a quick poll about Russia and Donald Trump

double spaced at 1.1, margins .8 inches on the sides

Bett er be 12 pt times new roman one inch margins single spaced!

Michael Tracey
‏@mtracey

I'll be going on @SamSeder at approximately 1:20pm EST to explain why Marcy Wheeler, aka @emptywheel, is the Judith Miller of the Trump/Russia saga -- except her ethical violations were much more egregious, damaging, and extreme. Tune in!

I didn't hear this yet, but my wife says Sam was screaming at him.

Monica Lewinsky reminds me a little of Lorelei Gilmore now.

Lol: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/04/russiagate-glenn-greenwald-matt-taibbi-denial/

The problem with counting on the criminal justice system to save us from Trump is that the entire system is rigged. In theory, the attorney general is supposed to operate independent of the president. In practice, everyone knows that William Barr was handpicked by a president who has sought to impede the Russia investigation, that Barr took office openly skeptical of Mueller’s efforts, that he has participated in high-level cover-ups before, and that he was confirmed on a party-line vote by a Republican Senate that has every incentive to make this story go away. Mueller’s job was to submit a report to Barr, and so far Barr has made no move to reveal more than a brief summary of the 300-page report’s contents to the public. While it’s true that Mueller has issued 37 indictments, including of six people close to the president, Trump himself is effectively immune from prosecution. Once again, the most powerful people are beyond the rule of law.

None of this should be surprising to anyone who has read With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful, by the Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Glenn Greenwald. The 2011 book, which features glowing cover blurbs from MSNBC anchors Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes, persuasively lays out the case that the wealthy and politically connected operate with legal impunity. “Those with political and financial clout are routinely allowed to break the law with no legal repercussions whatsoever,” Greenwald writes in his introduction. “Often they need not exploit their access to superior lawyers because they don’t see the inside of a courtroom in the first place—not even when they get caught in the most egregious criminality.”

Sam Seder the comedian?

Mother Jones has been a joke for years

Sam Seder the comedian?

I don't know if he still does comedy anywhere, but he's been a full-time left-wing broadcaster for 15 years

That Klion piece is embarrassing.

The pro-Mueller ralliers in Times Square have distributed this songbook. They are currently leading a mass singalong. Please read these lyrics pic.twitter.com/1y36LDFeEg

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) April 4, 2019

Needs work. And if you're going to go with Blondie - "Show Me"?

How about "Once I had a prez, and he was so crass; soon turned out that he was an ass."

That's without even thinking too hard.

I See a Vlad Moon Rising

this is your brain on MSNBC

Are there a lot of posters on here slavishly watching MSNBC and hanging on Rachel Maddow's every word? I kind of doubt it.

i'm talking about the pod ppl who wrote those song parodies, Mood, don't be so defensive.

Fair enough

“Pro-mueller ralliers” jesus

The march was called 'Release the Mueller Report' and calling it a 'pro-Mueller' rally is Tracey's own spin on it, if anyone was in doubt. That guy is such a shithead.

...

It should be leaked at this point. Its getting ridiculous

https://www.flashlyrics.com/image/tw/leak-bros/gimmesumdeath-24

Leaking the full Mueller report would require it to have a wide enough circulation within the administration that it would not be easy to identify the leaker. Both Mueller and Attorney General Barr are old hands in Washington DC and would understand this principle in their very bones. Beyond Mueller, Barr and Rosenstein, it is nearly impossible to know who has see the whole thing, but I would guess it's an extremely short list. Even the investigators from the Special Counsel's Office who worked on the report are unlikely to have a full and complete copy of it.

Mueller should send me a pdf. I won’t tell anyone.

im sure assange can get a hold of this

Mueller, yousendit?

I've read the report. It's OK. 4/5.

Worth noting from p. 149 of the Mueller Report:

At approximately 2:40 am on November 9, 2016, news reports stated that candidate Clinton had called President-Elect Trump to concede. At...

{redacted section of about two lines, marked "Investigative Technique"}

...wrote to Dmitriev**, "Putin has won."

**Kirill Dmitriev, CEO of Russia's sovereign wealth fund and a close Putin associate, who was personally tasked by Putin with making swift high-level contact with Trump's transition team.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/15/kremlin-papers-appear-to-show-putins-plot-to-put-trump-in-white-house

yeesh

sad that my first thought was "which time? 2016 or 2020?"

(2016)

kremlin otm

They agreed a Trump White House would help secure Moscow’s strategic objectives, among them “social turmoil” in the US and a weakening of the American president’s negotiating position.

i mean it worked

The report – “No 32-04 \ vd” – is classified as secret. It says Trump is the “most promising candidate” from the Kremlin’s point of view. The word in Russian is perspektivny.

There is a brief psychological assessment of Trump, who is described as an “impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex”.

how were they able to obtain this intel on trump? how did they know he was all those things way back in Jan 2016?? how could anyone have known at that time?!?!?!?

xp of course it worked. they're doing it right now

i wonder who russia is rooting for in the 2024 election

probably kamala harris right?

My guess is they'd love to see Kamala run against any one of those 8 GOPers that spent the 4th of July in Moscow. Guaranteed massively divisive figure on the Dem side against their controlled puppet on the GOP side would probably be their dream matchup to undercut democracy even more.

kamala doesn't need to be divisive. there is a lot that the biden administration is doing that has mass appeal, including this new infrastructure bill. she needs to run on that and on the fact that they helped pull the country out of the covid catastrophe.

i think the child tax credit idea will win friends and influence people. they need more policies like this -- things that tangibly improve people's lives.

any democratic candidate will be massively divisive, though. whoever it is will become the tool of satan

believe it or not, in 2024, whoever the democratic candidate is will be seen by 40% of the country as the tool of satan

meanwhile, the republican candidate will be an impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex. but when balanced against the tool of satan, what can you do? america divided

I can think of a Kamala Harris policy that would massively improve people’s lives

joe biden did a good job not letting that stick to him though. trump tried to cast him as a villain, first, a radical, then as a fool, but it didn't work. he simply represented a "boring' return to normalcy for most voters. (a great feat as he is becoming more scattered in his speech). kamala should just do the same thing and she could do it even better because she really can convey competence. the less she puts herself at the center of her campaign, the better she will do. (this goes for all democratic candidates).

xp

hillary let herself become a foil to trump. biden didn't, it just didn't work.

the way the guardian piece drops in the italicized scary russian words is extremely funny imo

what's the russian word for signature reduction?

kamala doesn't need to be divisive. there is a lot that the biden administration is doing that has mass appeal, including this new infrastructure bill. she needs to run on that and on the fact that they helped pull the country out of the covid catastrophe.

I feel like I shouldn't have to point this out, but in modern America a woman of color running for president is going to be extremely divisive.

сокращение подписи

Aka 'sokrashcheniye podpisi'.

You're welcome. xp

people who are so racist that they wouldn't vote for a black person, or so sexist that they wouldn't vote for a woman, are voting for the republican candidate anyway. you don't need to worry about those voters. the important thing is driving turnout with a message that has broad appeal. i personally think that the key part here is not getting drawn into trump's distractions (if in fact trump is the candidate in 2024).