Skip to content

Month: February 2019

More “very fine people” by @BloggersRUs

More “very fine people”
by Tom Sullivan



“Down the rabbit hole” by Samantha Marx (CC BY 2.0)

The parent company of the National Enquirer tried to blackmail Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. So says Bezos in a Medium post Thursday. American Media Inc. and CEO David Pecker threaten to publish salacious photos of Bezos unless he stops investigating how AMI obtained text messages it published between Bezos and entertainment reporter and former TV anchor Lauren Sanchez.

Bezos, the richest man in the world and owner of the Washington Post, was not having it, writing, “If in my position I can’t stand up to this kind of extortion, how many people can?”

An “AMI leader” own told Bezos that Pecker is “apoplectic” over the Bezos investigation of AMI. Now, in this post-factual world it is wise to approach any such story with caution, even if the perpetrators put their extortion demands in writing. AMI did. Bezos adds:

In the AMI letters I’m making public, you will see the precise details of their extortionate proposal: They will publish the personal photos unless Gavin de Becker and I make the specific false public statement to the press that we “have no knowledge or basis for suggesting that AMI’s coverage was politically motivated or influenced by political forces.”

If we do not agree to affirmatively publicize that specific lie, they say they’ll publish the photos, and quickly. And there’s an associated threat: They’ll keep the photos on hand and publish them in the future if we ever deviate from that lie.

President Trump has identified Bezos and the Washington Post as political enemies. AMI has already struck an immunity deal with federal prosecutors over deploying its “catch and kill” operation to aid in Trump’s election. This action may have violated that non-prosecution agreement.

On MSNBC’s “The Last Word” with Lawrence O’Donnell Thursday, former Los Angeles bureau chief for the National Enquirer told O’Donnell that in Bezos Pecker had met his match:

“We have finally gone through the looking glass and we are way beyond yellow journalism — we are now in the area of the RICO Act,” he explained, referring to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, which federal prosecutors use to combat organized crime.

“This is extortion,” George concluded.

The Washington Post has more. Pulitzer Prize winner Ronan Farrow and other journalists claim they too have been targeted by AMI blackmail threats.

After the death and injuries of counter-protesters in Charlottesville, VA, Donald Trump defended white nationalists who rallied to protest the removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee as “very fine people.” In his allies at AMI, he has found some more.

There is a broader context here. Amanda Marcotte writes, “Gov. Ralph Northam and the two Democrats behind him in the line of succession have all been caught up in possible career-ending scandals involving racist costumes and alleged sexual assault.” The accusations first appeared on a “trolly right-wing website,” she writes, and Democrats agree there should be consequences for the men. But Marcotte sees more afoot in these cynical, scorched-earth politics.

“They are political nihilists,” Marcotte writes, “who use scandals like this to further their agenda of emptying politics of any morality, hope or substance, clearing the path for a naked power grab.” She adds:

But I’d argue that what Republicans are up to here is more sinister than garden variety hypocrisy. Their larger purpose is to push the idea that no one actually cares about racism or sexism, and that all protestations to the contrary are just postures that liberals adopt for political gain. Their strategy is to seed the notion that everyone is a bigot motivated by greed and naked self-interest, so they can then turn around and hold Republicans out as slightly better because hey, at least they’re honest about it.

As we have tumbled down this rabbit hole, much of that has been apparent for some time. But now the rabbit hole has a rabbit hole.

From Russia’s hacking of the 2016 election, to the Trump family’s tax avoidance, to Paul Manafort’s and Michael Flynn’s lies to the FBI, to Trump Tower Moscow, to Mohammad Bin Salman/Saudi state murder, to David Pecker/AMI extortion, in addition to the worldwide fraud exposed in the financial industry collapse, what ties together this massive, corrupt jigsaw is rich, powerful men convinced wealth shields them from the law — because it has.

For those keeping score at home

For those keeping score at home

by digby

Here is a list of the various planned congressional investigations

Oversight:
Cohen payments
Trump hotel lease
Census citizenship question
Prescription drug prices
Security clearances
Russian sanctions

Intelligence:
Russian collusion
Border wall
Russian sanctions

Judiciary:
Protecting Mueller
Family separation

Way and means:
Trump tax returns

Natural resources:
Puerto Rico remibursements

Energy and Commerce:
Family separation
EOA and climate change

Homeland security
Border security

Foreign Affairs:
Russian sanctions

Transportation:
Trump hotel lease
Russian sanctions

That’s just for starters.

I assume the different committees have different questions about some of these overlaps (like Russian sanctions) and that they are divvying up the duties. 

No wonder Trump’s hysterical.  Did he think they weren’t going to do it?  Did no one tell him how this works or was it another case where he was too busy wanking watching Fox and friends and didn’t pay attention?

.

More Foxification of the State Department

More Foxification of the State Department

by digby

I can see why some people would believe that a former Fox News reporter has the perfect qualifications to run a counter-disinformation department. They are, after all, experts at propaganda and lies. But still, it’s just a little bit unseemly considering that the administration is in power at least partially because of a major foreign disinformation campaign to put them in power and the president’s most vociferous and powerful domestic supporters are on Fox News:

A former Fox News reporter is expected to be appointed to lead the State Department agency in charge of efforts to counter foreign propaganda and disinformation, two officials told CNN.

Lea Gabrielle is expected to be officially named the special envoy and coordinator of the Global Engagement Center as soon as Thursday, the official said.

CNN reported in September that Gabrielle was a top contender for the job. The State Department did not immediately reply to a request for comment, and Gabrielle could not be immediately reached for comment.

Gabrielle was a general assignment reporter for “Shepard Smith Reporting,” according to her Fox News biography, and was previously a military reporter. A friend of Gabrielle’s told CNN in September that she was leaving Fox News and moving to Washington, DC.

Gabrielle is a United States Naval Academy graduate and served in the US Navy as fighter pilot for more than a decade, as well as taking part in some intelligence operations. She has said that her time in the Navy made her a better reporter. “I know how important it is that those who wear combat boots have their voices heard and their perspectives understood in news reporting,” Gabrielle said during a 2016 interview with fightersweep.com. “My goal as I report on military topics is always to honor them … by getting it right.”

In 2018, she criticized Trump on air over his plans for a military parade in Washington, calling the idea “completely unnecessary.”

The GEC was established in April 2016, and its mission includes “countering the adverse effects of state-sponsored propaganda and disinformation.” It has taken on increasing importance as experts warn of the potential for massive disinformation campaigns heading into the midterm elections.

It’s a joke. She’s a very accomplished person but being a fighter pilot and a Fox News reporter is not the right experience for any job of this kind.

But then they wouldn’t want that department to actually function, would they? They need the help and they seem very sure they are going to get it.

.

I guess Trump was in a coma in the 1990s

I guess Trump was in a coma in the 1990s

by digby

This is hilarious:

The whiny baby-man can dish it out but he sure can’t take it. Let’s go back to May 2016, shall we?

The real estate mogul has said in recent interviews that a range of Clinton-related controversies will be at the center of his case against Hillary Clinton.

“They said things about me which were very nasty. And I don’t want to play that game at all. I don’t want to play it — at all. But they said things about me that were very nasty,” Trump told The Washington Post in an interview. “And, you know, as long as they do that, you know, I will play at whatever level I have to play at. I think I’ve proven that.”

Clinton’s campaign has largely refused to engage the recent attacks directly, instead focusing — as Clinton did Monday during an appearance in Detroit — on Trump’s demeanor and job qualifications.

Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said Monday on Bloomberg TV that Trump’s attacks were part of a “strategy to try to distract from an issues-based campaign, which is what we intend to run. . . . To me, every day he spends in this type of stuff is a misspent opportunity by him in terms of doing the outreach he needs to do to improve his numbers.”

The race already appears to be teed up as a referendum on the two candidates’ pasts rather than their visions for the country’s future. Clinton has increasingly directed fire at Trump’s long history of derogatory statements about women, his bankruptcies and other controversies to argue he is unfit for office.

Trump, meanwhile, has sought to brand the former secretary of state as “Crooked Hillary,” pointing to such issues as the Whitewater real estate controversy in the 1990s and foreign donations to her family’s philanthropic organization over the past decade. Trump also regularly accuses the Clintons of hypocrisy on women’s issues and argues that Hillary Clinton has been an “enabler” of her husband’s actions and attempting to discredit the women in question.

In one recent interview, Trump said another topic of potential concern is the suicide of former White House aide Vincent Foster, which remains the focus of intense and far-fetched conspiracy theories on the Internet.

“It’s the one thing with her, whether it’s Whitewater or whether it’s Vince or whether it’s Benghazi. It’s always a mess with Hillary,” Trump said in the interview.

The presumptive Republican nominee and his associates hope that his tactics will bring fresh scrutiny to the Clintons’ long record in public life, which conservatives characterize as defined by scandals that her allies view as witch hunts. Through social media and Trump’s ability to garner unfiltered attention on the Internet and the airwaves, political strategists believe he could revitalize the controversies among voters who do not remember them well or are too young to have lived through them.

And he had a little help, didn’t he?

“The Clintons collectively have dodged many, many, many bullets. So much that was suppressed [by the media] is going to get re-analyzed. So many of the things that they slipped by on will get reexamined,” Trump confidant Roger Stone said Monday. “That’s something they should have counted on before getting into the race.”

At the same time, Trump has often dismissed scrutiny of his own behavior, including his questionable treatment of women, which served as tabloid fodder in New York City in the 1980s and 1990s. He has regularly criticized the media for reporting on events from decades ago.

“When was this? Twenty-five years ago? Wow, you mean you’re going so low as to talk about something that took place 25 years ago,” Trump said earlier this month when asked about pretending to be his own publicist in the 1990s.

Uh yeah. It happened before and over much, much more trivial bullshit than what he is accused of. A president named Bill Clinton spent his entire presidency under siege for a bunch of ridiculous Arkansas idiocy from decades before, wild wingnut conspiracy theories about dildoes on Christmas trees and gothic murder fantasies. Please.

Clinton’s investigations put a few people in jail for small bore corruption in Arkansas and some officials resigned for accepting tickets and failing to report secret payments for their mistress to the FBI. And we know that eventually he was caught lying under oath about sex. But I don’t think there was ever any suspicion that he had been a pmoney launderer for the Russian mob for decades or that he’d sold out the country and/or been the subject of blackmail by a foreign power.

As far as corruption while in office, he’s the greatest, the best, the biggest in history. That’s something he can genuinely brag about.

Trump and the conservative eangelicals

Trump and the conservative eangelicals

by digby

He appeared at the National Prayer Breakfast and said this today:

“I will never let you down. I can say that. Never.”

What he meant by that was, “there’s nothing I can do to let you down because you are all a bunch of cynical hypocrites who will support anything I do.”

Honestly, the worship of Trump by these people remains one of the great revelations of our time. These people are fundamentally dishonest and we do not have to pay any attention to them going forward except as just another right wing faction that plays partisan hardball. That’s fine. It’s their privilege as Americans. But there need not ever again be any presumption of sincere moral commitment.

.

Trump’s Electoral College problem

Trump’s Electoral College problem

by digby

This is the first poll I’ve seen recently showing trump’s approval in individual states. It’s not good news for him:

Trump’s base remained fairly solid, with 83 percent of Republicans approving of the president. But that share of support among Republicans was its lowest since September, when Washington was roiled by the Supreme Court confirmation proceedings for Brett Kavanaugh.

The poor national marks were reflected at the state level.

A majority of voters in just 12 states approved of Trump’s job performance, all of which were red enclaves spanning from Wyoming to Alabama. The president retained support from a plurality of voters in five other states he easily carried during the 2016 election: Alaska, Indiana, Kansas, Montana and North Dakota. But another state that Trump won, Nebraska, was split.

Trump’s net approval rating was underwater in 32 states, including 15 that experts said were worth keeping an eye on ahead of 2020.

A majority of voters in 27 states disapproved of Trump’s job performance in January, including Pennsylvania (53 percent disapprove), Michigan (55 percent disapprove) and Wisconsin (56 percent disapprove), all of which were pivotal to his Electoral College victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016.

A plurality of voters disapproved of the president in four states, including perennial swing-state Florida (50 percent disapprove) and Georgia (49 percent disapprove), where Democrats have grown more competitive in recent years amid shifting demographics and the growth of the Atlanta metro area. Without rounding, Trump was 1 point in the red in Texas, another state that has proven kinder to Democrats in the past two election cycles, as well.

The president is also underwater by double digits in Colorado (minus 18 points), Iowa (minus 14 points) and Maine (minus 11 points), states that could prove stiff competition for Trump and Senate Republicans next year.

In all, the January data shows Trump’s net approval declined in 43 states and increased in four: Idaho, Louisiana, Georgia and New Mexico.

The biggest slide came in New Hampshire, the traditional holder of the first-in-the-nation presidential primary. Nearly six in 10 Granite Staters (58 percent) disapproved of Trump in January – up 6 points since December – while 39 percent approved, down 4 points since the prior month.

Fox news likes to point out that Ronald Reagan was in similar shape in 1982. But they conveniently leave out the fact that the country was just starting to emerge from a deep recession for which Reagan would get the credit two years later. Trump has been riding on a long recovery (which they juiced with big tax cuts that are losing their potency) that has little room to improve.

This should not breed complacency. Presidential elections are between two people and voters have to choose between them. Trump and the Republicans are good at destroying their enemies (and Democrats are often too willing to help them) so this polling in a vacuum
that doesn’t tell us much. But it’s not where any incumbent president wants to be.

They all lost because they didn’t lick his boots eagerly enough

They all lost because they didn’t lick his boots eagerly enough

by digby

What a guy:

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that former Sen. Dean Heller lost his re-election bid last fall because the Nevada Republican had been “extraordinarily hostile” to him during the 2016 election and had alienated the conservative base.

“What happened with Dean Heller is, I tried for him,” Trump said during a sit-down with regional reporters in the Oval Office. But he said hard-core voter base “did not believe me. They wouldn’t go for him.”

In November, Heller was defeated by Democrat Jacky Rosen, who won 50 percent of the vote to his 45 percent.

“It’s past as far as I’m concerned,” Heller told the Review-Journal when told of Trump’s comments. “This president called me that day before the election and said I was going to win by five points. Now all of sudden he has a different spin on that. Not surprising. I think America’s used to that.”

Trump accused Heller of leaving the impression that he had voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.

“But the worst he said was ‘no comment,’ which is essentially the same” as saying he voted for Clinton, Trump contended. “When a senator walks out of a voting booth and he’s a Republican and he says ‘no comment,’ that’s not a good sign.”

It was for that reason, Trump said, that he did not nominate Heller to be his next Interior secretary. Heller had been considered a leading candidate to replace former Secretary Ryan Zinke, but on Monday, Trump nominated acting Secretary David Bernhardt for the job.

“I just could never get my base excited on him,” Trump said, before he added, “I like him a lot.”

And yet, Heller keeps slurping. Why? Because he is an invertebrate who has no self-respect.

“I consider the president a friend,” Heller told the Review-Journal. “I like him. I just hate to respond to these kind of comments. He did a lot of good for me in my campaign.”

Trump campaigned for Heller twice in Las Vegas and once in Elko as political prognosticators identified the Nevadan as the most vulnerable Republican in the Senate.

Heller, who had never lost an election, was the only GOP senator to run for re-election last fall in a state Clinton had won in 2016. Trump lost the Silver State by a margin of 2.5 percentage points.

Sig Rogich, veteran Nevada Republican strategist, said he didn’t agree with the assessment of why Heller lost.

“I don’t agree with that necessarily. I think Heller ended up supporting the president on important issues. I think people respected that,” Rogich said.

“I think you’ve got to credit Democrats for being organized and getting their people to vote,” he said. “That’s why Republicans lost so overwhelmingly in November.”

Before they became political allies, both Trump and Heller had to overcome early misgivings. Leading up to the 2016 general election, Heller said that he was “100 percent against Clinton, 99 percent against Trump.”

Heller remained coy about how he voted – “I kept it to myself,” he recalled Wednesday — until August 2017 when he publicly revealed that he had voted for Trump.

By then Heller had already crossed Trump when he announced his opposition to a GOP measure to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.

In an attempt to fortify the party’s resolve to repeal President Barack Obama’s signature health-care law, Trump then invited GOP senators to the White House for lunch. With Heller seated next to him, Trump said the Nevada Republican was “the one we’ve been worried about. You weren’t there. But you’re going to be.”

To punctuate his point, Trump added, “Look he wants to remain a senator, doesn’t he?”

If he wants to know why Nevadans rejected him, perhaps he ought to question whether they liked watching their Senator behave like a beaten dog on national TV? It’s not usually the kind of thing people look for in a leader.

Trump is very good at doing this to friends and foes alike. His public demeaning of their character conveys that kind of weakness even when they’re not being weak. It’s a tough challenge for anyone. But the ones who come crawling back and beg for more after they’ve been insulted that way are the ones who show their true colors.

.

A New Deal in every pot by @BloggersRUs

A New Deal in every pot
by Tom Sullivan

Garment-rending was in full tear. The proposal weeks ago by freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y., a.k.a. AOC) to raise taxes to 70 percent on incomes over $10 million had the private-jet set gnashing customized teeth from Silicon Valley to the World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland.

“Name a country where that’s worked ― ever,” demanded computing billionaire Michael Dell.

“The United States!” shot back panelist MIT professor Erik Brynjolfsson.

Mark Elliott of Economic Mobility Corporation offered Dell a handy pocket reference of historic U.S. tax rates. AOC already has ideas on how to invest the additional revenue:

On Thursday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) unveiled a landmark resolution cementing the pillars of an unprecedented program to zero out planet-warming emissions and restore the middle-class prosperity of postwar America that the original New Deal helped spur.

Just three months after calls for a Green New Deal electrified a long-stagnant debate on climate policy, the Democratic lawmakers released the six-page document outlining plans to cut global emissions 40 to 60 percent below 2010 levels by 2030 and neutralize human-caused greenhouse gases entirely by 2050.

The legislators scheduled a news conference at 12:30 p.m. EST Thursday.

Huffington Post adds:

Energy and infrastructure issues are the centerpiece of the resolution, with explicit goals of overhauling the transportation sector ― the country’s biggest source of climate pollution ― to expand public transit and high-speed rail and to spur a “clean” manufacturing boom with a particular focus on electric vehicles.

But, unlike most existing Green New Deal concepts, food and water are focal points. The resolution proposes “building a more sustainable food system that ensures universal access to healthy food” and “guaranteeing universal access to clean water.” To meet those goals, the document describes “working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers” to reduce agricultural pollution with “sustainable farming and land use practices that increase soil health” and “supporting family farming.”

NPR has a copy of the document here, as well as background on the Green New Deal, an idea that has been kicking around as far back as 2003.

Markey and AOC have company this morning. Christopher Ali, an assistant professor of media studies at the University of Virginia, offers another way to invest AOC’s additional tax revenue.

President Franklin Roosevelt’s creation of the Rural Electrification Administration in 1936 brought electricity and telephones to areas of the country within 20 years. Where the free market stepped away, America stepped up.

Ali explains the current situation, “In 2017, a full 30 percent of rural Americans (or 19 million people) and 21 percent of farms lacked broadband access.” Broadband subsidies available from the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service, as well as monies provided as part of the 2009 Recovery Act have not gained enough headway:

Despite the large amount of funding coming from the Rural Utilities Service and the F.C.C., rural America has not seen broadband deployed and adopted at the same speed and effectiveness that it had with electricity and telephone service almost a century ago. The reason for this lag is a lack of coordinated federal policies, which in turn has allowed major telecommunications companies to receive a large portion of these funds without much regulatory accountability. An opaque set of grant and loan stipulations make it difficult for communities to apply for funding, and in some states, a series of laws actively prohibit or inhibit towns and cooperatives from wiring their own communities.

Big Telecom doesn’t want competition. Even if it’s unwilling to compete, it wants to sit on unwired areas of the country like undeveloped oil leases.

Almost every state has a broadband plan, Ali writes, but therein lies the problem:

With so many plans, however, come as many definitions of broadband, target speeds, eligibility requirements for grants and a host of unique priorities. To ensure that high-speed broadband is available for all rural Americans, regardless of state, we need a national rural broadband plan … President Franklin Roosevelt and the Rural Electrification Administration did it in 1936 with electricity. We can do the same today.

Yes, tax rates were much higher in FDR’s day. It got me pondering what sorts of things Uncle Sam did when rates in this country were that high. A short list required no Googling:

  • Won WWI
  • Irrigated the Central Valley
  • Created the Tennessee Valley Authority
  • Enacted Social Security
  • Began rural electrification
  • Enacted GI Bill
  • Won WWII
  • Built the interstate highway system
  • Enacted Medicare
  • Won space race

And after the U.S. halved marginal tax rates, what? What will generations X and beyond look back on with pride and say they helped do that? Some of their own in Congress have some ideas.

Schiff Supercharged

Schiff Supercharged

by digby

Donald Trump said today that the House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff “is just a political hack who’s trying to build a name for himself. It’s just presidential harassment and it’s unfortunate and it really does hurt our country.”

What do you suppose caused this outburst?

The House Intelligence Committee’s investigation into President Trump’s ties to Russia is officially back. And under the panel’s new Democratic management, it’s beyond supersized.

In its first official business meeting of the new Congress on Wednesday—facilitated by the House Republican leadership’s somewhat belated announcement of GOP membership on the committee—the much-watched House panel voted to re-establish an inquiry into what now might be called Collusion-Plus.

It’s about as different as possible from the committee’s previous investigative incarnation under Republican management, which last year released a report absolving the president and his campaign of any culpability in Russian manipulation of the 2016 election and turned its ire on those within the Justice Department and FBI investigating Trump.

Democratic committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) has made no secret of his emphasis on going after financial ties between Trump and Russia and subpoenaing documents thus far untouched by the panel. And on Wednesday, the committee voted to execute another long-standing priority of Schiff’s: giving Special Counsel Robert Mueller the transcripts of all witnesses before the House probe. Misleading the committee and its Senate counterpart has already led to indictments of former Trump advisers Michael Cohen and Roger Stone—and they may not have been the only ones to give false or incomplete testimony.

But an announcement from Schiff shortly after the Wednesday morning vote underscored the ginormous reach of the 2.0 version of the investigation.

The investigation will examine the “scope” of the Kremlin’s influence campaigns on American politics, both in 2016 and afterwards, and “any links/and or coordination” between anyone in the Trump orbit—the campaign, transition, administration, or, critically, the president’s businesses—and “furtherance of the Russian government’s interests.” It will also look at whether “any foreign actor,” not only Russians, has any “leverage, financial or otherwise” over Trump, “his family, his business, or his associates”—and whether such actors actively “sought to compromise” any of those many, many people.

A related line of inquiry will examine whether Trump, his family, and his advisers “are or were at any time at heightened risk of” being suborned by foreign interests in any way. That includes a vulnerability to foreign “exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure or coercion.” All that makes it very likely that the committee examines Trump administration policy—think the Syria pullout, or ex-national security adviser and admitted felon Mike Flynn’s attempts to work with Russia’s military in Syria, or Trump’s infamous Helsinki meeting with Vladimir Putin—through that lens.

Schiff said that the committee will also probe whether anyone, “foreign or domestic,” currently or formerly sought to “impede, obstruct and/or mislead” the intelligence committee’s investigation or any others, meaning Mueller’s or the Senate intelligence committee’s own inquiries. And that raises the prospect of examining whether the aforementioned witnesses before the panel obstructed it. Fellow Democrats on the committee have told The Daily Beast their desire to get several witnesses back before the panel whose testimony they consider questionable. Illinois Democrat Mike Quigley said last month there were “nine or ten” such witnesses on his radar, including the president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr.

And with questions swirling about how heavily Trump attorney general nominee Bill Barr will withhold Mueller’s final investigative report, Schiff indicated that the committee will form a sort of backstop for the public. He also indicated he’ll work with other House committees, likely the oversight and judiciary panels, “on matters of overlapping interest,” Schiff said.

“The Committee must fulfill its responsibility to provide the American people with a comprehensive accounting of what happened, and what the United States must do to protect itself from future interference and malign influence operations,” Schiff said in Wednesday’s announcement.

And in addition to what the committee voted to give Mueller, Schiff committed to publicly releasing “all investigation transcripts” before the committee—though he didn’t commit to any timetable, in the interests of “continued pursuit of important leads and testimony.” That corresponds with another move Schiff and the committee made on Wednesday: to delay Friday’s scheduled closed-door testimony of Cohen until Feb. 28, something neither the committee nor the Cohen camp has yet explained beyond vague allusions to investigative interests.

I’m not sure what they expected but they should have seen this coming. It’s not as if the Democrats tried to hide it.

.

The art of the payoff

The art of the payoff

by digby

QOTD is by NBC news international correspondent Keir Simmons:

If you want to find the motivation around the world for many of the things that have been happening: make money. This is a president who telegraphed around the world, “I’m the guy you can do deals with, I’m the art of the deal” What oligarchs and property magnates around the world read that as is “bring your money and we can do deals.” If you’re Russian, we can do deals to get rid of these sanctions. If you’re Ukrainian we can do deals to improve the image of Ukraine. If you’re a property magnate in the Gulf, one that I sat down with who attended some of these inauguration activities and describes himself as a friend of president Trump, he’s trying to do deals on property in his region. so it’s not a surprise that the man who is the art of the deal is very attractive to people around the world who think they can make a lot of money doing deals.”

This week, we learned that Trump badly needed money during the campaign and couldn’t get another loan from Deutsche Bank….

Just saying.

This twitter thread is making the rounds and it’s quite interesting, along these lines.

Morning epiphany: @emptywheel was right and the whole Carter Page – Man of Mystery – was an elaborate distraction, an illusion used by the magician to make us look for fake conspiracy instead of at the real one. The Russians were clearly onto Steele and fed…
Disinfo into the dossier. Once you remove that fog and dead ends of those pieces (Rosneft, pee tapes, etc.), the complexity of the conspiracy becomes simplified and crystal clear. It goes something like this and I’ll start with Mike Flynn’s texts to illustrate:
“Mike has been putting everything in place for us,” Copson told the informant, according to Cummings. “This is going to make a lot of wealthy people.”

That’s the whole point. It was never about espionage. It was about money. Trump had one job: to lift sanctions when he became POTUS. Once the sanctions were lifted, every corrupt bastard in his orbit was going to make a lot of money…

Trump did not need to be involved or even know of each separate conspiracy and each criminal undertaking (Flynn’s nuclear plant, Manafort’s pay off to Deripaska, etc.). He had his own bribe: Trump Tower Moscow and he needed it, because once again…

He was near bankruptcy. A deal was made in which he would make a lot of money and all he had to do was run for POTUS. He would be helped along the way. He did not need to be read into how he would be helped. But he knew there was help and where it came from…
And then something unexpected happened. The USIC/USLE made public that Russia had hacked the DNC. Suddenly, team Trump realized the “how” of the help. They panicked… deals were being called off, a frenzy of meetings and discussions were had…

I think team Trump really did not grasp how deeply they were now compromised and that is why Trump began to insist that there was no collusion. In his mind, he did not know or tell the Russians to do what they did specifically. He does not realize (even now) …

That by making the deal with the devil (regardless of not knowing the particular details of what the devil would do), he was already compromised and that everything the devil did implicates him. Not only that, everything every other crook …

Did to profit off of the lifted sanctions also implicates him, even if he did not know of each crime or each criminal activity. Let me put it this way. Trump’s job was to unlock the house for the thieves. He did not need to know what each thief was going to take…
Or what each thief was going to do or even who the thieves were. That is why there are so many side conspiracies that seem to involve every aspect of his personal and professional life. Like putting his name on a building, he need not know what goes on inside…
But by agreeing to the bribe (Trump Moscow) and taking the stolen keys (without even thinking where those keys came from) and by opening the door, he is responsible 4 everything that happened as a result. He believes “there was no collusion” in terms of what went…

On in the hypothetical house. He probably did not know about Flynn’s little side deal or Manafort’s side deal or Cohen’s side deals. In his mind, he had nothing to do with any of this. But that is not true, is it? He unlocked the door in exchange for millions in property.

He committed the main crime from which all the other crimes were born.I woke up this morning marveling at the the elegant simplicity of all of this. It really is about the money and just the money. I really think he hoped to lose the election once things got real.

I don’t know that this is the case, but it’s certainly true that the money motive is becoming clearer.
.