The Orange Dog That Didn’t Bark

 

One way or another, Trump’s DoJ did not raid Hillary.  And specifically, I mean that either he didn’t order the DoJ to turn her vodka cave upside-down, or the DoJ refused to do it because reasons.

Either Trump was a better, more moral President than Biden, or the mutiny and coup against Trump was real — or both.  But it cannot be the case that neither claim is true.

I know that I sound like a broken record at times, but Benghazi was a clarifying moment for me.  The Deep State is real. It amounts to at least a fourth branch of government, the investigation is the cover-up, and while many kooks are wrong, some of them are right.

Clinton’s e-mail server held a great many secrets which would be injurious to her, to Obama, and to the Democrat / Deep State project.  This is also why it existed in the first place — to avoid legally required monitoring and potential disclosure.  “Yoga,” my butt.

Hillary’s server was the nexus of a lot of bad stuff, because the people using it felt secure.  Fools.  One of my favorite targets for dumpster-diving that thing would have been the emails surrounding conversations between Hillary and folks like Petraeus, for whom I lost all regard.  I do think that the kerfuffle surrounding his affair was a lifeline to get him out of the line of questioning, the same way Susan Rice was moved under the Executive Privilege umbrella just in time.  Petraeus could still have answered questions related to his time in the previous office (and so could Rice), but for some reason, the excuse “no longer in office” was allowed to fly, and neither would return to testify when the heat was on.  Convenient, that.  And by heat, I mean the unanswered question, “who gave the order to stand down?”

Remember that the Benghazi debacle occurred shortly after Obama declared Mission Accomplished in the war on terror, and shortly before his re-election.  This is why Susan Rice peddled the absurd Nakoula Nakoula YouTube video story on five Sunday morning shows.  Bad America, you offended the Islamic Jihadis whom Obama, I assure you, soundly defeated  Nothing to see here — not a terror attack, nothing to do with the administration.  The incomprehensible action of absolutely nothing was our response.  The only way our response could possibly have been nothing is if there was immense pressure to suppress every instinct, trained response, and formal duty of various subordinate decision-makers and force commanders in the area.  It came from somewhere.

The ship has sailed on “Who gave the order?”, we will never get the answer, and Hillary cruised away from another disgusting episode, the key to which was that server.  Why do you think she had the server vaporized, and fought so hard to resist efforts to preserve, to obtain copies, to publicize the contents?  And why was she allowed to get away with it despite Republican control of the House?  Remember Darrell Issa?  Remember Trey Gowdy?  Great fiery speeches.  Bolshy Slovos.

Add to that the pay-for-play Clinton Global Initiative, the presence of obviously classified material, sometimes mutilated to remove classification markings, and the well-founded suspicion that John McCain’s own version of Charlie Wilson’s War running guns from Libya to Syria was represented on that server.  That server was the Hunter Biden laptop of the Clinton operation, and it slipped away.  Somehow.  Because reasons.

The server’s existence itself was a crime, it contained evidence of multiple crimes, and the clean-up was yet another crime.  Net result — no crime committed, no criminal intent, “no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges.”  You know the drill.  “Deny, deny, deny”, and when the “unimportant” and unaskable become old news and “already answered”, the thing is complete.

Slipped away because reasons, maybe, but via methods, and those methods have increasingly been brought to bear against the Republic itself.  Through the Benghazi cluster of very bad things, the Deep State both honed its tools and learned that it could get away with a lot more than it had thought.  This was not a case of the President knocking over countries and abandoning good — great — men to die in foreign hellholes.  This was something below the surface doing it regardless of the President’s intent.

Clinton was only in Washington DC for Obama to “keep his enemy closer”.  By putting her in the cabinet, he restricted her freedom of movement, except it only sorta worked out.  He reduced her threat to himself, and empowered her to lay waste to swathes of the government and the world at large.  he could lean on her, but she could also operate her cabinet-level department as she saw fit, and that’s exactly what happened.  The Clinton Crime Family Global Initiative rolled on, after all, with her faction increasingly competing not against Obama, but against the Biden Crime Family.  Even at the time, they fought for the number two spot regardless of title.  Russian Reset.  Burisma.  Rosemont Seneca Bohai and ten percent for the big guy.

I would say that for fans of Kremlinology, the US is now the most “Kremlinized” major power, followed by China and then Russia.  The DNC/DLC split has never actually been resolved, and during the Obama administration, it seems to me that Obama went with the third option — he weaponized the government itself as a partisan tool, and now he and his shadow government subsist entirely within the intel community and the inscrutable Byzantine bureaucracy.  ‘The One” has ascended into the machine.   The Biden camp and the Clinton camp are still competing for the number two spot.  They both have to in order to keep their permanent campaigns up so that any attempt to bring them to justice is met with media howls about the power of government being used for partisan purposes against a political rival.

And then we have Trump, against whom no number of impeachments, show trials, real FBI raids, Democrat pillaging of American cities,  or other Goldsteinization will ever suffice.  The two-minutes-hate will continue to be broadcast for 47 minutes of every hour, every day, and will not stop regardless of your eventual capitulation.  Comrade.

I suspect (and I almost never credit this throwaway laziness) that we do not have words adequate to convey the horror of what is happening.  I suspect the Russian language abounds in them.  And perhaps soon, Chinese.  Those people are waking up while we sleepwalk.

Oh, the Road Not Taken.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 40 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Conspiracies do exist, and people go to jail for conspiracy from time to time, to include RICO charges (broadly speaking).  Theorizing is a proto-scientific manner of combining hunches with observation.  Some things just ring true, and can lead otherwise intelligent people to their doom.  Yet… sometimes the outlandish is the correct answer.  Without drawing a tautology, there is room for Occam’s razor to still present two valid alternatives.  People can either accept the simplifying assumption that Trump really is all that bad, or they can accept the parallel simplifying assumption that Hillary Clinton really is all that bad.  Very likely, at least one of these is true.

    People very much like to make sense of the world, and have difficulty finding meaning in life without a sense of purpose, and the clearer, the better.  Simplifying assumptions are recruited to this cause, and can do real damage to a person’s logical faculties.  Another common simplifying assumption therefore is that everything can be known, or that things must make sense.  It can drive people to believe that which is either plainly not true, or for which there is no evidence — that person’s worldview simply needs this fact, and so it is believed.

    So I’m aware of the danger.  Just the same, very likely at least one of them is a horrible lawless person.  For my money, it’s Clinton.

    • #1
  2. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Never Trump of course does not care. They are silent or cheer it on.

     Since they can’t condemn this it proves that in fact they don’t believe in the rule of law that they don’t believe in principles and they don’t believe in norms.

     Either people who are never trump denounce this or I understand that in fact they are pro tyranny an anti-freedom an anti liberty.

    • #2
  3. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Never Trump of course does not care. They are silent or cheer it on.

    Since they can’t condemn this it proves that in fact they don’t believe in the rule of law that they don’t believe in principles and they don’t believe in norms.

    Either people who are never trump denounce this or I understand that in fact they are pro tyranny an anti-freedom an anti liberty.

    Bryan, I’m with you, really I am, but you don’t have to throw down the NT gauntlet demanding capitulation or else on every thread.  You’re a therapist — what you’re doing is both picking a fight and justifying your inevitable position as some mechanical response: “Now look what you made me do.”  Please picture this said in friendship, but in public because, well, here we are.

    Frankly, I don’t expect to hear much from the NT on this.  I think some of them are laying low, perhaps aghast but probably not, and may be re-thinking or at least inventing tactical tweaks to their highly nuanced positions.  Fine.  They’ll have their own threads.

    On your extended point, that Cheney ad somehow never mentioned the Obama cult’s destruction of the Republic as the “greatest threat” etc.  His (Cheney’s) job is to provide top cover to a system he is very comfortable with, and they had to deploy him — perhaps *due to and in preparation for* the Mar-a-Lago raid.  That’s certainly how I see it.

    • #3
  4. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    BDB: Trump was a better, more moral President than Biden

    I believe that to be true. And I do not say that as some sort of praise for Trump, but as an honest assessment of Biden.

    • #4
  5. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Notice:  Edited, added some paragraphs.

    • #5
  6. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Never Trump of course does not care. They are silent or cheer it on.

    Since they can’t condemn this it proves that in fact they don’t believe in the rule of law that they don’t believe in principles and they don’t believe in norms.

    Either people who are never trump denounce this or I understand that in fact they are pro tyranny an anti-freedom an anti liberty.

    Bryan, I’m with you, really I am, but you don’t have to throw down the NT gauntlet demanding capitulation or else on every thread. You’re a therapist — what you’re doing is both picking a fight and justifying your inevitable position as some mechanical response: “Now look what you made me do.” Please picture this said in friendship, but in public because, well, here we are.

    Frankly, I don’t expect to hear much from the NT on this. I think some of them are laying low, perhaps aghast but probably not, and may be re-thinking or at least inventing tactical tweaks to their highly nuanced positions. Fine. They’ll have their own threads.

    On your extended point, that Cheney ad somehow never mentioned the Obama cult’s destruction of the Republic as the “greatest threat” etc. His (Cheney’s) job is to provide top cover to a system he is very comfortable with, and they had to deploy him — perhaps *due t0 and in preparation for* the Mar-a-Lago raid. That’s certainly how I see it.

    This is my only comment on the FBI search warrant at Ricochet.

    I am holding my fire, and waiting to see what develops.  I bought the Russiagate conspiracy and later realized that I spoke too soon, and then walked it back.  I am waiting at least until I can see the Affidavit in support of the search warrant.  I don’t practice criminal law, but my recollection is that within a pretty short time, the person whose home was searched has the right to see the Affidavit in support of the search warrant.  When that happens, I hope that Trump will release all of it.  At that point, I hope that the lawyers at Ricochet can opine on it.

    In L.A. Confidential, there is a scene where the captain says, that it better to not talk to a man when his blood is up.  A lot of people who I respect and care for at Ricochet have their blood up right now.  There is nothing to be served by me getting into the fight when I have a lack of knowledge.

    I wish everyone well.  I want to know more information before speaking further.

    • #6
  7. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    [snipped]

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    This is my only comment on the FBI search warrant at Ricochet.

    I am holding my fire, and waiting to see what develops. I bought the Russiagate conspiracy and later realized that I spoke too soon, and later walked it back. I am waiting at least until I can see the Affidavit in support of the search warrant. I don’t practice criminal law, but my recollection is that within a pretty short time, the person whose home was searched has the right to see the Affidavit in support of the search warrant. When that happens, I hope that Trump will release all of it. At that point, I hope that the lawyers at Ricochet can opine on it.

    In L.A. Confidential, there is a scene where the captain says, that it better to not talk to a man when his blood is up. A lot of people who I respect and care for at Ricochet have their blood up right now. There is nothing to be served by me getting into the fight when I have a lack of knowledge.

    I wish everyone well. I want to know more information before speaking further.

    Fair enough.  Have a great day!

    • #7
  8. jzdro Member
    jzdro
    @jzdro

    BDB (View Comment):
    they had to deploy him — perhaps *due to and in preparation for* the Mar-a-Lago raid.  That’s certainly how I see it.

    Certainly. Out of the blue, there were his face and his assertion about the “greatest threat.” A few days later we saw what those were for: getting our minds right for what was soon to come, and for belief that the FBI is praiseworthy.  And you could uptake the essentials in a couple of small doses easily, even during vacation season. Professional!

    • #8
  9. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    BDB:

    I know that I sound like a broken record at times, but Benghazi was a clarifying moment for me.  The Deep State is real, it amounts to at least a fourth branch of government, the investigation is the cover-up, and while many kooks are wrong, some of them are right.

    My long-time acquaintance, Ray McGovern, a former CIA analyst who served during the Reagan Administration and delivered the Presidential daily intelligence briefings, warned about this Deep State behavior of the intelligence community at least a decade before Benghazi. Ray was a founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). Ray is knowledgeable on Russian history and US/Russia affairs and gave strong public warnings against the false Russia Hoax Trump charges and investigation. I personally put a lot of credence in his views knowing that he is liberal, religious, and has always been a staunch Democrat. I think the government intelligence function is the source of our biggest problems in the Deep State because of its ability to keep all things secret.

    • #9
  10. GFHandle Member
    GFHandle
    @GFHandle

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I wish everyone well.  I want to know more information before speaking further.

    Of course, the rest of your sentence got lost somehow “but on the face of it this looks pretty double-standardish and Dershowitz makes a telling point about normal procedures.”

    • #10
  11. OldPhil Coolidge
    OldPhil
    @OldPhil

    Hillary cruised away from another disgusting episode

    It’s happened a few times, hasn’t it?

    • #11
  12. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    BDB (View Comment):

    Conspiracies do exist, and people go to jail for conspiracy from time to time, to include RICO charges (broadly speaking). Theorizing is a proto-scientific manner of combining hunches with observation. Some things just ring true, and can lead otherwise intelligent people to their doom. Yet… sometimes the outlandish is the correct answer. Without drawing a tautology, there is room for Occam’s razor to still present two valid alternatives. People can either accept the simplifying assumption that Trump really is all that bad, or they can accept the parallel simplifying assumption that Hillary Clinton really is all that bad. Very likely, at least one of these is true.

    People very much like to make sense of the world, and have difficulty finding meaning in life without a sense of purpose, and the clearer, the better. Simplifying assumptions are recruited to this cause, and can do real damage to a person’s logical faculties. Another common simplifying assumption therefore is that everything can be known, or that things must make sense. It can drive people to believe that which is either plainly not true, or for which there is no evidence — that person’s worldview simply needs this fact, and so it is believed.

    So I’m aware of the danger. Just the same, very likely at least one of them is a horrible lawless person. For my money, it’s Clinton.

    This comment is worth saving, so thank you, I’ll do it.

    But this brings up something that I’ve been increasingly forced to contemplate.  Megalomania, delusional obsession and other forms of mental illness aside, and ignoring for the present suggestibility and externally guided thought — there are two extremes of decision-making.

    One is that everything is believed, or at least accepted as tentatively true until and unless it is disproven (as in “I’m not saying this is true, it’s just another data point”).  And the other is disbelieving everything until it’s “proven” to the person’s satisfaction (as in “but the methodology is bad; let’s see the quote; he has no credentials”).

    So you end up with one person who is believing a lot of things, but admitting inadequacies or proof of logic (sort of very strong hunches that serve as operating hypotheses) and another person who believes nearly nothing except what what makes it past his exclusionary rational framework.

    So the first tends to accept the possibility of wild conspiracies existing, allowing place for the unknown to be true — and the second tends to discount conspiracies because they’re not immediately tangible and provable, and substitute the unknown with the known and the commonplace.

    • #12
  13. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    BDB (View Comment):
    Frankly, I don’t expect to hear much from the NT on this.  I think some of them are laying low, perhaps aghast but probably not, and may be re-thinking or at least inventing tactical tweaks to their highly nuanced positions.  Fine.  They’ll have their own threads.

    I really can’t see any NTer not fitting this into his world view as “This just proves that what I’ve been saying about Trump’s criminality it true, and he’s finally getting what’s coming to him.  [redacted]”

    • #13
  14. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    BDB:

    One way or another, Trump’s DoJ did not raid Hillary. And specifically, I mean that either he didn’t order the DoJ to turn her vodka cave upside-down, or the DoJ refused to do it because reasons.

    Either Trump was a better, more moral President than Biden, or the mutiny and coup against Trump was real — or both. But it cannot be the case that neither claim is true.

    I thought it was pretty clear that Trump said publicly that he would not prosecute Hillary Clinton.  It is one of the few broken campaign promises he committed that mostly goes overlooked by Trump fans.

    • #14
  15. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Flicker (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Frankly, I don’t expect to hear much from the NT on this. I think some of them are laying low, perhaps aghast but probably not, and may be re-thinking or at least inventing tactical tweaks to their highly nuanced positions. Fine. They’ll have their own threads.

    I really can’t see any NTer not fitting this into his world view as “This just proves that what I’ve been saying about Trump’s criminality it true, and he’s finally getting what’s coming to him. Maybe he’ll be shot trying to escape and put an end to this once and for all”.

    For four years the forces that want  Trump to be charged with crimes had control of all the resources to go after evidence. We know some things were manufactured.  For an even longer period there has been opportunity, including when Republicans had the power, to go after Clinton. Nothing. 

    • #15
  16. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Frankly, I don’t expect to hear much from the NT on this. I think some of them are laying low, perhaps aghast but probably not, and may be re-thinking or at least inventing tactical tweaks to their highly nuanced positions. Fine. They’ll have their own threads.

    I really can’t see any NTer not fitting this into his world view as “This just proves that what I’ve been saying about Trump’s criminality it true, and he’s finally getting what’s coming to him. Maybe he’ll be shot trying to escape and put an end to this once and for all”.

    For four years the forces that want Trump to be charged with crimes had control of all the resources to go after evidence. We know some things were manufactured. For an even longer period there has been opportunity, including when Republicans had the power, to go after Clinton. Nothing.

    Well, that sounds pretty — either irrational,  hypocritical or corrupt.  I was thinking more along the lines of how a dyed-in-the-wool NTer would see this.

    • #16
  17. TempTime Member
    TempTime
    @TempTime

    BDB: I know that I sound like a broken record at times, but Benghazi was a clarifying moment for me. 

    Myself as well.  Thanks for a great post.

    • #17
  18. Dotorimuk Coolidge
    Dotorimuk
    @Dotorimuk

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Hillary cruised away from another disgusting episode

    It’s happened a few times, hasn’t it?

    Yeah, what WERE the Clinton’s doing on Epstein’s plane? 

    • #18
  19. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Frankly, I don’t expect to hear much from the NT on this. I think some of them are laying low, perhaps aghast but probably not, and may be re-thinking or at least inventing tactical tweaks to their highly nuanced positions. Fine. They’ll have their own threads.

    I really can’t see any NTer not fitting this into his world view as “This just proves that what I’ve been saying about Trump’s criminality it true, and he’s finally getting what’s coming to him. Maybe he’ll be shot trying to escape and put an end to this once and for all”.

    For four years the forces that want Trump to be charged with crimes had control of all the resources to go after evidence. We know some things were manufactured. For an even longer period there has been opportunity, including when Republicans had the power, to go after Clinton. Nothing.

    Well, that sounds pretty — either irrational, hypocritical or corrupt. I was thinking more along the lines of how a dyed-in-the-wool NTer would see this.

    I don’t know about NTer’s but what I have seen is various investigative moves against Trump over these years with no evidence or probable cause ever presented, so investigations for nothing.

    Then over the years, numerous acts by Clinton that should warrant a look to see if there was something substantive but never even a serious investigation.

    I think it is basically a reflection of the political establishment viewpoint and that NTer’s like that. We saw this during Trump’s term, in the J6 inquiry, and now in the FBI search of his home. Nobody looks at anything related to the Clintons and nobody who is supposedly political opposition says anything. I never hear anything from the Bushes unless it’s some mild criticism of a Trump action. Of course, Liz Cheney and her shadow on the J6 committee have actually gone overboard, but it is still the same story, no evidence of whatever they are looking for.

    I think NTer’s fit the pattern.

    • #19
  20. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    I really can’t see any NTer not fitting this into his world view as “This just proves that what I’ve been saying about Trump’s criminality it true, and he’s finally getting what’s coming to him. Maybe he’ll be shot trying to escape and put an end to this once and for all”.

    For four years the forces that want Trump to be charged with crimes had control of all the resources to go after evidence. We know some things were manufactured. For an even longer period there has been opportunity, including when Republicans had the power, to go after Clinton. Nothing.

    Well, that sounds pretty — either irrational, hypocritical or corrupt. I was thinking more along the lines of how a dyed-in-the-wool NTer would see this.

    I don’t know about NTer’s but what I have seen is various investigative moves against Trump over these years with no evidence or probable cause ever presented, so investigations for nothing.

    Then over the years, numerous acts by Clinton that should warrant a look to see if there was something substantive but never even a serious investigation.

    I think it is basically a reflection of the political establishment viewpoint and that NTer’s like that. We saw this during Trump’s term, in the J6 inquiry, and now in the FBI search of his home. Nobody looks at anything related to the Clintons and nobody who is supposedly political opposition says anything. I never here anything from the Bushes unless it’s some mild criticism of a Trump action. Of course, Liz Cheney and her shadow on the J6 committee have actually gone overboard, but it is still the same story, no evidence of whatever they are looking for.

    I think NTer’s fit the pattern.

    I don’t think we disagree.  You seem to be looking at the professional anti-Trumpers (the CIA, FBI, DNC, Press, etc.) and the process, and perhaps the failure, and I’m looking at NTers wondering at how they make their emotional stance mesh with their need to have an ostensible reason as to why Mar a Lago (MAL) was raided, and how they are processing this.

    If you absolutely know that Trump is a criminal and personally is the greatest threat to the republic ever, then anything no matter how otherwise illegal or unprecedented is justified.  Judging by what I’ve seen from Tik Tok, there are NTers who absolutely want to have Trump, um, no more.  So no law enforcement misbehavior is unjustified.

    In my big picture, I still don’t have a settled reason for the barbed wire around the Capitol, the second impeachment, the Jan 6th TV propaganda show, and now this attempt to find (or plant) something incriminating at MAL.

    The professionals have a logical reason (either convenience or fear), I’m more interested in the NTers emotional reasoning.

    • #20
  21. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Flicker (View Comment):

    The professionals have a logical reason (either convenience or fear), I’m more interested in the NTers emotional reasoning.

    Let’s go with Liz Cheney and her dad then.

    She has no evidence from the committee hearings else we would see it. Yet she sees something in Trump’s personal behavior that impels her to the conclusion that he is a dire threat to the Republic. Republicans don’t usually refer to our Democracy. I would have to think that these NTer’s sense some other right-wing extremist component as being the mechanism with which Trump’s threat to the Republic could be carried out. I think most Trump supporters don’t see anything even remotely in that category as being realistic.. Every Trump supporter I have encountered would put a quick stop on anything like that. I just don’t see it.

    I mean, the anomaly is right there in your expression I have bolded.

    • #21
  22. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    The professionals have a logical reason (either convenience or fear), I’m more interested in the NTers emotional reasoning.

    Let’s go with Liz Cheney and her dad then.

    She has no evidence from the committee hearings else we would see it. Yet she sees something in Trump’s personal behavior that impels her to the conclusion that he is a dire threat to the Republic. Republicans don’t usually refer to our Democracy. I would have to think that these NTer’s sense some other right-wing extremist component as being the mechanism with which Trump’s threat to the Republic could be carried out. I think most Trump supporters don’t see anything even remotely in that category as being realistic.. Every Trump supporter I have encountered would put a quick stop on anything like that. I just don’t see it.

    I mean, the anomaly is right there in your expression I have bolded.

    But she’s a paid professional politician.  I can’t automatically believe anything she says.  And in this case I don’t believe her any more than her father in this.

    • #22
  23. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    The professionals have a logical reason (either convenience or fear), I’m more interested in the NTers emotional reasoning.

    Let’s go with Liz Cheney and her dad then.

    She has no evidence from the committee hearings else we would see it. Yet she sees something in Trump’s personal behavior that impels her to the conclusion that he is a dire threat to the Republic. Republicans don’t usually refer to our Democracy. I would have to think that these NTer’s sense some other right-wing extremist component as being the mechanism with which Trump’s threat to the Republic could be carried out. I think most Trump supporters don’t see anything even remotely in that category as being realistic.. Every Trump supporter I have encountered would put a quick stop on anything like that. I just don’t see it.

    I mean, the anomaly is right there in your expression I have bolded.

    Continuing with Liz Cheney and her dad:

    What in his behavior or expressed ideological points do they consider the factor that would lead to the nation’s destruction? I haven’t heard anything other than what he thought about the election results and Trump didn’t get very far with that. He gets support from the people when he exposes the truth. That is a danger to almost all of our federal level politicians.

    • #23
  24. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    The professionals have a logical reason (either convenience or fear), I’m more interested in the NTers emotional reasoning.

    Let’s go with Liz Cheney and her dad then.

    She has no evidence from the committee hearings else we would see it. Yet she sees something in Trump’s personal behavior that impels her to the conclusion that he is a dire threat to the Republic. Republicans don’t usually refer to our Democracy. I would have to think that these NTer’s sense some other right-wing extremist component as being the mechanism with which Trump’s threat to the Republic could be carried out. I think most Trump supporters don’t see anything even remotely in that category as being realistic.. Every Trump supporter I have encountered would put a quick stop on anything like that. I just don’t see it.

    I mean, the anomaly is right there in your expression I have bolded.

    But she’s a paid professional politician. I can’t automatically believe anything she says. And in this case I don’t believe her any more than her father in this.

    Yeah, maybe she and her dad think paid professional politicians constitute the Republic and they might get destroyed.

    • #24
  25. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    @flicker

    I have reached this conclusion. Professional paid politicians thrive whenever they can operate deceptively and cover that up. This works better when there are allies who can help. The politicians have several allies for this among them the administrative bureaucracy, the public media, the intelligence community, the academic establishment, and big business, especially big tech. Each of these groups also thrives through this multi-member partnership, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. They are not all equal and not all members of any of the groups described are on board for the alliance.

    So we have this combination and it operates as a soft fascism. This must be what they are worried about being destroyed.

     

    Trump threatens this. Each of the alliance components gets threatened in a different manner. Even though the members in each group that are not on board with the alliance of deception and coverup is small in comparative numbers, the fact that they choose to do the right thing gives them unusual strength and creates fear and uncertainty in the alliance.

    The Intelligence Community is very strong when the alliance is getting its way because of its ability to lie and cover up all things where it has a dominant role.

    • #25
  26. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    @ flicker

    I have reached this conclusion. Professional paid politicians thrive whenever they can operate deceptively and cover that up. This works better when there are allies who can help. The politicians have several allies for this among them the administrative bureaucracy, the public media, the intelligence community, the academic establishment, and big business, especially big tech. Each of these groups also thrives through this multi-member partnership, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. They are not all equal and not all members of any of the groups described are on board for the alliance.

    So we have this combination and it operates as a soft fascism. This must be what they are worried about being destroyed.

     

    Trump threatens this. Each of the alliance components gets threatened in a different manner. Even though the members in each group that are not on board with the alliance of deception and coverup is small in comparative numbers, the fact that they choose to do the right thing gives them unusual strength and creates fear and uncertainty in the alliance.

    The Intelligence Community is very strong when the alliance is getting its way because of its ability to lie and cover up all things where it has a dominant role.

    I think it’s because Trump’s a nationalist.

     

    • #26
  27. Timothy Landon Member
    Timothy Landon
    @TimothyLandon

    BDB – thank you for reminding us of Benghazi. The Obama administration’s attempt to say it was spontaneous was truly nuts.  That same group gave us the debacle of the Afghanistan withdrawal.  I guess we shouldn’t have been surprised.

    The actions of the FBI, the DOJ, and the Judiciary this week are really flabbergasting. 

    How didn’t someone, anyone, pump the brakes?  It’s absurd.  Why couldn’t the presidents lawyers and the government’s lawyers just work out the review and return of documents?  It’s truly absurd.

     

    • #27
  28. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Timothy Landon (View Comment):

    BDB – thank you for reminding us of Benghazi. The Obama administration’s attempt to say it was spontaneous was truly nuts. That same group gave us the debacle of the Afghanistan withdrawal. I guess we shouldn’t have been surprised.

    The actions of the FBI, the DOJ, and the Judiciary this week are really flabbergasting.

    How didn’t someone, anyone, pump the brakes? It’s absurd. Why couldn’t the presidents lawyers and the government’s lawyers just work out the review and return of documents? It’s truly absurd.

     

    The Powers That Be didn’t need the situation resolved. They needed a pretext to raid Mar A Lago.

    • #28
  29. Timothy Landon Member
    Timothy Landon
    @TimothyLandon

    Percival (View Comment):

    Timothy Landon (View Comment):

    BDB – thank you for reminding us of Benghazi. The Obama administration’s attempt to say it was spontaneous was truly nuts. That same group gave us the debacle of the Afghanistan withdrawal. I guess we shouldn’t have been surprised.

    The actions of the FBI, the DOJ, and the Judiciary this week are really flabbergasting.

    How didn’t someone, anyone, pump the brakes? It’s absurd. Why couldn’t the presidents lawyers and the government’s lawyers just work out the review and return of documents? It’s truly absurd.

     

    The Powers That Be didn’t need the situation resolved. They needed a pretext to raid Mar A Lago.

    First Afghanistan, then transitory inflation, then an FBI raid of a former president eligible for a second term.

    I’ve never voted for Trump in a general election.  But if I was polled today, I’d pull the lever for him.  He’s not as incompetent as Biden.

    • #29
  30. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Timothy Landon (View Comment):

    BDB – thank you for reminding us of Benghazi. The Obama administration’s attempt to say it was spontaneous was truly nuts. That same group gave us the debacle of the Afghanistan withdrawal. I guess we shouldn’t have been surprised.

    The actions of the FBI, the DOJ, and the Judiciary this week are really flabbergasting.

    How didn’t someone, anyone, pump the brakes? It’s absurd. Why couldn’t the presidents lawyers and the government’s lawyers just work out the review and return of documents? It’s truly absurd.

     

    They have been working together.

    The above timeline highlights just some of former president Donald Trump's battles with the National Archives since leaving office, including an unrelated court fight with the January 6 committee

    The above timeline highlights just some of former president Donald Trump’s battles with the National Archives since leaving office, including an unrelated court fight with the January 6 committee

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.