Sessions, leaks, security, Manafort and 'false news.'

Six fun (sad/awful/false/infuriating) stories emerged from the swamp in the last couple of days. Peter Taylor noted elsewhere on the site some vows made by Attorney-General Jeff Sessions on the issue of "leaks."  Some of the usual suspects have pretended that this is a "Threat" against the noble profession of prostitution journalism.

The strongest or least-false coverage of this issue from that point of view may be from font of evul Politico ... in a story called Jeff Sessions' Attack on the Media Is Worse Than You Think.  Of course, Objectivist analysis might find that the threat is more than necessary, and that it will encourage a proper "chilling effect." Less clear is the notion of "Lie Detectors" (in the White House). Polygraphs are a useful investigative tool, but not accepted by US courts on the whole. 

Less intrusive than a lie detector is the power to subpoena ... but see the story for all the convolutions. (one stand-out point was that it is relatively rare for journalist-itutes to be prosecuted or held in contempt for refusing to reveal sources [think Judith Miller]; the Politico story points out that the four arrested cited-but-not-cited by Sessions were not recipients but those who had purloined secret and often highly-classified 'spy' entrails from the DC borg.)


The second story circulating is that Robert Mueller has impaneled a grand jury in Washington, DC.  This may or may not be true -- even though everyone and the dog has been biting on the "news." I do not know if this would become public in the normal course of justice.

The third story is that President Trump is a lazy do-nothing, who spends far too much time at his golf clubs ... instantiated in a nasty Newsweek cover.

The fourth story is related to the Mueller grand jury suggestion ... this excerpt is from the brief Slate article "U.S. Reportedly Intercepted Suspected Russian Agents' Chatter That Manafort Asked for Their Help With Clinton:


Buried in a long story on CNN Thursday recapping the current state of play in the Russia investigation was a reminder that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who is largely out of the spotlight at the moment, may not be for long. Manafort, who had spent years on the political fringes helping dictators and strongmen get elected around the world and then lobbying on their behalf in Washington, came out of nowhere to join the Trump campaign, and then take over the reins when Cory Lewandowski was fired in June 2016. By that time, unusual communications between the Trump campaign and Russian officials had pinged on U.S. intelligence agencies’ radar. As did Trump’s new right hand man.

In the summer of 2016, US intelligence agencies noticed a spate of curious contacts between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian intelligence, according to current and former US officials briefed on the investigation… CNN has learned that investigators became more suspicious when they turned up intercepted communications that U.S. intelligence agencies collected among suspected Russian operatives discussing their efforts to work with Manafort, who served as campaign chairman for three months, to coordinate information that could damage Hillary Clinton's election prospects, the US officials say. The suspected operatives relayed what they claimed were conversations with Manafort, encouraging help from the Russians.

There are obviously multiple investigative balls in the air, and the public focus has shifted of late to Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner, who certainly have had longer and more lasting influence on Donald Trump, but keep an eye on Paul Manafort, his Russia connections are deep and dodgy.

Update, Aug. 4, 2017: Jason Maloni, a spokesman for Manafort, issued this statement on the latest round of accusations: “Paul Manafort did not collude with the Russian government to undermine the 2016 election or to hack the DNC. Other than that comment, we aren't going to respond to anonymous officials illegally peddling second hand conspiracy theories.  But the Justice Department, and the courts if necessary, should hold someone to account for the flood of unlawful government leaks targeting Mr. Manafort."

Manafort was the first somewhat hinky part of the Trump campaign and influence apparat to appear in posts here on OL, back a year and more ago.  It's not surprising that Mueller would request documents and testimony from the Manafort axis.  It isn't that he was a tool of Russia or an obvious go-between, but that he could have been a major conduit for the wink-wink quid pro quo that the crazy Russia conspiracists are certain is going to be found.

Did Mr Manafort wink-nudge the Trump attitude that 'we take help from where it comes, given that politics  is a dirty dirty game'? I mean, isn't the essential question reduced to who promised what in return?  

I take the tentative position that Trump's stated positions on Russia during the campaign and since being in office are obvious. So it will be exceedingly hard to show him 'promising' things on the down low, since he did it on the stump. Then, if he was inclined to reduce sanctions bite on Russia and to warm things up between the superpower and the also-ran, it was open and public.  Which requires that underlings and satellites were going to be the ones dealing with the details of wink-wink, nudge-nudge. If you are a Menshist, or not.

(the more hysterical of the Russia hoopla employees and hobbyists are those who think every rumour is true, every leak informs the big picture. So the Flynn Effect [very pro-Russia relax] and other fizz from the week means Russian "information warfare" was coordinated. Which is alarmist nonsense, right?)


The fifth story is about vacation-time, but in this instance taken by the manly President of Russia. Here's a sample:


The sixth story is as usual performed by two casts, in two theatres. In the permutations, a Cernovich wing in the White House leaks out a broad range of accusations against Trump's National Security Adviser Lt. General HR McMaster -- that he is a tool of Soros/Rothschilds/Saudis, an enemy of Israel, and ever-so Swamp-Like that his hideous influence must be extirpated from Cabinet.

Two guys come shambling up the alley. First guy looks like Steve Bannon, the second guy looks like  McMaster, and the guy with McMaster is brown and in a turban**. Which one would you ask out on a date/for help?  Which one is leaking to the Washington Post, or -- as this week -- to Cernovich-Breitbart-Gateway Pundit?

I think there is a mini-war of ideas in the White House, which slops over into a war of words and Grand Hoopla Theatre in the mediatic multiplex. But what do I know. I am that guy who wrote "Why Donald Trump lost the election." 


i11.jpgshare.png Amir Tibon / Haaretz:
Far-right Bannon Affiliates Attack McMaster for Being ‘Controlled by Jews’ and ‘Hostile to Israel’  —  Campaign against McMaster intensified after he fired a number of mid-level officials from the National Security Council, who were considered loyal to Bannon and to the former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn

Incidentally, as a bonus seventh story -- did you know that obsessive humans do such things as rigorously analyze Twitter accounts that peddle the Kremlin lines of attack?

Yes you did, but did you know that PR and political attack campaigns have a particular 'footprint' or pattern? Of course you did, so it won't be a surprise that there is a website that tracks real-time information-warfare memes and their flows in Kremlin-friendly orbit. If you squint and pretend to be Louise Mensch, yesterday's peak trends like the Cernovich Leaks from the angry West Wingers about McMaster were coordinated with a robust 'managed news' campaign directed by the drunk guy in the alley. See if you can find your favourites bot link or alt-news site here. I add a screenshot of the crazy site, but first an intro from the feverish topic ends of Twitter.




* I am picturing Harjit Sajjan, who rarely togs out in his Commander outfit, but still. Who doesn't feel safer when a turbaned Sikh gets on the bus?  I would think Bannon was a drunk, and McMaster probably a loud talker. Which makes me think how many more generals should join the Trump cabinet and administrative apparatus.


Recommended Comments

6 hours ago, william.scherk said:

President Individual-1 seems to want us to think that 'The Deal' was well-known ...


And Mueller seems to want us to think that "The Rat" tells the truth--this time. The Rat will not lie to save his own skin. Oh nooooooooo... The Rat has integrity...

Just like Mueller...

:evil:  :) 


Share this comment

Link to comment

Day of insane Giant Hoopla Whoopee connected to the name "Michael Cohen."

A lot of fake news blob goo to pick through, but for a perfect sample of everything that is wrong with blob-thinking, I recommend the source: Michael Cohen in his own words, now that everyone knows he is heading to the hoosegow.

Michael Cohen talks to George Stephanopoulos: TRANSCRIPT

share.png Washington Post:
Trump's claim that he didn't violate campaign finance law is weak — and dangerous  —  The case against the president would be far stronger than the case against John Edwards was.  —  Last week, in their case against Michael Cohen, federal prosecutors in New York filed a sentencing brief concluding that …
i5.jpgshare.png George Stephanopoulos / ABC News:
Ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen says Trump knew it was wrong to make hush-money payments during campaign  —  Donald Trump directed Michael Cohen to arrange hush-money payments with two women because then-candidate Trump “was very concerned about how this would affect the election” …

In other familiar ground, Fox News:

He's 'King Rat': Geraldo Says Cohen on 'Mission to Take Down the President'
Says Cohen testimony putting Trump in 'grievous peril.'

-- we can tell which side of truth the CNN takes:


Share this comment

Link to comment

Deripaska in the news.

On 6/3/2018 at 2:54 PM, william.scherk said:

Manafort's ideas to profit by his nearness to Trump with special briefings for Deripaska and a welter of other sleaze and as-charged crimes ... seem predictable.  I recall Robert Campbell being one of us who raised flags here early on Manafort.



The Trump administration is ready to remove sanctions on Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska’s aluminum company, United Co. Rusal, after reaching an agreement to significantly reduce his ownership stake.

Deripaska will remain under U.S. sanctions and his property will remain blocked, but Treasury intends to remove financial restrictions on Rusal, En+ Group Plc and JSC EuroSibEnergo. The move will take effect in 30 days unless Congress blocks the action, the Treasury Department said in a statement Wednesday.

Story at Bloomberg. There is a certain amount of huffing and puffing from the usual suspects.  Deripaska Quid Quo Pro! Yadda yadda. Not really a lot of quid to my eyes, from a national security perspective.

Share this comment

Link to comment

Who wants odds on the result of processing "process crimes"?  Will such acts, if proved in court, lead to a "process prison" via a "process process"?

Roger Stone is accused in the charging document of the "processes" of witness tampering, lying to Congress, and obstruction of justice.

Click and go image (link --




[Edited to remove the stupid smiley]

Edited by william.scherk

Share this comment

Link to comment
23 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Who wants odds on the result of processing "process crimes"?  Will such acts, if proved in court, lead to a "process prison" via a "process process"?

Roger Stone is accused in the charging document of the "processes" of witness tampering, lying to Congress, and obstruction of justice.

Click and go image (link --


  Hide contents



Did you just now discover the term "process crime"? Tee Hee Hee?

That's interesting, because some of the leftist press's legal "expert" commentators are acting as if they've never heard of the term either. It's like they're trying to pretend that the term was just made up by Trump defenders to trick people.

Heh. And if it were anyone on the left accused of the same, we'd be hearing expert analysis that it shouldn't even be a process crime. We'd be hearing that no reasonable prosecutor would believe that there was sufficient grounds for indictment.


[Edited to remove the stupid smiley]

Edited by william.scherk

Share this comment

Link to comment

I make a mistake if I consider "process crime" to be simply or solely a weasel-word -- and I also err if I consider each appearance of "it's a process crime" as simply being a means to obscure, downplay, excuse or minimize the import of a particular crime on the books ("It's just a process crime; it's not  a 'real' crime").  It has a specified meaning within the scope of the US justice system ...



Roger Stone downplays 'process crime' after arrest by FBI


(CNN)Roger Stone, an informal political adviser to President Donald Trump, downplayed his Friday indictment by a grand jury on charges brought by special counsel Robert Mueller as based on a "process crime" that doesn't show collusion with WikiLeaks or the Russian government.

"First of all, I always said that there could be some process crime," Stone told CNN's Chris Cuomo on "Cuomo Prime Time."

"There's still no evidence whatsoever that I had advance knowledge of the topic, the subject, or the source of the WikiLeaks disclosures. I never received any of the WikiLeaks disclosures. I never communicated with Assange or WikiLeaks other than the limited communication on Twitter on direct message, which I gave to the House Intelligence Committee last September, I guess it was."



Edited by william.scherk

Share this comment

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now