Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)

[JBS]

Putin polls are best polls!

But

42% wanted him to be removed from the White House if there is enough evidence to do so

I hope that is merely bad phrasing, because it implies that 58% don't think he should be removed even if there is enough evidence against him.

[drogulus]

     

May I point out that in working for Popoviciu, Hunter Biden and Giuliani were in effect "the same thing"?

     That appears to be correct in that they both represented a corrupt individual. Giuliani has taken the view that this was wrong of Biden in some unspecified way, but he won't go so far as criticizing his own motive for acting as counsel for the same guy.

     

[SimonNZ]

But
I hope that is merely bad phrasing, because it implies that 58% don't think he should be removed even if there is enough evidence against him.

Not so unlikely. That would be the "but both sides do it" brigade. Or Todd's that's just the way politics is played worldview.

[Karl Henning]

May I point out that in working for Popoviciu, Hunter Biden and Giuliani were in effect "the same thing"?

Point taken.

[Florestan]

Question # 1: Why did Puiu Popoviciu, a corrupt Romanian businessman, contact Hunter Biden with the explicit request that he (Biden) take action in order to save him (Popoviciu) from the prospective jail sentence?

I can think of only three logical answer.

1. PP personally knew HB well enough to know that HB is available for such a job and had previously helped others in similar situations.

2. PP was refered to HB by a mutual acquaintance who personally knew HB well enough to know that HB is available for such a job and had previously helped others in similar situations.

3. It was common knowledge in PP's circles that HB is available for such a job and had previously helped others in similar situations.

The idea that PP simply scratched his head on the question of who might help him save his neck and decided to take his chance with HB without any prior information or certainty that HB might indeed be able to help him is preposterous.

Question #2: if HB was not available for such a job and had not previously helped others in similar situations, then whey did he take the matter in his hands for a while (albeit unsuccessfully) instead of turning down the request in the first place?

I can think of no logical answer to this.

[Florestan]

     Considering that MMT is often first encountered as a series of myths not worth believing, it's not an exception at all.

The problem with MMT is that the first impression eventually consolidates into certainty.

[BasilValentine]

Question # 1: Why did Puiu Popoviciu, a corrupt Romanian businessman, contact Hunter Biden with the explicit request that he (Biden) take action in order to save him (Popoviciu) from the prospective jail sentence?

I can think of only three logical answer.

1. PP personally knew HB well enough to know that HB is available for such a job and had previously helped others in similar situations.

2. PP was refered to HB by a mutual acquaintance who personally knew HB well enough to know that HB is available for such a job and had previously helped others in similar situations.

3. It was common knowledge in PP's circles that HB is available for such a job and had previously helped others in similar situations.

The idea that PP simply scratched his head on the question of who might help him save his neck and decided to take his chance with HB without any prior information or certainty that HB might indeed be able to help him is preposterous.

Question #2: if HB was not available for such a job and had not previously helped others in similar situations, then whey did he take the matter in his hands for a while (albeit unsuccessfully) instead of turning down the request in the first place?

I can think of no logical answer to this.

Of course PP had mutual acquaintances who assumed HB had influence he was willing to exert for cash; He knew HB was on the board of Burisma, so that was his natural assumption. Until there is some actual evidence, however, one can't rule out the more obvious possibility that HB just "suckered them" and did nothing illegal. Giuliani and his pals Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, by contrast, committed multiple felonies. They all took money from Dymitro Firtash and were all engaged in bribery, a campaign finance conspiracy, and the attempted subversion of the 2020 election in the US. So, congratulations! Your statements above are exactly the result the Russian disinformation campaigns have been aiming for. They've convinced you of false equivalencies. I'm surprised you are such an easy mark.

[Florestan]

Of course PP had mutual acquaintances who assumed HB had influence he was willing to exert for cash; He knew HB was on the board of Burisma, so that was his natural assumption. Until there is some actual evidence, however, one can't rule out the more obvious possibility that HB just "suckered them" and did nothing illegal.

True, but "suckering" Popoviciu is as morally reprehensible as doing illegal things on behalf of Popoviciu. Whether the former or the latter, it's obvious Hunter Biden is an immoral and greedy guy. Just like Giuliani is.

Giuliani and his pals Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, by contrast, committed multiple felonies. They all took money from Dymitro Firtash and were all engaged in bribery, a campaign finance conspiracy, and the attempted subversion of the 2020 election in the US. So, congratulations! Your statements above are exactly the result the Russian disinformation campaigns have been aiming for. They've convinced you of false equivalencies. I'm surprised you are such an easy mark.

Firstly, the current discussion started by SimonNZ is about what Hunter Biden and Giuliani did in the Popoviciu case. (Btw, we don't know whether Biden did anything illegal, but we know for certain that Giuliani didn't: writing a letter to the President of Romania --- albeit a pathetic one which I'm sure Mr. Iohannis made the best use of in the smallest room of his residence --- is not a crime, at least not in Romania.) What Giuliani did in the US in a different matter altogether is of no relevance here.

Secondly, your insinuation that I am a victim of Russian propaganda is far off the mark* and intellectually lazy. Anyone who has been paying the slightest attention to my posts all these years knows and can attest that my political Rusophobia is untreatable.

(* especially so since I've never ever read a Russian newspaper or watched a Russian TV channel in my whole life.)

But by all means, go ahead finding excuses for, and whitewashing, "your" bad guys all the while condemning and vilifying "their" bad guys. Just don't pretend any more that you are objective and neutral.

[milk]

True, but "suckering" Popoviciu is as morally reprehensible as doing illegal things on behalf of Popoviciu. Whether the former or the latter, it's obvious Hunter Biden is an immoral and greedy guy. Just like Giuliani is.

Firstly, the current discussion started by SimonNZ is about what Hunter Biden and Giuliani did in the Popoviciu case. (Btw, we don't know whether Biden did anything illegal, but we know for certain that Giuliani didn't: writing a letter to the President of Romania --- albeit a pathetic one which I'm sure Mr. Iohannis made the best use of in the smallest room of his residence --- is not a crime, at least not in Romania.) What Giuliani did in the US in a different matter altogether is of no relevance here.

Secondly, your insinuation that I am a victim of Russian propaganda is far off the mark* and intellectually lazy. Anyone who has been paying the slightest attention to my posts all these years knows and can attest that my political Rusophobia is untreatable.

(* especially so since I've never ever read a Russian newspaper or watched a Russian TV channel in my whole life.)

But by all means, go ahead finding excuses for, and whitewashing, "your" bad guys all the while condemning and vilifying "their" bad guys. Just don't pretend any more that you are objective and neutral.

perhaps I missed a piece of this conversation. So far, it looks like HB is a typical amoral Washington creep. But Giuliani is that and in real trouble with the law. That's fair to say. I'm missing why it's irrelevant but probably I didn't follow enough of the conversation.
It may be the HB is just as bad morally because a lot of center-left people really do think there's stuff in American politics that should be illegal and just isn't. Again, Giuliani's kind of corruption is different: trying to subvert the U.S. democratic process is another kind of cravenness. I believe guys like Giuliani were called rat fuckers back in the day. Pardon my French.

[Florestan]

perhaps I missed a piece of this conversation. So far, it looks like HB is a typical amoral Washington creep. But Giuliani is that and in real trouble with the law. That's fair to say. I'm missing why it's irrelevant but probably I didn't follow enough of the conversation.

The conversation started here: https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,26377.msg1242926.html#msg1242926

Please note the introductory line "Our Romanian friends" which I infered to be an invitation to offer my thoughts on the information presented in the video dealing with the triangle Popoviciu-Biden-Giuliani. Which I did. Based on the information, it can safely be concluded that both Biden and Giuliani acted immorally although apparently not illegally. Then come BasilValentine and accuse me ---  me of all people --- of being a gullible falling prey to Russian propaganda because I stated that both Biden and Giuliani were immoral and greedy in this specific case. Where's the logic in that, pray tell?

[BasilValentine]

The conversation started here: https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,26377.msg1242926.html#msg1242926

Please note the introductory line "Our Romanian friends" which I infered to be an invitation to offer my thoughts on the information presented in the video dealing with the triangle Popoviciu-Biden-Giuliani. Which I did. Based on the information, it can safely be concluded that both Biden and Giuliani acted immorally although apparently not illegally. Then come BasilValentine and accuse me ---  me of all people --- of being a gullible falling prey to Russian propaganda because I stated that both Biden and Giuliani were immoral and greedy in this specific case. Where's the logic in that, pray tell?

You are right. I shouldn't have drawn that conclusion about you. Please accept my apology.

[Florestan]

You are right. I shouldn't have drawn that conclusion about you. Please accept my apology.

Apology accepted, no hard feelings whatsoever.

[drogulus]

     Why did Giuliani put himself on the opposite side of Hunter Biden in representing the same client, and why did he tell the media that his view was based on rumors about what Hunter had done?

     Hunter Biden's legal work in Romania raises new questions about his overseas dealings

In August 2018, Giuliani wrote a letter to Romania's president and prime minister criticizing the country's recent efforts to rein in corruption as overly aggressive. Giuliani's position contradicted the U.S. stance on anti-corruption efforts in Romania.

It wasn't until several months later that Giuliani began publicly assailing Hunter Biden for his work in Ukraine and pushing the unsubstantiated allegation that his father helped to force out a prosecutor to end a probe into the gas company that employed Hunter.

Last month, Giuliani indicated that he was planning to broaden the line of attack against Hunter Biden.

"We haven't moved to Romania yet. Wait 'til we get to Romania," Giuliani told Fox News host Howard Kurtz.

When NBC News asked Giuliani to elaborate on his claims about Hunter Biden relating to Romania, he offered a terse response. "I only know rumors about it," Giuliani said.

     So what does "Wait 'til we get to Romania" mean?

     The case against Giuliani will not be rumor based or it won't be a case. Pointing the finger at Hunter Biden is a campaign tactic and Rudy only has rumors to offer. There seems to be a false equivalence operating here.

[drogulus]

"That's the piece of the puzzle I'm here to report today, that unlike the narrative of the press, that President Trump wants to dig up dirt on his 2020 opponent, what he wants is he wants an accounting of what happened in 2016. Who set him up? Did things spring from Ukraine? There's a good piece we got an Oversight [Committee] letter on from Politico in 2017. Let me quote the article. It says: 'Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump.' They did so by disseminating documents 'implicating a top Trump aide in corruption,' suggesting they were investigating the matter. Ukrainian officials also reportedly 'helped Clinton allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers.' There is potential interference in the 2016 election. That's what Trump wants to get to the bottom of, but the press doesn't want to."

— Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), during an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," Oct. 6, 2019

     There's plenty of truth in this. Some in the Ukrainian government wanted to avoid a TrumPutinist victory in the U.S. When Hillary campaign oppo researchers talked to Ukrainian officials about Manafort they got real dirt, not fake dirt. They didn't promote a false narrative, they gathered information for a true one.

     Trump wants to overturn the verdict on TrumPutin 2016. He wants election help and revenge for Manafort in the bargain. Ukraine is internally divided between those who are scared of what TrumPutin means for them and those who are fed by it.

     The GOP theory that Ukraine 'set up' Trump

The Politico article cited by Johnson says a Ukrainian American Democratic operative, Alexandra Chalupa, began looking into Trump campaign official Paul Manafort's ties to Ukrainian politician Viktor Yanukovych, who served as president from 2010 until his ouster in 2014. Chalupa was hired as a consultant to the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 campaign to help mobilize ethnic communities. She left the DNC in July 2016, the DNC said.

The story of Chalupa's work at the DNC has not advanced since 2017, and it's pretty thin beer, especially when compared with state-ordered hacking by Russia. She may or may not have worked with embassy officials, and the DNC did not use her research. The impact, if any, seems minimal.

The release of the "black ledger" — via a Ukrainian state agency and legislator — did result in Manafort's removal from the campaign and prompted questions about Trump and Russia. (Trump might have avoided some of these questions if he had done some due diligence and not hired Manafort in the first place, given Manafort's deep ties to Russian figures.) But the legal ruling in Ukraine that this was election inference has been overturned. And again, people appear to have acted out of individual motivations, not at the behest of the head of state.

     That's pretty much it. Manafort was dirty enough that he stank even to Repub noses before he became campaign chairman. Imagine what honest Ukrainians think of him, and what he helped Yanukovych and his patron do to their country.

[SimonNZ]

Firstly, the current discussion started by SimonNZ is about what Hunter Biden and Giuliani did in the Popoviciu case.

I don't think I've said or quoted anything about that.


meanwhile:

The White House press briefing now takes place on Fox News
Since taking the job, White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham has given zero press briefings, even in response to a historic vote on the impeachment process -- but she appears regularly on some of the president's favorite TV shows

"Since becoming White House press secretary on July 1, Stephanie Grisham has held zero press briefings. Instead, Grisham has found the time to grant interviews to some of President Donald Trump's favorite current and former Fox News hosts.

It is not new that Grisham appears on Fox News, or that Grisham tells pro-Trump lies. Sarah Sanders certainly did both quite a bit while she held the office.

But it is new that Grisham appears virtually only on Fox News.

Grisham's particular innovation is to move the entire office of White House press secretary into the world of Fox News and Fox-adjacent media. After giving her first TV interview to Sinclair's Eric Bolling (who was fired by Fox for sending unsolicited explicit photos to coworkers), Grisham did three interviews on Fox & Friends, and one each on Mornings with Maria Bartiromo, Lou Dobbs Tonight, Watters' World, and Outnumbered Overtime with Harris Faulkner. She has also done a subsequent interview with Bolling. Instead of actually briefing the press at the White House, Grisham treats her duties as press secretary as complaining to pro-Trump pundits about how unfair everyone else is to the president."[...]

[Karl Henning]

State Media

[SimonNZ]

Trump team seeks to 'modernize' national parks, with wifi and Amazon deliveries

"A team of Trump administration advisers – consisting mostly of appointees from the private industry – are urging "modernization" of national park campgrounds, with a vision of food trucks, wifi and even Amazon deliveries.

"Our recommendations would allow people to opt for additional costs if they want, for example, Amazon deliveries at a particular campsite," Derrick Crandall, vice-chairman of the Made in America Outdoor Recreation Advisory Committee, told the Los Angeles Times. "We want to let Americans make their own decisions in the marketplace."

The committee published its recommendations in a letter to the Interior Department last month.

National park campgrounds are just one of many government resources that Trump has sought to privatize, including the US Postal Service and infrastructure like airports and freeways.

The White House wants to reduce spending on the National Park Service by 15%, or $481m, even as the service has said it is facing a more than $11bn maintenance backlog.

Crandall is counselor for the National Park Hospitality Association, which represents businesses that provide food, retail and other services in parks. Other committee members include executives from Aramark and Delaware North, which both have contracts to operate concessions at national parks, according to the Washington Post, as well as the founder of Bass Pro Shops and the CEOs of Choice Hotels International and Kampgrounds of America."[...]

[Florestan]

I don't think I've said or quoted anything about that.

You're right. I'm terribly sorry, I confused you with BasilValentine. My apologies.

[drogulus]

The problem with MMT is that the first impression eventually consolidates into certainty.

    I don't do certainty, I do probability. If MMT doesn't work I have no use for it. I do use it a little but since I'm a buy and hold investor it's mostly just a more accurate preview of how the economy will behave. I'm immune to most of the inflation/recession panic my brethren in the invest-o-sphere are prone to.

[drogulus]

     Another one bites the dust.

     Gordon Sondland Admits He Told Ukraine Aid Was Tied to Biden Probe

     Isn't anyone willing to lie for Trump under oath any more? Where's the love? Where's the loyalty?

     Will no one stand up to defend Pompeo? How come no one has his back?