William,

Is there a purpose to this?

I don't use Twitter much. I look at President Trump's tweets regularly. Sometimes I look at the feed, but not all that much. Besides, their algorithms tend to make a hash out of the feed. If they provided the latest tweets from those I follow, I would use it more. But there's a lot they leave out and they mix up the times. 

In fact, I consider looking at the normal Twitter feed like political water cooler gossip. Something to look at (among many things) when I feel bored.

When I embed a tweet from anyone but the President, I generally get the link from an article I am reading elsewhere, not even from Twitter itself.

I do like President Trump's tweets, though. I try to stay on top of those. Especially since they piss off the establishment ruling class and toady press.  

So, once again, is there a purpose to making a thing of my personal Twitter account settings?

You may not believe this, but I regularly visit several places on the Internet during the day.

Michael

President Trump had a relatively quiet day, with a ten-minute DC radio interview, and some alarming tweets. In the audio, he is frustrated that he has to keep away from the Justice Department, according to advisors. But that didn't stop him from asking "Where is our Justice Department?"

On 10/30/2017 at 7:28 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I look at President Trump's tweets regularly.

Tonight was fun ... 

Full audio of today's presidential interview below. I'll also excerpt out the remarks about the Justice Department later once I learn how to rip from Audioboom.

BONUS!

'But you know the saddest thing, because I'm the president of the United States I am not supposed to be involved with the Justice Department. I am not supposed to be involved with the FBI,' he explained. 'I'm not supposed to be doing the kinds of things I would love to be doing and I'm very frustrated by it.'

Here's the short bit of Trump responding to Larry O'Connor's point that his radio call-ins number one demand is for the Justice Department to really, truly. honestly investigate Hillary Clinton. Not angry, frustrated. Mr Trump.

On 10/30/2017 at 7:28 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I don't use Twitter much. I look at President Trump's tweets regularly.

What did you think of these three retweets appearing on the President's timeline?

Trump is using his tweeting to lightning rod attract a continual media firestorm while his cabinet does his bidding relatively unmolested by the sorry excuse of what some still call "journalism." He is playing the media establishment for fools. 

--Brant

22 hours ago, william.scherk said:

What did you think of these three retweets appearing on the President's timeline?

William,

Persuasion technique. A wickedly effective one. We can call it engineered cognitive dissonance, but it's so much more. (Notice the effectiveness as the whole world and world leaders are suddenly talking about Muslim immigrant violence.   )

I'm going to write about this in another thread and include other examples (like the race riots a few years ago), so this goes beyond President Trump. He does it well, but so do others.

I'll come back here and put the link in this post.

Right now, of all things, I have to go to the friggin' dentist in an hour or so and probably get a root canal or extraction. If I don't do the post immediately, that will be the reason. But this topic interests me a lot, so I definitely will get to it as soon as the pain stage passes. Maybe even before, who knows?...

Michael

3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Notice the effectiveness as the whole world and world leaders are suddenly talking about Muslim immigrant violence.

I wonder why the President picked this account to retweet. I am not noting its effectiveness, except that it caused another rift between Trump and the UK Prime Minister. Why would you want an ally pissed off at you? (which sets aside the bullshittery of at least one of the videos).

Another interesting/puzzling tweet yesterday was this:

Another bit of bullshittery?

PM May is no ally. She is a member of the cabal and will be rounded up soon in a UK re-enactment of the Saudi Purge.

Joe is a rapist murderer.

On 11/30/2017 at 9:27 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Right now, of all things, I have to go to the friggin' dentist in an hour or so and probably get a root canal or extraction. If I don't do the post immediately, that will be the reason. But this topic interests me a lot, so I definitely will get to it as soon as the pain stage passes. Maybe even before, who knows?...

For the record, I'm going to do an oral surgery extraction in a few days as this is more complicated than a simple tooth-pull. Gotta let antibiotics clear out an infection first and I'm on heavy dose ibuprofen when needed until then.

(This is not relevant to the thread, but since I mentioned it, I'm giving an update for those who want to send good vibes my way.  )

As to my views on Flynn, see here.

Michael 

If they use a general anaesthesia on you take vitamin C 4 times a day* until the pull date and for several days after to vitiate the chance of heart attack or stroke, mini or major.

--Brant

*take it anyway (and make sure your blood pressure is under control)

22 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I'm giving an update for those who want to send good vibes my way.

I had major dental surgery in August, under anesthesia. Take it easy when you get home, healing is usually past the point of complications within a week. I hope you heal up as fast and completely as I did. Refuse any opiates or opioids ...

Quote

As to my views on Flynn, see here.

I think your comments could be summed up as not too interested in speculation rampant in the Fey Canoes/Hoopla sector. Those writers who are paid to opine or analyze, rather than report, have certainly found something to make the gerbil wheel go round, IMO ... 

22 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

A last blaze of glory for the fake news media on Flynn:

NYT - Michael Flynn Pleads Guilty to Lying to the F.B.I. and Will Cooperate With Russia Inquiry

USA Today - Five reasons Michael Flynn's guilty plea is such a big deal

ABC News - ANALYSIS: Michael Flynn's guilty plea opens more doors than it closes

The Atlantic - If Flynn Is Small Fry, Who’s the Bigger Fish in Mueller’s Net?

WaPo - Michael Flynn pleads guilty to lying to the FBI on contacts with Russian ambassador

I should add in the important points made in a subsequent commentary:

20 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

All the fake news media is doing with this string of Flynn puff pieces is to buy some time to take a breath and that's about all. [ ... ] These stories are not going anywhere. [...]

The Flynn fizzle will pass, though, except for, maybe, on Rachel Maddow's show. 

He Who Is President took to Twitter an hour ago, so that we have no doubt what he thinks is the truth:

Which leaves the question (for me), why?  Why did Flynn lie to the FBI in the first place? Why did Flynn lie to Pence? 

If Michael is right, there is nothing more of great import  to come from Mueller's inquiry ... nothing, that is, that will incriminate anybody currently working in the White House. The Flynn plea agreement closes out the season on 'bombshells.'

Guess who wants some justice for the loser of the last presidential election?  Guess who is griping about Michael's Flynn's lies catching up with him?

Lock her up!

Michael

The Daily Caller's Chuck Ross is one of several reporter-analysts delving into the fresh scandal surrounding an FBI agent Peter Strzok, who was apparently in charge of politically-sensitive investigations (according to original reporting from the New York Times) ... FBI Agent Who Supervised Trump-Russia Probe Reportedly Sent Anti-Trump Text Messages. See also Red State's Trump’s Tweets On Clinton Sympathizing FBI Officials Only Scratches The Surface Of The Problem.

But before we get to the Top Twitterer himself on this issue, some leftover controversy from yesterday. President Trump's account tweeted this:

-- immediately, a scrum of hoopla-meisters seized upon this sentence: "I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI."  The problem with the tweet was that at the time of the Flynn firing, the President said he had no knowledge of the lies to the FBI. The sole reason given publicly was that Flynn had lied to Pence about his Russian sanctions discussions with the then Russian ambassador.

So, is this an admission by Trump that his staff did instruct him of Sally Yates's warning that Flynn had lied?

Apparently not.  The President's personal lawyer John Down stepped in to curb the hoopla, speaking to ABC News:

President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, John Dowd, says he drafted the president's Saturday morning tweet that stated he fired former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn for lying not only to Vice President Mike Pence but also to the FBI.

Dowd told ABC News he wrote those words and had done so in a "sloppy" manner. A second source familiar with the matter corroborated his account.

The unusual clarification by Dowd -- revealing that someone other than Trump himself had authored a tweet from his official account -- could also be an attempt to tamp down on potential legal exposure from the message.

Alright, so John Dowd is an idiot, or fall-guy.  What else is on the President's Twitter account since that sloppily-written tweet?

In order, beginning several hours ago:

Two retweets:

Back to the Prez:

5 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Alright, so John Dowd is an idiot, or fall-guy.  

This might need further explaining.

The idiocy is in making the "mistake" or "error" Dowd admits having made in the first place (speaking for the President/suggesting the President fired Flynn for lying to the FBI as well as Mike Pence [transition head]) -- but what also strikes stupid is opening up the question of Which Trump Tweets are Actually Trump Tweets? Dowd's error/sword-fall  unveils the unbeknownst-to-everybody 'sometimes a lawyer writes DJT's tweets' detail. 

Remember when Sean Spicer told us that these tweets were official presidential statements?

Even such Trump-sympathetic reporters as Salena Zito say the Dowd admission/error leaves unanswered questions about the dang communications made on the platform via @realDonaldTrump ...

She has a nice way of putting it. However, the nasty Deaps Fey Tait Canoes tribe are not so kind:

[added:]

“ANTI-TRUMP FBI AGENT LED CLINTON EMAIL PROBE”

On 12/3/2017 at 10:29 AM, william.scherk said:

The Daily Caller's Chuck Ross is one of several reporter-analysts delving into the fresh scandal surrounding an FBI agent Peter Strzok, who was apparently in charge of politically-sensitive investigations (according to original reporting from the New York Times) ... FBI Agent Who Supervised Trump-Russia Probe Reportedly Sent Anti-Trump Text Messages. See also Red State's Trump’s Tweets On Clinton Sympathizing FBI Officials Only Scratches The Surface Of The Problem.

This is a very promising line of attack/defense for those who seek to undermine the Mueller investigation. Peter Strzok was apparently an FBI investigator in charge of the (Comey-led) inquiry into Hillary Clinton's email scandal.  He is likely the person who played a large part in the process of softening the language Comey used in his public comments -- changing the wording from  'grossly negligent' to 'extremely careless.'  He is also said to have been the/an investigator interviewing Michael Flynn ...

Follow Chuck Ross on Twitter (@ChuckRossDC) and catch up with his reporting at Daily Caller.

Here's his latest on questions needing to be put to Mueller: 6 Questions That Mueller Should Answer About The Anti-Trump Russia Investigator

-- as the President said:

The biggest Twitter-based news since I last reported is all about "inappropriately gathered emails." Most of you following hoopla** on the national stage have probably already heard or read some of the details. 

Whose emails, how many, what for?  

First, a Chuck Ross retweet:

And another Ross tweet:

Whose emails, how many, what for?  

-- background:

General Services Administation, the US government entity that provides equipment, office space and secure communications, including email accounts under ptt.gov = GSA; Trump For America = TFA, a private entity responsible for the presidential transition; Presidential Transition Team = PTT, referring to the same entity.

It looks like the FBI requested emails by letter to the GSA, asking for the communications of a dozen PTT officials responsible for national security. The GSA provided all materials requested. The lawyers for the PTT/TFA now suggest that the emails were inappropriately/unlawfully provided, that the emails included privileged communications. 

What could possibly come out of these emails? Well, if the Special Counsel was in possession of communication inside the Trump transition, it would have been able to compare the information in the emails to the public statements and also testimony of senior administration/transition officials.

In which case, there is a chance that senior staff might be caught in a lie or lies.  Beyond that, speculation abounds. 

___________________________________________

** Snatched from the jaws of Google:

I think this might be  a new usage -- Hate Media, or rather Fake News Hate Shows. I like the ring of it. From the US president twelve hours ago:

Meanwhile, commentary on one of President Trump's little-understood accomplishments. 

Warmest Holiday Wishes to all my OL pals past and present!

Who doesn't enjoy a festival of hoopla -- especially when it is over some relatively non-newsworthy 'best words' uttered in haste? President "I didn't say it" totally stable genius was busy dealing with affairs of state, posting after his bedtime last night: 

A special one-time donation of 20 Canadian dollars to the OL fund if anyone can point out the errors in the above tweet. Among the wild claims made about the cancellation of a state visit to the UK is the notion that the President did not want to unduly stress the security services in London -- since it was expected that massive demonstrations of love would accompany such a visit. Who knows what really motivated the cancellation?

Up and at this morning, the President reacted to the full-blown media histrionics that followed reports he had used some 'salty language' during a discussion of immigration matters yesterday. 

President Best Words's words are unequivocal -- "this was not the language used." The language used by him was not the language used. Clear? Clearly.

A couple of hours later, still presumably on Executive Time**, President Pussy-Grab further clarified ...

This almost sounds like President Trump denies having said the phrases attributed to him. 

Rumour has it that the White House has signalled that the President was only quibbling with reports that he remarked "take them out" in reference to Haitians currently in the United States under temporary protected status. When given a chance to respond, the President was both brave and true.

pic.twitter.com/IM8d5JRNBR

— Broderick Greer (@BroderickGreer) January 12, 2018

_______________________________________________

** the phrase Executive Time is taken from a White House information posting about the President's daily schedule.

A tale of two tweets.  White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders versus Wall Street Journal. It concerns a tiny phoneme that makes all the difference between Trump 2013's "I do have a relationship with [Putin]" and Trump the True Hyperbole person's "Putin is a nicer person than I am” and the President's "I have nothing to do with Russia."  

Just kidding. It concerns forty milliseconds of sound recorded during a lengthy WSJ sitdown with President Trump last Thursday morning -- or rather it concerns a two-character transcription "error" of same ... 

And ...

And ...

Now, to my mind, the politically-corrected phrase "I [would] probably have a very good relationship with Kim Jong Un of North Korea" is just as bizarre and revealing as the 'error.'  I would probably have a very good relationship with Satan. Who wouldn't?

Further to the teeny phoneme, a non-Trump guy slows down the audio excerpt ...

I think that the chattering classes and the anti-Trump haters and doubters and critics should give the benefit of the doubt to the White House and President Trump on this.  It seems a picayune matter (luckily, the titanic hoopla is confined to Twitter, mostly -- CNN has drifted back to its baseline of pinball alley flashing pinball chyrons, noise and Democratic advocacy -- after two straight days of 50 paid hacks screaming at each other ... ).

Here is the phrase with some context:

**Here is an example of how a real/unreal controversy becomes a Mount St Helens of pyroclastic flow, smoke, noise, screaming and general huffing and puffing on CNN:

9 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

Further to the teeny phoneme, a non-Trump guy slows down the audio excerpt ...

[...]

(edited:)  I'm seeing the claim is he said "I'd" instead of "I".  It sounds like "I'd" to me, after giving it a more critical listen.  Not sure that it's "fake news" though?

On 12/1/2017 at 1:20 PM, Jon Letendre said:

PM May is no ally. She is a member of the cabal and will be rounded up soon in a UK re-enactment of the Saudi Purge.

Define: soon

Be that as it May, I didn't know where else to put this. It's a tweet from Rick Wilson. Yes, that Rick Wilson, an anti-Trumper from the get-go, and a guy with a  Florida Man wild wit. Too bad he is on the wrong side of the law, so to speak. Probably bound for Gitmo, soon.

Objectivist Living [unaffiliated] on Twitter. Test. 

I'd like to reduce the gargantuan width, and also find out if it stresses any browsers to load the iframe (iframe is an internal window to another site's code. In this case, Twitter does all the code, and I have to figure out how to make it a lighter load. Then I can figure out where a permanent feed on the forum makes the most sense. In the meantime, we follow 49 people and have THREE followers. I have no idea how two of them even saw our tweets or our account. That is one of the mysteries when you send "talk to the whole world." When everyone and their dog is talking on the same platform, how do you get heard?

Anyway, this message will self-destruct after it is reformatted and moved to its long-term place. I will in that thread also keep pinned an appeal for Team Members. Twitter allows more than one person to use an account. Lots of embeddable widgets and hook-ups to explore.

Then we will see if some angry and belligerent or critical voices show up, and we face the the decision: drive further crazy so that they block us, mute, block, block and sub-tweet the hell out of the ABCV ...

 A side issue and only momentarily interesting -- but have a look at how many "impressions" a tweet can get. I have about a thousand and a half followers. @OLiving2018 has but three at the moment. Still, "eyes" on the short messages were fixed even on our new feed. 
 

-- point being that a lot of interested people (in the subcultures) could be reached via the Twitter account. I hope I get a vote of confidence.  But in the meantime, back to the lab.