatever they want, but in every clip that I see now of Kushner and his wife, he looks very troubled. Is this the look of a guilty man who knows his transgressions are about to be exposed?

in every clip that I see now of Kushner and his wife — Metaphysician Undercover

For just a second I forgot who his wife is.

With Deutsche Bank it's starting to get interesting. This is something I will like to see.

And likely Trump will continue to be as predictable as he has been. Just like the tweet he made where he didn't understand what actually he was writing (which one of his lawyers then posed as having himself sent), I do believe that he will make things worse for him. And I really believe that sooner or later he will fire Mueller.

Not only because it's extremely likely that Russians have indeed been financing Trump, but also because the only arena that matters to Trump is the public media discourse. For Trump this is a public show, allways has been. This we have seen over and over again. Most important to him is how he looks to his hard-core followers. And Mueller here with looking at Deutsche Bank has "crossed the Red line" that Trump himself imposed on the issue. Hence Trump would look to be "weak", especially if family members would be next in line.

What Trump just needs is someone saying to him what he wants to hear: that the President cannot obstruct justice and not only can he fire Mueller, but it would be in his best interest.

I'm assuming that Trump is competent enough to realize that firing Mueller after Comey is suicide. But, the man is full of surprises. Let's see what happens.

Huh. Turns out the whole investigation started with Papadopoulos getting drunk and telling some Australian diplomat about the Russians having dirt on Clinton.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/30/us/politics/how-fbi-russia-investigation-began-george-papadopoulos.html?_r=0

Trump on Russia probe: ‘You fight back, oh, it’s obstruction’

Did he just admit to obstructing justice?

The glaring problem in all of this is that T. doesn’t appear to understand what is at issue. He seems to think that he has been accused of personally receiving bribes or co-operating with some Russian operatives, which I don’t think he did. What is at issue are the reports of Russian attempts to influence the vote in his favour and in so doing, trying to solicit co-operation with members of his organisation, for which there seems to be considerable evidence. But he can’t pay attention to anything long enough to actually understand that - he can only think about it in his usual, totally self-centred way. It’s what happens when his perception of the issue collides with the facts, that things will really start to get interesting. Suspect that day is not far off.