US Politics November 2017

Is that a transcript of the full 7 hours !?

208 pages! This is like a novella.

Some nice word salad here

Totally weird ass passage where Schiff notes that Page testimony doesn’t match with his emails. That triggered this on meetings vs outreach. pic.twitter.com/XYzmSqJfHV

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) November 7, 2017

The audacity of these knuckleheads, from Trump on down. Just do all this shitty, shady stuff, and when called on it sort of shrug. Tbf, I guess it's worked for Trump all his life.

Damn. I almost believe that he actually doesn’t understand the illegal or wrongs he has probably committed. He has, like, only “word-concepts.” Those are topically related to the issues under discussion, but also nonsensical. Wordy word salad.

there are no misdeeds, only opportunities for legal entanglement

Diving into this a bit, I keep reading Carter Page as Dennis Reynolds from "It's Always Sunny ... "

Mr. Page, did you ever communicate with Paul Manafort?

No, never. Well ... not directly.

Not directly? What does that mean? Did you or didn't you?

No, I did not. I did not. Absolutely. I mean, not directly.

And so on. I understand Page's concern, he's overthinking it, knowing that the odds of him being proven a liar or perjurer or criminal or whatever increase the more definitive his claims, and yet ... elsewhere he has no problem categorically denying stuff, or babbling on and on in a confusing and contradictory manner. It's just absolutely bonkers that he would open himself up like this. I mean, the sheer hubris of a guy who would show up without a lawyer, half plead the fifth for fear of prosecution for contradictions in his statements and yet willingly offer to provide copies of emails and stuff that could very well introduce statements that contradict his babbling ...

Anyway, Carter Page, ladies and gentlemen, one of the greatest fictional characters of all time.

Gentlemen, I'm afraid that I must plead the fifth. But before I do, I feel that it's only right and proper to provide you with a thorough accounting of the thoughts and experiences which have informed my decision. Chapter one...

Yeah, I've been reading the transcript. He constantly talks in circles. The man needs a lawyer, if only to stop him from contradicting himself in consecutive sentences. He reads like a man whose brain is floating like a cork in choppy waters. He recalls all his prepared talking points, but he cannot connect them to the questions he has been asked. It is bizarre.

It seems like he's casting about for ways to deny that his communications with or about Russians were of any substance beyond general goodwill sentiments, but it's clear the documents the committee has contradicts this. It's also striking that the republicans on the committee don't show him any more sympathy than the democrats. They are all annoyed that he hasn't delivered the required documents, that he can't stay on topic or answer questions clearly, and that he's not particularly forthcoming.

the spectre of his inane discomfiting grin hovers over all of this shambles

who knew there was an uncanny valley for stupid

I've read about 100 pages of the questioning and his answers. So far he's used the phrase "dodgy dossier" about 30 times in his testimony, usually gratuitously, during a digression of self-pity. It's like a magic incantation designed to inoculate him from harm. Very Trumpian of him.

I’m guessing it’s a term he picked up from Nigel farage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Dossier

This explains why he said he wanted the transcript to be made public right away.

Just heard NPR refer to current times as "the golden age of grievance."

duels are illegal now so nah

I think we have transcended the formality of duels.

to our detriment

That Page transcript is like Joseph Heller meets Lewis Carroll.

Were you employed by the Trump campaign?
No, I was just a volunteer.
Well, who brought you onboard?
I - I mean, I just volunteered there.
So who did you answer to? Someone had to invite you onboard the team?
No one, because I was not on the team, just a volunteer. Etc.

Or:

Who approved your trip to Moscow?
I didn't need approval, because I was just a private citizen not officially working for the campaign.
So you didn't ask permission to go to Moscow?
Not directly, no.
What does that mean, not directly?
I mean, I emailed key members of Trump's team to get permission, if that's what you mean, and they said yes - I can get you copies of the email - but other than that, no, no direct contact.
We want to be very clear here. Did you ask permission to go to Moscow?
No.
OK, were you in communication with anyone on the Trump team about your Russian trip?
No, not directly. I mean, did email them to ask if I could go to Moscow, but other than that, no, no contact.

good god, that last one

the "hello, mister thompson" gif doesn't even come close

This guy takes stupidity to a whole other level.

i keep marveling at his apparently sincere belief that the double-jeopardy clause in the constitution covers the court of public opinion and random vigilantes. so really you can't ever be tried at all, since you might later be double-jeopardied by extralegal forces! which is irrelevant anyway since he is not on trial. but it's very important that he explain all this to congress. he must be baffled as to how they don't know all this stuff already.

I read through some of those Carter Page transcripts...I mean, I wasn't actually reading them but I was, y'know, scanning the words with my eyes and processing the constituent meaning with my brain, but I never actually read them. Did I read read them? Of course. I never said otherwise. But did I read read them? Of course not. Don't be silly.

TBF, he probably has a degree of brain damage induced by a lifetime of people viciously shaking him and screaming 'JUST SAY WHAT YOU MEAN, CARTER!'

https://www.comedy.co.uk/images/library/people/900x450/w/w1a_will.jpg

good god, that last one

xpost, just to be clear, I made those up! But it pretty much capture the spirit of Carter Page.

omg well joke's on me but tbf they were horribly plausible

Like, you just can't make this stuff up, which is why it makes it so easy to make up. The "plead the fifth" back and forth really conveys the madness. Or the fact that even pinheaded Gowdy, an erstwhile ally, is from the start skeptical and almost adversarial when responding to Page's nutty rabbit hole dives.

He is so sneaky in his omissions - and inclusions - it's baffling. When asked who invited him to Russian, his response is "I was just invited." As if that either answers it or doesn't raise more questions. Or his repeated declarations of "I just want to be careful" or "not directly," as if allowing rhetorical wiggle room would withstand legal scrutiny.

1/ Carter Page’s testimony is a painful reminder of the importance of hiring an attorney when you’re under investigation.

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) November 7, 2017

Though again, to be fair, I actually understand where Page is coming from. He's saying first that some documents he provides might contradict his previous statements, which would be incriminating. And then second he's saying that because (he claims) some documents were illegally leaked, producing those documents would make him a post facto accomplice to a crime. I'm not a lawyer, but a good lawyer would have expressed this stuff better than he could, because Page of all these chuckleheads has the worst poker face and looks and acts like a squirrely liar even when he could be telling the truth.

I think it's important to be completely transparent, but also that there should be limits on complete transparency.

He's basically saying he is being completely transparent, or trying to be as transparent as possible, but that it's not possible to be completely transparent and that's why he's not being transparent.

At one point they ask him if he ever goes by any alias and he outright says no. Then the next breath he says he does have a couple of aliases for the sake of security. Same sort of things with his cell phones. Do you have more than one phone? No, absolutely not. I mean, yes, I do, maybe three, but that's to save on phone bills when I'm in Russia.

If this guy were a b-list supervillain his name would be Red Flag.

“there are no misdeeds, only opportunities for legal entanglement” is all time great summation imo mh

kind of dreading this VA governor's race, and what a Gillespie win is gonna mean for the midterms

He hasn't won yet

always expect the worst, you'll be disappointed infrequently

It was... a trifle harrowing to be back in the school gym, with about the same level of cautious optimism, as a year ago.

even if the VA Gov race ends in disappointment, today still may be fairly positive for democrats. This is a pretty good round up on what else is happening:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/7/16612630/new-jersey-governor-election

That Page transcript is like Joseph Heller meets Lewis Carroll.

can't speak for LC, but clearly Heller was inspired by the Carter Pages of his time.

Asked during a Seoul news conference whether he would entertain “extreme vetting” on guns, Trump appeared irritated by the question and suggested it was not appropriate to talk about “in the heart of South Korea.”

He then answered by saying “if we did what you are suggesting it would have made no difference three days ago.” Devin Patrick Kelley opened fire with a semiautomatic rifle, killing 26 people in a church.

Another man, Stephen Willeford, later grabbed his own gun and exchanged fire with Kelley outside the church. Police found Kelley dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound, but authorities said Willeford helped stop Kelley and called him a “hero.”

Trump referred to Willeford as a “brave man” and said “if he had not had a gun, instead of having 26 dead, you would have had hundreds more dead. … It’s not going to help.”

“You look at the city with the strongest gun laws in our nation, is Chicago,” Trump replied. “And Chicago is a disaster. It's a total disaster.... If this man didn't have a gun or rifle, you'd be talking about a much worse situation in the great state of Texas.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/11/07/trump-says-hundreds-more-might-have-died-in-texas-shooting-if-gun-laws-were-tougher/

“You look at the city with the strongest gun laws in our nation, is Chicago,”

He really loves repeating this lie

Oops

Wow: JD Gordon tells NBC's @vmsalama he tried to stop Page from going to Moscow, but Page went around him "directly to campaign leadership."

— Ken Dilanian (@KenDilanianNBC) November 7, 2017

Trump referred to Willeford as a “brave man” and said “if he had not had a gun, instead of having 26 dead, you would have had hundreds more dead. … It’s not going to help.”

600 people live in Sutherland Springs. Trump is pretty much suggesting that he would have massacred the entire town.

^the movie in his head

"until one man.... with a Colt .45 in his BVDs.... jumped in his '03 celica and started firing out the window..."

On the tradition of 'patriotic leaders' who hate their fellow citizens:

https://theintercept.com/2017/11/05/john-kelly-loves-america-he-just-hates-americans/

Lots of feedback on this is not that John Kelly doesn't detest Americans, but that he's absolutely right to do so https://t.co/yAlDdwiD8n pic.twitter.com/W70wtb2Q1S

— Jon Schwarz (@schwarz) November 6, 2017

Donald Trump 'tells Japanese emperor mass shootings can happen anywhere' — in country with no mass shootings

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/donald-trump-japan-emperor-akihito-texas-mass-shooting-visit-shinzo-abe-sutherland-springs-a8041391.html