Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

A lot happened yesterday but something that I though interesting and important came out.

At this point, we know that one of Cohen's lies was that they didn't hear back from the Russians after proposing the deal in January.

From 4.c of the criminal information:

c. COHEN did not recall any Russian government response
or contact about the Moscow Project. “In mid-January
2016, [Individual 2] suggested that I send an email
to [Russian Official 1], the Press Secretary for the
President of Russia, since the proposal would require
approvals within the Russian government that had not
been issued.

Those permissions were never provided.

I decided to abandon the proposal less than two weeks
later for business reasons and do not recall any
response to my email, nor any other contacts by me
with [Russian Official 1] or other Russian government
officials about the proposal.”

That quite straight-forward so far but oddly enough, Russian Official 1 publicly stated that he didn't respond either. In other words, he told the same lie as Cohen.





So here we have Team Trump and Team Putin running with the same messaging. I'm not suggesting any coordination here but what this does show is that even this simple lie is something that can be described as Kompromat. It's exactly what Kompromat is - knowledge/evidence of illegal or embarrassing behaviour that could be used for blackmail. The Russians knew Cohen had lied to the senate and they could have used that against him as leverage.

This is just one tiny example in the grand scheme of things but I thought it was worth sharing as it's all confirmed and it illustrates how much Kompromat the Russians could potentially have on Trump.

Igotadose wrote: »

This is interesting to me. A particularly bad Federal Judge nominee with a history of anti-minority rulings, was rejected by the Senate, seen as a blow to Trump. 2 tGOP'ers voted against him as did all the Democrats. Maybe the GOP are starting to grow a tiny bit of spine.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-judicial-nominee-thomas-farr-black-voter-suppression_us_5c006678e4b0d04f48b26f51

The link put up the now usual request to agree to TOC's. Is Thomas Farr the rejected nominee? I got the name by asking google for info on senate rejections

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utVtDh4TXEQ

According to this BBC vox "pop" "they all break the law"

Why not just disband the justice system?

School is out ,gangs are in.

Igotadose wrote: »

. Wouldn't surprise me that several of the people in the video were in fact part of the millions that 'commit crimes.'

That had occurred to me too.Self serving opinions smell so good.

circadian wrote: »

House Democrats are pushing for campaign finance reform and an anti-corruption bill.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/30/18118158/house-democrats-anti-corruption-bill-hr-1-pelosi

I don't see this getting passed due to the very issue of corruption but at least they're setting out a goal and the GOP need to tread carefully as the optics could be detrimental come 2020.

It's quite a smart move really. Kind of a pre-emptive strike against any future "swamp" talk in 2020, or even shift it around against any rep candidate

TomOnBoard wrote: »

While the objective is laudable, it smacks of a political/PR stunt to me.

Wrapping 'Drain the Swamp' rhetoric around political promises has been debased of late. No-one, except those with corrupt intent, would argue against an anti-corruption drive. But when the ones who are proposing anti- corruption laws have a history of deeply corrupt practices themselves, (and I'm referring to the Clintons for example here and not Sarbanes) then I'm more than a little cynical about what their real motives are. In any event, limitations on political contributions by individuals are meaningless when the Supreme Court allows corporates to contribute what they want, following the Citizens United case.

Forgive my looking at this with such a jaundiced eye.

The Clintons aren't running the Dem party.

We might as well judge Trump by George W's standards (imagining of course that GWB was worse).

Anyway - I think you get my point.

There are a lot of new faces in the Dem party. It may be understandable, but I wouldn't be so cynical. Let them aspire to get legislation in that would prevent a facet of Trump's behaviour. There should be more of it in my view

Looking at and listening to the various news agencies reports on the world leaders meeting in Argentina, I'm left with the impression that Don is forgoing his usual tweet practice and is being measured in response to the U.S media questioning re NOT meeting Vlad and the Saudi crown prince.

I assume that Don will get the usual presidential briefing from his own senior Admin cabinet members and the usual Govt agencies Int precis when he awakes, along with whatever news sources he looks at for breaking stories and updates. I can imagine that reading the various stories being run by the media on how he's avoiding [for political or other reasons] meeting Vlad and the Prince and the version of how famously-well those two people are getting along in front of the cameras, that people might expect a negative tweet or two about more "fake news" being run by the media.

If there are none, then it's either because Don is not following his usual news reading, not getting a briefing from his people or is not in possession of a tweet capability, or even more important showing that his tweets were not really expressions of rage against the media machine, that his tweets were all a con job. 4AM wil tell the truth.

Trump is with these people now and for the summit. He is the alpha coward, he won't have one of his tweet storm attacks until he is safely back on his plane to the US where he can rant and rave from his own safe space.

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that the Clintons are running the Dem party. I used them as an example of current/recent Democratic leaders/influencers whose political manoeuverings are as suspect as anything on the GOP side. So, I've no problem with anyone trying to make the system cleaner, but if it's framed as a.clean-up measure directed at the GOP alone rather than at ALL politicians, then I see that as more hypocracy.

Not sure how the democrats could go about implementing anti corruption laws that only affect the GOP unless the GOP are corrupt. It will be hard for them to fight this.

That tie must be 3 feet long

George H.W. Bush passed away.

It will be interesting to see if Trump will be welcome at that funeral...

R.I.P.

Bush made a very accurate speech in 1991 where he predicted what Political Correctness would become.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness#1980s_and_1990s

..."The notion of political correctness has ignited controversy across the land. And although the movement arises from the laudable desire to sweep away the debris of racism and sexism and hatred, it replaces old prejudice with new ones. It declares certain topics off-limits, certain expression off-limits, even certain gestures off-limits."[45].....

volchitsa wrote: »

What a change from all that silly macho hand-shake stuff that he was so keen on when he first became president - he can't even make eye contact now.

It's like going to a party your ex is at and seeing them flirting with someone else.
Except, it's leaders of the most powerful countries in the world behaving like this.