Skip to content

Month: July 2018

Well, that went well.

Well that went well

by digby

Pompeo asked for actual denuclearization apparently. It doesn’t seem to have been a big hit:

Hours after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo hailed his two-day visit to Pyongyang as a “productive” round of “good-faith negotiations,” North Korea on Saturday sharply criticized U.S. negotiators’ attitude during the talks as “regrettable” and “robber-like,” accusing the United States of making unilateral demands to denuclearize.

The remarks exposed the fragility surrounding discussions at the center of President Trump’s foreign policy, raising questions about Pyongyang’s intentions and whether the North Korean Foreign Ministry’s statement represents a temporary outburst or if it signified a deeper misunderstanding between the two negotiating teams.

The statement, issued Saturday by an unnamed spokesman and shared by the state-run Korea Central News Agency, said the United States violated the spirit of the June 12 Singapore summit between President Trump and North Norean leader Kim Jong Un. It contradicted statements made earlier by Pompeo, who signaled the visit made “progress on almost all of the central issues.”

I think we know what this is all about, don’t we?

At the same time, North Korea said it still wants to build on the “friendly relationship and trust” that Trump and Kim created during the Singapore gathering. Pompeo did not meet with the North Korean leader during his visit and did not secure a shared understanding of the path to denuclearization.

They want to deal with the dotard and only the dotard. And for good reason.

.

Lie of the year?

Lie of the year?

by digby

Trump has repeatedly said he cancelled the military exercises because they are too expensive.

A joint military exercise between the United States and South Korea scrapped after President Donald Trump griped about “tremendously expensive” military drills would have cost around $14 million, U.S. officials told Reuters on Friday.

We knew he was lying, of course. He’s the guy who wants to write a blank check for the military and is prepared to spend millions on a stupid parade. He was instructed to do it by Vladimir Putin whom he apparently sees as his top national security adviser.

Still, that number is surprising. Especially considering this:

The $14 million price tag compares with a recent contract awarded to Boeing Co (BA.N) for nearly $24 million for two refrigerators to store food aboard Air Force One, the presidential plane. The contract has since been canceled due to possible delivery of an updated Air Force One aircraft.

The U.S. military has a budget of nearly $700 billion this year.

And this:

Trump has been to Mar-a-Lago 17 times, for a grand total of $17 million in flight and protection costs.

.

Big brother is a very fine fellow. You can trust him.

Big brother is a very fine fellow. You can trust him.

by digby

This is a disturbing article about Michal Kosinski one of the scientists preparing our brave new world. (You may recall that he’s a big part of the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica controversy.)

He has an algorithm that he says can tell by a picture if someone is gay (which seems absurd and creepy) but he’s obviously very influential in all this new propaganda strategies that are forming around social media. It’s disturbing. Here’s one little excerpt:

The aim of his research, Kosinski says, is to highlight the dangers. Yet he is strikingly enthusiastic about some of the technologies he claims to be warning us about, talking excitedly about cameras that could detect people who are “lost, anxious, trafficked or potentially dangerous. You could imagine having those diagnostic tools monitoring public spaces for potential threats to themselves or to others,” he tells me. “There are different privacy issues with each of those approaches, but it can literally save lives.”
[…]
Kosinski seems unperturbed by the furore over Cambridge Analytica, which he feels has unfairly maligned psychometric micro-targeting in politics. “There are negative aspects to it, but overall this is a great technology and great for democracy,” he says. “If you can target political messages to fit people’s interests, dreams, personality, you make those messages more relevant, which makes voters more engaged – and more engaged voters are great for democracy.” But you can also, I say, use those same techniques to discourage your opponent’s voters from turning out, which is bad for democracy. “Then every politician in the US is doing this,” Kosinski replies, with a shrug. “Whenever you target the voters of your opponent, this is a voter-suppression activity.”

Kosinski’s wider complaint about the Cambridge Analytica fallout, he says, is that it has created “an illusion” that governments can protect data and shore up their citizens’ privacy. “It is a lost war,” he says. “We should focus on organising our society in such a way as to make sure that the post-privacy era is a habitable and nice place to live.”

Right. Let’s have a nice, habitable Panopticon, shall we?

I don’t think humans can be fully human without privacy. But I’m old school.

.

Even dumber than we knew

Even dumber than we knew

by digby

This story in the Washington Post just ruined my day…

President Trump will land in Europe next week amid fears that he will blow up a key summit focused on Europe’s defense and then offer concessions to NATO’s main adversary, Russian President Vladi­mir Putin.

The allies’ worries and Moscow’s hopes are rooted in Trump’s combative approach to foreign policy. In recent days, Trump has told senior aides that he wants to slash U.S. spending on Europe’s defense if the allies are unwilling to contribute more to NATO, a senior administration official said.
[…]
This report is based on interviews with U.S. and European officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal deliberations and Trump’s interactions with world leaders. The core of Trump’s freewheeling approach has been in place since his earliest days in the White House. Shortly after he took office, Trump began passing out his personal cellphone number to a handful of foreign leaders, and in April 2017, White House aides were startled when officials in Canada issued a standard summary of a conversation between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Trump. In it, Trudeau complained of “unfair duties” and “baseless” claims about trade by Trump administration officials.

No one at the White House was aware the call had taken place. “We had no idea what happened,” a senior U.S. official said.

Typically, such calls, even with close allies, are choreographed affairs. Regional experts prepare talking points covering the wide array of issues that might be raised. The national security adviser will brief the president ahead of the call and remain by his side to offer advice. After the call, a transcript is distributed to key aides, who will issue a public readout.

In this instance, U.S. officials had to rely on Trump’s memory. A terse public readout described “a very amicable call.”

After the call, White House aides urged Trump to route all conversations with foreign leaders through the Situation Room, as required under federal records law, the senior official said.

Trump’s lack of preparation has added a further level of unpredictability to his interactions with foreign leaders, the officials said. The president rarely reads his nightly briefing book, which focuses on issues likely to come up in meetings, a second senior U.S. official said. To slim down Trump’s workload, aides have sometimes put the most critical information in a red folder, the official said.

In November and again in March, Trump invited Putin to the White House for a summit against the advice of aides, who argued that the chances of progress on substantive issues was slim.

For Trump, the meeting was the point. In an interview with Fox News last month, Trump speculated that he and Putin could potentially hash out solutions to Syria and Ukraine over dinner.

“I could say: ‘Would you do me a favor? Would you get out of ­Syria,’ ” Trump said. “ ‘Would you do me a favor? Would you get out of Ukraine.’ ”

Some White House officials worry that Putin, who has held several calls with Trump, plays on the president’s inexperience and lack of detailed knowledge about issues while stoking Trump’s grievances.

The Russian president complains to Trump about “fake news” and laments that the U.S. foreign policy establishment — the “deep state,” in Putin’s words — is conspiring against them, the first senior U.S. official said.

“It’s not us,” Putin has told Trump, the official summarized. “It’s the subordinates fighting against our friendship.”

In conversations with Trudeau, May and Merkel, Trump is sometimes assertive, brash and even bullying on issues he feels strongly about, such as trade, according to senior U.S. officials. He drives the conversation and isn’t shy about cutting off the allies mid-sentence to make his point, the officials said.

With Putin, Trump takes a more conciliatory approach, often treating the Russian leader as a confidant.

“So what do you think I should do about North Korea?” he asked Putin in their November 2017 telephone call, according to U.S. officials. Some of those officials saw the request for advice as naive — a sign that Trump believes the two countries are partners in the effort to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula. Other officials described Trump’s query as a savvy effort to flatter and win over the Russian leader, whose country borders North Korea and has long been involved in diplomacy over its nuclear program.

A similar dynamic has played out in Syria, where Putin has offered to cooperate with the U.S. military on counterterrorism and help Trump realize his goal of an American withdrawal.

Trump’s more hawkish current and former advisers, including McMaster, disparaged Putin’s offer as a cynical ploy, and maintain that Russia’s primary goal is to prop up the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and, more broadly, undercut U.S. influence in the Middle East.

The Pentagon views Russia’s proposal with similar skepticism, U.S. officials said.

Ahead of the NATO summit, European officials have huddled to discuss how to avoid a repeat of the Group of Seven meeting in June, in which Trump arrived late, left early and refused to sign a customary joint statement with the other leaders.

Guiding nearly all of Trump’s interactions with world leaders is his belief that his ability to win over, charm and cajole foreign leaders is more important than policy detail or the advancement of strategic goals. Often, the calls can be discursive and confounding. In conversations with the British prime minister, he has boasted about his properties in the United Kingdom, asked her about his Cabinet officials’ performance and sometimes castigated her for being too “politically correct,” U.S. and British officials said.

Trump focused part of a meeting earlier this year with the Swedes, who are important interlocutors on North Korea, on complaints about the trade deficit, startling the visiting prime minister; the United States does not have a big trade deficit with Sweden relative to other European countries.

“Really?” Trump said last year when Irish officials visiting the Oval Office asked for a fix for undocumented immigrants from their country in the United States. “You guys? Really?”

On one point, Trump has been consistent: He rarely ends a call with a head of state without extending an invite to the White House. “Next time you’re in Washington, stop by for lunch at the White House,” he often says, according to U.S. officials.

He has made the offer when his advisers urged him not to. Such was the case with Putin and with Michel Temer, the president of Brazil, who was weighed down by corruption allegations and deeply unpopular when Trump spoke with him last fall.

Before the call, aides had urged him not to invite the Brazilian leader to the White House. Trump did it anyway. White House aides spent the next several weeks dodging calls from the Brazilian ambassador trying to set up the meeting.

Purity, authoritarian style by @BloggersRUs

Purity, authoritarian style
by Tom Sullivan


Image from promo for The Strain, Season 3

Republicans were once the party of local control. Now, they’re just the party of control.

— Thomas Mills, NC political consultant

Purity/sanctity is one of a set of foundations underlying the morality of both liberals and conservatives, says Jonathan Haidt. In his model, conservatives score higher on the purity scale, valuing purity more (and/or in different ways) than liberals.

But it is not moral purity, clearly, American authoritarians and a radicalized Republican Party pursue in the Trump era. It is political purity achieved by limiting the population of non-white ethnic groups, and by limiting the franchise of political competitors not of the GOP’s shrinking white base.

News that the administration is embarking on a program to investigate and “denaturalize” citizens proven to have falsified their citizenship applications should put Therese Patricia Okoumou of Staten Island on notice.

Tucker Carlson warned Thursday on his Fox News program of “growing extremism” on the left, pointing to the anti-ICE protester who climbed the base of the Statue of Liberty. “Just yesterday,” Carlson began, “a Congolese immigrant shut down the Statue of Liberty — our Statue of Liberty — to protest the Trump administration’s immigration policies. The left applauded that.”

Okoumou, 44, is a naturalized citizen. It is her Statue of Liberty too. Now her nonviolent exercise of that liberty has put a bureaucratic target on her back. She has to worry the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will pull her file searching for a pretext to strip her citizenship and deport her.

Jamelle Bouie writes of the denaturalization program at Slate:

The small scale of this effort belies its significance. As a country, the United States makes few distinctions between naturalized citizens and their native-born counterparts. The naturalization process, which includes long-term residents with deep ties to the U.S., is assumed to be permanent. This new task force on denaturalization throws that permanence into question, bringing suspicion on anyone who received their citizenship through means other than birth.

There’s no guarantee this effort will stay confined to cases of cheating and fraud. The Trump administration has shown, in its drive to criminalize asylum-seekers, that the existing processes for seeking legal status can effectively be criminalized at any time. The president’s willingness to demonize all immigrants as intruders on American soil offers little comfort.

Amanda Marcotte concurs at Salon. Seeing an escalation in “what amounts to an ethnic cleansing campaign,” Marcotte adds:

… the administration has made it a priority to shake the trees to find every legal avenue possible to throw out people Trump considers too dark-skinned. This has included getting the Supreme Court to approve a Muslim travel ban, finding legal loopholes to prosecute people who are legitimately seeking political asylum, and ending temporary protected status for hundreds of thousands of people from countries such as Haiti and El Salvador.

As we noted yesterday, the Trump Department of Defense is abruptly discharging enlistees who joined the service through a post-September 11 program that offered “expedited naturalization” to immigrant soldiers. The Trump Justice Department has pulled out all the stops to deter Central American immigrants from filing for asylum, including “ripping children from their mothers and fathers.”

But targeting immigrants is simply the next logical extension of GOP efforts to disenfranchise its political competitors, among them immigrants once welcomed by the colossal statue in New York harbor. The GOP years ago moved beyond its unofficial Defund The Left program to defund trial lawyers and unions to defunding cities and public universities. Basically, any and all vectors of financial and electoral support for political rivals is a target for GOP ratf*cking. Passing voter ID measures that “target African Americans with almost surgical precision”; drawing and redrawing district lines for state and federal legislative seats to secure them for the party, confuse voters and drive down turnout (their own, if necessary); taking control of whole cities and invalidating their elections; changing the methods and timing of elections; redrawing city and county districts to favor Republicans; tweaking one election law after another to find a legislative “sweet spot” that will tilt the balance of power permanently in their favor. They hope.

As pattern-seeking animals, readers likely perceive one.

Like Therese Okoumou, here in the Cesspool of Sin, we know something about having targets on our backs. NC political consultant Thomas Mills wrote this week:

Republicans were once the party of local control. Now, they’re just the party of control. They’re doing all they can to limit democracy by gerrymandering districts, rewriting the rules of local and judicial races, making voting more difficult for elderly African-Americans and limiting the power of the governor. What’s clear is that they believe their legislative majorities are intact for the foreseeable future. They believe they’ve insulated themselves from checks-and-balances of our democratic system and they’re going to make all of us who disagree pay a price.

But getting back to Tucker Carlson. In the same July 5 monologue in which he warned of growing extremism on the left, Carlson acknowledged his deep-seated fear that demographic changes (to which immigration contributes) would disempower Republicans:

They’re going to tell you it’s about civil rights, or about some other principle that they pretend to care about, but they are lying. It’s about seizing power and holding it. That’s their only aim, they’re deadly serious about it. While you were grilling in the backyard last night, they were plotting, in effect, a coup.

Our Statue of Liberty. While you were grilling, they were plotting. The “coup” and “seizing power” of which Carlson speaks ominously Republicans of yore called democracy practiced through free and fair elections. Those would be the ones the GOP has worked deliberately to ensure are neither, and have ceased pretending to care about.

What they care about is purity, ethnic purity that guarantees control.

* * * * * * * * *

For The Win 2018 is ready for download. Request a copy of my county-level election mechanics primer at tom.bluecentury at gmail.

Friday Night Soother: Lions are doing it for themselves

Friday Night Soother: Lions are doing it for themselves

by digby

You want a piece o’ me? 

It’s not exactly soothing but maybe what we need right now is a little poetic justice instead:

At least three suspected poachers were apparently killed by lions while hunting rhinos at a South Africa wildlife reserve.

Rangers found human remains Tuesday at Sibuya Game Reserve, and police returned the following morning to look for poachers, reported the Sunday Times.

Investigators found a human head, along with other body parts and limbs, along with three pairs of empty shoes, according to the Daily Mail.

A rifle and an ax were also found at the lion camp.

Nine rhinos have been shot and killed by poachers so far this year on Eastern Cape reserves.

Three white rhinos were killed by poachers at Sibuya in June 2016, and three rhinos were killed in May at the nearby Port Alfred Nature Reserves.

Hakuna Matata mothafuckahs …

.

How a dotard makes the most important decisions

How a dotard makes the most important decisions

by digby

This is the stuff that still astonishes me:

A White House official involved in the vetting process tells me that President Trump’s Supreme Court pick will come down to “who he feels most comfortable with in a personal setting.”

The personal touch is how Trump makes most big decisions, whether it’s picking top staff or deciding how to treat other world leaders. 

Even some aides recognize that may not be the best way to pick a Supreme Court justice.

But Trump is Trump. “It’s not going to be an analysis of Pennsylvania politics” or some other convoluted, bank-shot logic, the official said.

Trump has said his announcement will be Monday, but aides wouldn’t be surprised if he jumped the gun and appeared with his nominee in the next few days.

He makes decisions this way because he is so far in over his head he has no other way of doing it. And that is just horrifying.

And by “comfortable” it means they must kiss his hem and give some kind of assurance that he needn’t fear for his own personal legal future which is paramount. He will try to assess which of these people will be the most loyal. He might just ask them outright.

.

This is not fine

This is not fine

by digby

I’m not anti-Russia. I have no doubt that most Russians like people everywhere — some good, some bad — very human. As Trump says, “we’re just people.”

The Russian government is not benign and Putin is monstrous, however. And these Republican Senators are either fools or traitors.

.

Poor Sarah didn’t get her entree

Poor Sarah didn’t get her entree

by digby

Via Daily Kos:

“I need somebody to come through here please, ASAP. Now. There’s about eight people in a van, and they’ve been in the store for about an hour. They keep going back and forth to the bathrooms by my back door.” That’s the 911 call—obtained by WSB-TV Channel 2 Action News—from a Subway employee on a family of 6, Felicia and Othniel Dobson and their four children, ages 8, 12, 13, and 19. The family had stopped at the Subway in Coweta County, Georgia, on their trip back from South Georgia to their home state of North Carolina. They had been attending a grandparent’s birthday party for the weekend.

The Dobsons
[…]

A Newnan police officer showed up. The Dobsons said the officer apologized and told them the employee had said she was suspicious of the family and that she has been robbed before and thought they would rob her.

The Dobson family told the Channel 2 Action news that their 19-year-old is going to college this year, the kids are upstanding young folk, and there had been nothing to indicate there was an issue. Subway headquarters says they are “investigating,” and the owner of this particular franchise called the family to apologize and say the woman had been put on “administrative leave.”

I reached out to Felicia Dobson and she sent this statement from the family.

It can be dangerous to make a call to law enforcement with blatantly false information for people of color. The employee’s voice was quivering as she described my family as non-customers, more women than men, and hanging around a back door eventually describing us as being suspicious and possibly going to rob her to an officer. This call came after we purchased several footlong subs and one addition while she took a smoke break outside of the store. We have no words for her action. Our kids were stunned to see their parents speaking with an officer following what they thought was a normal dinner followed by using a single stall bathroom one at a time. Our hope is that this one day stops happening to people in this country. Discrimination is never ok. We pray that love will prevail.

Oh, here’s another one:

A white man called the cops on a black family in North Carolina Wednesday for using a neighborhood pool because he apparently didn’t believe she was rich enough to live there. In the latest of a string of incidents of white people calling cops on people of color for increasingly absurd reasons—this week an Oregon African-American lawmaker was reported for canvassing for votes—a man dubbed #IDAdam on social media demanded to see ID proving she was allowed to use the pool. “This is a classic case of racial profiling in my half a million $$ neighborhood pool,” wrote Jasmine Edwards. “This happened to me and my baby today,” she said, in reference to her encounter with police, which was captured on cell phone video. The Winston-Salem Journal has identified the man as Adam Bloom. Police officers are on the scene as the video begins. One of the officers tells the man that if Edwards “has a card to get in the pool I believe that that should be enough.” The woman later hands over her electronic key card to the officer, who demonstrates that it opens the gate. “Alright ma’am,” the officer tells the woman. “I apologize for the time and the altercation that occurred.”

This stuff happens all over the country every day to people of color. And yet Sarah Sanders was politely asked to leave and got her cheese board comped and the entire country had a hissy fit.

.

They love him for his racism and misogyny

They love him for his racism and misogyny

by digby

I noted the sickening comments about Elizabeth Warren last night. But I wanted to put up the video so everyone can see the derisive tone and how much his audience still loves him for this nasty, juvenile behavior:

Why am I supposed to have respect for people who laugh and cheer at that crap? Why? They are awful, terrible people. How can this be ok while others are being vilified, even by the mainstream media, for respectfully addressing their discomfort with all this to his cabinet officials and staff? 

But let’s unpack this despicable commentary a little bit more. The slur against native Americans is ongoing. He doesn’t care. I guess he figures that they don’t vote for him anyway and his awful followers loves him for his racism. He’s probably right about that. They were cheering for it lustily. In Montana.

Then there’s the sexism in which he mocks the Me Too movement on the very day he hired a man who was fired from Fox News for covering up sexual abuse, including sex slavery, at the network.

Finally, there’s the weird insidious implication that he’d like to throw something hard at Elizabeth Warren and hurt her but he can’t do it because it’s not allowed anymore. Also, the implication that she’s delicate which is his way of saying she doesn’t have the “strength and the stamina” to be president, his “clever” way of saying that a woman is too weak to be president (“Does that look like a president?”)

His whole speech was disgusting on nearly every level, as usual. But this stands out for the fact that his hire of Bill Shine to basically run the White House when he previously covered up a sex slave operation at Fox News is more disturbing as usual. Of course, the fact that this operation existed at the network and everyone has pretty much shrugged and said “so what?” is the most disturbing of all.

The reason Trump must be put out of office at the earliest opportunity is not just because of this outrageously racist and sexist language which his followers practically drool with delight over. His policies are completely insane as well, from the environment to the economy to immigration and all of foreign policy and national security.

But this despicable rhetoric symbolizes all of that. He is a cretinous asshole and it manifests itself in everything he does. But the fact that there are tens of millions of Americans, as well as what appears to be the entirely of the official GOP, that cheer him on is the most chilling thing of all. It scares the living hell out of me.

Who ARE these people? And why are they considered so sympathetic? I will never understand it.

Update: This reminded me of a Washington Post article back in 2016

Following the country’s most deadly mass shooting, Donald Trump was asked to explain what he meant when he said President Obama either does not understand radicalized Muslim terrorists or “he gets it better than anybody understands.”

“Well,” Trump said on the “Today Show” Monday morning, “there are a lot of people that think maybe he doesn’t want to get it. A lot of people think maybe he doesn’t want to know about it. I happen to think that he just doesn’t know what he’s doing, but there are many people that think maybe he doesn’t want to get it. He doesn’t want to see what’s really happening. And that could be.”

In other words, Trump was not directly saying that he believes the president sympathizes with the terrorist who killed at least 49 people in an Orlando nightclub. He was implying that a lot of people are saying that.

Trump frequently couches his most controversial comments this way, which allows him to share a controversial idea, piece of tabloid gossip or conspiracy theory without technically embracing it. If the comment turns out to be popular, Trump will often drop the distancing qualifier — “people think” or “some say.” If the opposite happens, Trump can claim that he never said the thing he is accused of saying, equating it to retweeting someone else’s thoughts on Twitter.

This is particularly true when it comes to Trump’s comments on Islam. For months, the candidate has portrayed Muslims as the leading threat working against the United States and has routinely suggested in a wink-wink fashion that the president might secretly be a follower.

At a rally in New Hampshire in September, a man in the audience loudly declared President Obama a Muslim and “not even an American,” then asked Trump to get rid of Muslim “training camps.”

“You know, a lot of people are saying that, and a lot of people are saying that bad things are happening out there,” Trump responded. “We’re going to look at that and plenty of other things.”

Later that month, Trump announced that as president he would kick all Syrian refugees out of the country and not allow any others to enter because they could be a secret terrorist army.

“This could be the ultimate — probably not, but it could be — the ultimate Trojan horse,” Trump said on Fox News in early November, floating the idea without embracing it.

(On Fox News Monday, Trump said that he used to make this suggestion “with a smile” but he is now “starting to think that it can happen because our politicians are so inept and so incapable.”)

When it comes to the Iran nuclear deal, Trump has floated a variety of theories as to why the United States got what he views as such a raw deal. During a campaign rally in South Carolina in December, Trump seemed to accuse the U.S. negotiators of not having the country’s best interests in mind.

“Some people say it’s worse than stupidity. There’s something going on that we don’t know about,” Trump said in Hilton Head. “And you almost think — I’m not saying that, and I’m not a conspiracy person. . . . Half the people in this room are saying it. I’m trying to be — you know, I’m just hoping they’re just stupid people, okay?”

Trump’s they-said-it-not-me tactic is also often used when he’s attacking his rivals or their relatives.

In early January, Trump said that he was not concerned that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) was born in Canada — but that he had heard from many Republicans who were.

“I’d hate to see something like that get in his way, but a lot of people are talking about it, and I know that even some states are looking at it very strongly, the fact that he was born in Canada and he has had a double passport,” Trump said in an interview with The Washington Post at the time.

As this attack on Cruz stuck — and was echoed by other Republicans — Trump stopped pinning the concern on others and embraced it as his own, even threatening to sue Cruz over his eligibility in mid-February.

In attacking Hillary and Bill Clinton, Trump indirectly raised questions about one of their close friends, Vince Foster, whose suicide in 1993 has long been a focus of far-right conspiracy theorists who allege Clinton involvement.

“I don’t bring [Foster’s death] up because I don’t know enough to really discuss it,” Trump said in an interview with The Post in May. “I will say there are people who continue to bring it up because they think it was absolutely a murder. I don’t do that because I don’t think it’s fair.”

Still, the fact that Trump even chose to comment on the topic outraged many — including Foster’s sister, who accused Trump of “cynically, crassly and recklessly” insinuating that her brother had been murdered to further his own candidacy.

When asked about Foster during a news conference in North Dakota soon after, Trump continued to distance himself by attributing the concern to “a lot of people.”

“Somebody asked me the question the other day, and I said that a lot of people are very skeptical as to what happened and how he died,” Trump said. “I know nothing about it. I don’t think it’s something that, frankly, really, unless some evidence to the contrary of what I have seen comes up, I don’t think that it’s something that should be part of the campaign.”

In some cases, Trump’s commenting-while-not-commenting is delivered with a clear wink to the crowd. He will tell his audience that he’s not going to talk about something he shouldn’t talk about — and then continue to comment.

“I’m not going to say it, because I’m not allowed to say it, because I want to be politically correct,” Trump said in discussing the sound of Clinton’s voice at a rally in Fresno, Calif., last month. “So I refuse to say that I cannot stand her screaming into the microphone all the time.”

On Twitter recently, he took a swipe at Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.): “I find it offensive that goofy Elizabeth Warren, sometimes referred to as Pocahontas, pretended to be Native American to get in Harvard.” He did not note that he was the one who coined the nickname.

Trump has explained his approach by comparing it to a retweet. During a rally in New Hampshire in February, a woman in the crowd called Cruz a vulgar word, and Trump repeated it for the rest of the audience to hear.

“It was like a retweet,” Trump said in a television interview the next day. “I would never say a word like that — by the way, can I tell you what? The audience went crazy. Standing ovation. Five thousand people went nuts, they loved it.”

It’s not just him. It’s them too.

.