Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2017 American Political Scene

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...20a_story.html

    President Trump asked two of the nation’s top intelligence officials in March to help him push back against an FBI investigation into possible coordination between his campaign and the Russian government, according to current and former officials.

    Trump made separate appeals to the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, and to Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, urging them to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election.

    Coats and Rogers refused to comply with the requests, which they both deemed to be inappropriate, according to two current and two former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private communications with the president.

    Trump sought the assistance of Coats and Rogers after FBI Director James B. Comey told the House Intelligence Committee on March 20 that the FBI was investigating “the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts.”

    Trump’s conversation with Rogers was documented contemporaneously in an internal memo written by a senior NSA official, according to the officials. It is unclear if a similar memo was prepared by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to document Trump’s conversation with Coats. Officials said such memos could be made available to both the special counsel now overseeing the Russia investigation and congressional investigators, who might explore whether Trump sought to impede the FBI’s work.

    White House officials say Comey’s testimony about the scope of the FBI investigation upset Trump, who has dismissed the FBI and congressional investigations as a “witch hunt.” The president has repeatedly said there was no collusion.

    Current and former senior intelligence officials viewed Trump’s requests as an attempt by the president to tarnish the credibility of the agency leading the Russia investigation.

    A senior intelligence official said Trump’s goal was to “muddy the waters” about the scope of the FBI probe at a time when Democrats were ramping up their calls for the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel, a step announced last week.

    Senior intelligence officials also saw the March requests as a threat to the independence of U.S. spy agencies, which are supposed to remain insulated from partisan issues.

    “The problem wasn’t so much asking them to issue statements, it was asking them to issue false statements about an ongoing investigation,” a former senior intelligence official said of the request to Coats.

    The NSA and Brian Hale, a spokesman for Coats, declined to comment, citing the ongoing investigation.

    “The White House does not confirm or deny unsubstantiated claims based on illegal leaks from anonymous individuals,” a White House spokesman said. “The president will continue to focus on his agenda that he was elected to pursue by the American people.”

    In addition to the requests to Coats and Rogers, senior White House officials sounded out top intelligence officials about the possibility of intervening directly with Comey to encourage the FBI to drop its probe of Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, according to people familiar with the matter. The officials said the White House appeared uncertain about its power to influence the FBI.

    “Can we ask him to shut down the investigation? Are you able to assist in this matter?” one official said of the line of questioning from the White House.

    Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee, said the report is “yet another disturbing allegation that the President was interfering in the FBI probe.” Schiff said in a statement that Congress “will need to bring the relevant officials back to testify on these matters, and obtain any memoranda that reflect such conversations.”

    The new revelations add to a growing body of evidence that Trump sought to co-opt and then undermine Comey before he fired him May 9. According to notes kept by Comey, Trump first asked for his loyalty at a dinner in January and then, at a meeting the next month, asked him to drop the probe into Flynn. Trump disputes those accounts.

    Trump’s effort to use the director of national intelligence and the NSA director to dispute Comey’s statement and to say there was no evidence of collusion echoes President Richard Nixon’s “unsuccessful efforts to use the CIA to shut down the FBI’s investigation of the Watergate break-in on national security grounds,” said Jeffrey H. Smith, a former general counsel at the CIA. Smith called Trump’s actions “an appalling abuse of power.”

    Trump made his appeal to Coats days after Comey’s testimony, according to officials.

    That same week, Trump telephoned Rogers to make a similar appeal.

    In his call with Rogers, Trump urged the NSA director to speak out publicly if there was no evidence of collusion, according to officials briefed on the exchange.

    Rogers was taken aback but tried to respectfully explain why he could not do so, the officials said. For one thing, he could not comment on an ongoing investigation. Rogers added that he would not talk about classified matters in public.

    While relations between Trump and Comey were strained by the Russia probe, ties between the president and the other intelligence chiefs, including Rogers, Coats and CIA Director Mike Pompeo, appear to be less contentious, according to officials.

    Rogers met with Trump in New York shortly after the election, and Trump’s advisers at the time held him out as the leading candidate to be the next director of national intelligence.

    The Washington Post subsequently reported that President Barack Obama’s defense secretary and director of national intelligence had recommended that Rogers be removed as head of the NSA.

    Ultimately, Trump decided to nominate Coats, rather than Rogers. Coats was sworn in just days before the president made his request.

    In February, the Trump White House also sought to enlist senior members of the intelligence community and Congress to push back against suggestions that Trump associates were in frequent contact with Russian officials. But in that case, the White House effort was designed to refute news accounts, not the testimony of a sitting FBI director who was leading an open investigation.

    Trump and his allies in Congress have similarly sought to deflect scrutiny over Russia by attempting to pit U.S. intelligence agencies against one another.

    In December, Trump’s congressional allies falsely claimed that the FBI did not concur with a CIA assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Trump win the White House. Comey and then-CIA Director John Brennan later said that the bureau and the agency were in full agreement on Moscow’s intentions.

    As the director of national intelligence, Coats leads the vast U.S. intelligence community, which includes the FBI. But that does not mean he has full visibility into the FBI probe. Coats’s predecessor in the job, James R. Clapper Jr., recently acknowledged that Comey did not brief him on the scope of the Russia investigation. Similarly, it is unclear to what extent the FBI has brought Coats up to speed on the probe’s most sensitive findings.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

    Comment


    • Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
      You do realize that Trump was just using that as a stick to club Hilary over the head? Nothing more.

      Don't forget that Trump is amoral. He doesn't care about right and wrong and never has. He only cares about winning and losing. So, yes, he will gladly be the hypocrite to use it against Clinton as long as he wins. Winning is all that matters and how he gets there can be summed up as "all's fair in love and war even to selling someone out"
      Selling your daughters integrity is another scale. All is fair for me in love and war is one thing; roping in your children on your hypocrisy is another.

      Comment


      • If these Rogers and Coats are proven accurate the game is up and Trump has to go. Not for collusion - treason, which is his real crime but for attempting to obstruct justice.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by snapper View Post
          If these Rogers and Coats are proven accurate the game is up and Trump has to go. Not for collusion - treason, which is his real crime but for attempting to obstruct justice.
          NO, no, no !

          I cannot believe we are going to have Mike Pence as POTUS.
          That would combine the worst of DJ's stupid ideas with insider, re-electable efficiency.

          Nightmare.
          Trust me?
          I'm an economist!

          Comment


          • DOR,

            I cannot believe we are going to have Mike Pence as POTUS.
            That would combine the worst of DJ's stupid ideas with insider, re-electable efficiency.

            Nightmare.
            nah, wouldn't be as bad as that-- otherwise Republicans would be hustling Trump out the door right now.

            a President Pence would have to deal with a DJT screaming from the sidelines about a coup. considering that Pence is pretty much a bland nobody whom was not even popular in his home state, and Trump is, well, Trump...that'd probably mean a complete meltdown within the GOP.

            and with the utter chaos and time-suck of the impeachment process, if it happens, nothing gets done legislatively. which further lowers the chances of the GOP staying in power. not to mention...Paul Ryan's ideas of conservatism are popular where?

            short of investigators actually finding a tape where Trump literally promises something to the Russians in exchange for cash, I don't think it'll ever get to the point where the Senate decides to boot Trump out. now the -House- starting impeachment proceedings is a real possibility, though.
            There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

            Comment


            • Originally posted by astralis View Post
              DOR,



              nah, wouldn't be as bad as that-- otherwise Republicans would be hustling Trump out the door right now.
              From your lips to Paul Ryan's ears ...

              Meanwhile,



              Five Thirty-Eight on the 2018 mid-term elections

              1. Trump voters don’t represent the majority of voters in the majority of congressional districts.

              2. If House GOPers won every Trump district in 2018, and lost every other one, Democrats would have 230 seats.

              3. Democrats need to win 24 of the 40 districts where the GOPer candidate won, but Trump got less than half the vote.

              In short, how independents vote in 2018 and who turns out will play roles just as big as that of how satisfied Trump voters are. Even if the latter are super happy with Trump, if everyone else is super unhappy, Democrats will likely do well.

              https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ake-the-house/

              ADD:

              The 2018 midterms are a story of two chambers. Democrats are in the best position they’ve been in since 2010 to win a majority of seats in the House of Representatives. The Senate map, on the other hand, is so tilted toward the GOP that most political analysts have all but dismissed Democrats’ chances of winning the chamber before 2020. It has even been suggested that Republicans could gain enough Senate seats (eight) in 2018 to amass a filibuster-proof majority (60 seats).

              Democrats hold 23 of the 33 seats up for a vote. There are 10 Democratic senators running in states that President Trump won, five of whom (Sens. Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Jon Tester of Montana) are from states that Trump won by about 20 percentage points or more. Meanwhile, there are only two Republican senators (Arizona’s Jeff Flake and Nevada’s Dean Heller) up for re-election in states Hillary Clinton came within 5 points of winning in 2016.

              It’s far too early to know how 2018 will play out. It’s a bad map for Democrats, and Republicans are working against history with Trump in the White House. Maybe one of those forces will swamp the other. Or maybe the result will be a wash.

              https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-both-parties/
              Last edited by DOR; 23 May 17,, 14:52.
              Trust me?
              I'm an economist!

              Comment


              • The Krauts are not mincing words; "Donald Trump has transformed the United States into a laughing stock and he is a danger to the world. He must be removed from the White House before things get even worse." http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1148471.html

                Comment


                • Same bitching and moaning.

                  Jackasses like that, especially from Europe, make me want to relive election day again and again.

                  Donald Trump is not fit to be president of the United States. He does not possess the requisite intellect and does not understand the significance of the office he holds nor the tasks associated with it. He doesn't read. He doesn't bother to peruse important files and intelligence reports and knows little about the issues that he has identified as his priorities. His decisions are capricious and they are delivered in the form of tyrannical decrees.
                  He is a man free of morals. As has been demonstrated hundreds of times, he is a liar, a racist and a cheat. I feel ashamed to use these words, as sharp and loud as they are. But if they apply to anyone, they apply to Trump. And one of the media's tasks is to continue telling things as they are: Trump has to be removed from the White House. Quickly. He is a danger to the world.

                  Trump is a miserable politician. He fired the FBI director simply because he could. James Comey had gotten under his skin with his investigation into Trump's confidants. Comey had also refused to swear loyalty and fealty to Trump and to abandon the investigation. He had to go
                  Those "tyrannical decrees" are executive orders and his fitness to be President was decided by a majority of the electors selected by the voters of the States, something not to be overturned by the pleas and lamentations of sobbing German bloggers. Glad he made a stop over there to slap Europe down a bit.

                  The first is Trump's resignation, which won't happen. The second is that Republicans in the House and Senate support impeachment, which would be justified by the president's proven obstruction of justice, but won't happen because of the Republicans' thirst for power, which they won't willingly give up. The third possible solution is the invocation of the 25th Amendment, which would require the cabinet to declare Trump unfit to discharge the powers of the presidency. That isn't particularly likely either. Fourth: The Democrats get ready to fight and win back majorities in the House and Senate in midterm elections, which are 18 months away, before they then pursue option two, impeachment. Fifth: the international community wakes up and finds a way to circumvent the White House and free itself of its dependence on the U.S. Unlike the preceding four options, the fifth doesn't directly solve the Trump problem, but it is nevertheless necessary - and possible.
                  So no solution :'( ?

                  Remember kids down the block not across the street.
                  Last edited by troung; 26 May 17,, 14:46.
                  To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by snapper View Post
                    The Krauts are not mincing words; "Donald Trump has transformed the United States into a laughing stock and he is a danger to the world. He must be removed from the White House before things get even worse." http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1148471.html
                    Roflmao, I am no Trump fan, but I'll take his opinion over Germany's any day of the week. The last decade has made Germany look like a group of imbeciles.

                    Should also note that Germany would be despised in the US press right now if not for Angela Merkel and the Zeroth Amendment (which almost destroyed Schengen, marking, like, the 5th time Germany almost single-handedly destroyed the EU in the past 10 years).
                    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by snapper View Post
                      The Krauts are not mincing words; "Donald Trump has transformed the United States into a laughing stock and he is a danger to the world. He must be removed from the White House before things get even worse." http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1148471.html
                      Thats rich coming from the kraut merkle , europe is fucked through her n her policies and the lapdogs called tusk junker etc etc .

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by GVChamp View Post
                        Roflmao, I am no Trump fan, but I'll take his opinion over Germany's any day of the week. The last decade has made Germany look like a group of imbeciles.

                        Should also note that Germany would be despised in the US press right now if not for Angela Merkel and the Zeroth Amendment (which almost destroyed Schengen, marking, like, the 5th time Germany almost single-handedly destroyed the EU in the past 10 years).
                        So, Germany has been pursuing a "Germany First" monetary policy for the euro, and that makes them look like a bunch of imbiciles? OK, I'll buy that.

                        Reminds me of the guys at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
                        Trust me?
                        I'm an economist!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by snapper View Post
                          The Krauts are not mincing words
                          Actually, that's just the left-wing press editorial version. The actual quote came from German right-wing hawk Günter Beckstein yesterday and said "Trump is incompetent as a president, but incompetence is not a reason for impeachment [in the USA]". Which is more of a statement about the USA than about Trump. That opinion on Trump himself is considered a given in Germany.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by DOR View Post
                            So, Germany has been pursuing a "Germany First" monetary policy for the euro, and that makes them look like a bunch of imbiciles? OK, I'll buy that.

                            Reminds me of the guys at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
                            Germany isn't even pursuing good policy for Germany, IMO. They have suppressed labor costs for the last 17 years, which is why they can run a current account surplus now. Great way of saying you can get work if you just volunteer to work for nothing.

                            http://voxeu.org/sites/default/files...ickey_fig1.gif

                            Germans would be better off with higher wages and accommodating monetary policy for the whole Euro-zone.

                            But, yeah, Germany first is stupid, since Germany doesn't have the economic, political, technological, or cultural strength that the US uniquely has. Roman Empire vs. 1400s Venice.
                            "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by GVChamp View Post
                              Great way of saying you can get work if you just volunteer to work for nothing.
                              Mmm, it's a relative thing. Germany has a relatively (by comparison) small income spread. Minimum wage is 2.0 times welfare level, average income is 4.0 times welfare level and at 6.0 times the welfare level you're earning in the top 10 percent for Germany. In other words the overwhelming majority of people earn within a set +-50% to average. By comparison in the US the average income is higher, but the spread is a whole lot wider - around +-90%.

                              In manufacturing wages in Germany can be considered insanely high in fact. My cousin earns enough to feed a family of four on a single income only working 30 hours per week as a CNC lathe operator. It's really ridiculous.

                              Comment


                              • what the holy f**.

                                ====
                                https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...20a_story.html

                                Russian ambassador told Moscow that Jared Kushner wanted secret communications channel with Kremlin

                                Jared Kushner and Russia’s ambassador to Washington discussed the possibility of setting up a secret and secure communications channel between Trump’s transition team and the Kremlin, using Russian diplomatic facilities in an apparent move to shield their pre-inauguration discussions from monitoring, according to U.S. officials briefed on intelligence reports.

                                Ambassador Sergei Kislyak reported to his superiors in Moscow that Kushner, then President-elect Trump’s son-in-law and confidant, made the proposal during a meeting on Dec. 1 or 2 at Trump Tower, according to intercepts of Russian communications that were reviewed by U.S. officials. Kislyak said Kushner suggested using Russian diplomatic facilities in the United States for the communications.

                                The meeting also was attended by Michael Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser.

                                The White House disclosed the fact of the meeting only in March, playing down its significance. But people familiar with the matter say the FBI now considers the encounter, as well as another meeting Kushner had with a Russian banker, to be of investigative interest.

                                Kislyak reportedly was taken aback by the suggestion of allowing an American to use Russian communications gear at its embassy or consulate — a proposal that would have carried security risks for Moscow as well as the Trump team.

                                Neither the meeting nor the communications of Americans involved were under U.S. surveillance, officials said.

                                The White House declined to comment. Robert Kelner, a lawyer for Flynn, declined to comment. The Russian embassy did not respond to requests for comment.

                                Russia at times feeds false information into communication streams it suspects are monitored as a way of sowing misinformation and confusion among U.S. analysts. But officials said that it’s unclear what Kislyak would have had to gain by falsely characterizing his contacts with Kushner to Moscow, particularly at a time when the Kremlin still saw the prospect of dramatically improved relations with Trump.

                                Kushner’s apparent interest in establishing a secret channel with Moscow, rather than rely on U.S. government systems, has added to the intrigue surrounding the Trump administration’s relationship with Russia.

                                To some officials, it also reflects a staggering naivete.

                                The FBI closely monitors the communications of Russian officials in the United States, and maintains near-constant surveillance of its diplomatic facilities. The National Security Agency monitors the communications of Russian officials overseas.

                                Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said that though Russian diplomats have secure means of communicating with Moscow, Kushner’s apparent request for access to such channels was extraordinary.

                                “How would he trust that the Russians wouldn’t leak it on their side?” said one former senior intelligence official. The FBI would know that a Trump transition official was going in and out of the embassy, which would cause “a great deal” of concern, he added. The entire idea, he said, “seems extremely naïve or absolutely crazy.”

                                The discussion of a secret channel adds to a broader pattern of efforts by Trump’s closest advisors to obscure their contacts with Russian counterparts. Trump’s first national security adviser, Flynn, was forced to resign after a series of false statements about his conversations with Kislyak. Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from matters related to the Russia investigation after it was revealed that he had failed to disclose his own meetings with Kislyak when asked during congressional testimony about any contact with Russians.

                                Kushner’s interactions with Russians — including Kislyak and an executive for a Russian bank under U.S. sanctions — were not acknowledged by the White House until they were exposed in media reports.

                                It is common for senior advisers of a newly elected president to be in contact with foreign leaders and officials. But new administrations are generally cautious in their handling of interactions with Moscow, which U.S. intelligence agencies have accused of waging an unprecedented campaign to interfere in last year’s presidential race and help elect Trump.

                                Obama administration officials say members of the Trump transition team never approached them about arranging a secure communications channel with their Russian contacts, possibly because of concerns about leaks.

                                The State Department, the White House National Security Council and U.S. intelligence agencies all have the ability to set up secure communications channels with foreign leaders, though doing so for a transition team would be unusual.

                                Trump’s advisers were similarly secretive about meetings with leaders from the United Arab Emirates. The Obama White House only learned that the crown prince of Abu Dhabi was flying to New York in December to see Kushner, Flynn and Steven Bannon, another top Trump adviser, because U.S. border agents in the UAE spotted the Emirate leader’s name on a flight manifest

                                Russia would also have had reasons of its own to reject such an overture from Kushner. Doing so would require Moscow to expose its most sophisticated communications capabilities — which are likely housed in highly secure locations at diplomatic compounds — to an American.

                                The Post was first alerted in mid-December to the meeting by an anonymous letter, which said, among other things, that Kushner had talked to Kislyak about setting up the communications channel. This week, officials, who reviewed the letter and spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence, said the portion about the secret channel was consistent with their understanding of events.

                                For instance, according to those officials and the letter, Kushner conveyed to the Russians that he was aware it would be politically sensitive to meet publicly, but it was necessary for the Trump team to be able to continue their communication with Russian government officials.

                                In addition to their discussion about setting up the communications channel, Kushner, Flynn and Kislyak also talked about arranging a meeting between a representative of Trump and a “Russian contact” in a third country whose name was not identified, according to the anonymous letter.

                                The Post reported in April that Erik Prince, the former founder of Blackwater private security firm and an informal adviser to the Trump transition team, met on Jan. 11 — nine days before Trump’s inauguration — in the Seychelles islands in the Indian Ocean with a representative of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
                                There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X