Sure, as long as were clear that’s your contribution.
Well, you could safely consider that particular mission accomplished and follow the lack of inclination you expressed in post 326.
Meantime, I have to admit that even if Trump has dipped a toe in the pool of Russian stoogery, it may not matter - if he turns out to be an otherwise effective and productive president. I daresay some degree of corruption is inevitable and if by 2018, hypothetically, the American credit rating is back to AAA and the Dow is at 25000 and the American unemployment rate has dropped another 3 percentage points and the budget is balanced and gay marriage and abortion remain legal, I’m prepared to re-evaluate my opinion of Trump and even make allowances for a fair amount of boorish and childish behaviour and maybe even a little bit of light treason.
"Mr Trump, if you make a good faith gesture and put up some of your own money, we will specifically target your opponent with the aim of helping you win the election. This will be insurance for us: if it ever comes out that there was hacking, we expect you to deny that we had anything to do with it. If you try to retaliate diplomatically or otherwise, we’ll just tell everybody you were in on it with us, and we’ll have your cash payments as evidence.
“If you don’t agree to this deal, we’ll still hack, just like we always do, but whatever we find, the decision to release it or not is at our discretion. So if there’s anything you’re worried about us digging up on you (there totally is, and we all know it, and it’ll be worse than anything we could ever HOPE to find on Hillary) you should seriously consider our offer.”
Maybe it just isn’t that complicated. Exxon and Putin had a sweet deal all worked out, wrapped and ready for the ribbon. Then the sanctions torpedoed all of that. There are tons of money, it was almost in Putin’s hands and then…gone. He’d really like to have that money. And he probably didn’t think it was going to be that big a deal. Exert a little influence here and there, sure, why not?
The DNC hacks weren’t all that hairy, the people it most upset were the Bernie people, who simply could not shut up about how the DNC was screwing him over. A lot of them went ballistically bonkers, but unless you’re on this end of the rope and paying attention, you wouldn’t know it. I mean, Donna Brazile gave Hillary a question she was going to be asked? Isn’t it as least as likely that she already expected it? Outside of that, what was there?
Did he expect the be successful? Probably not, but the risk was small and the investment minimal. Sure, it’s usually dumb to make a bet running ten to one against you. But if the payout is one hundred to one, its a good bet. Not because you are likely to win, you aren’t, but if you win, you WIN!
And if he gets caught? His relationship with us is already bad, so not like he would spoil anything. He might easily have assumed that no one would believe it, he could guarantee that at least some segment of the population would refuse to believe it regardless. All of whom, apparently, post to the SDMB.
*Multiple US officials briefed on the matter told CNN on Thursday that FBI Director James Comey and Trump had a brief one-on-one conversation at last Friday’s intelligence briefing.
It’s during that pull aside that Comey briefed the President-elect on the two-page synopsis of the claims about Trump and Russia. All four intelligence chiefs had decided that Comey would be the one who would handle the sensitive discussion with the President-elect. *
NBC is reporting it slightly different.
*President-elect Donald Trump was informed about the existence of the unverified allegations against him about Russian ties after last Friday’s Intel briefing at Trump Tower on alleged Russian hacking, U.S. officials told NBC News.
A senior U.S. official said that it was FBI Director James Comey himself who pulled Trump aside after the briefing and spoke with him one-on-one about the so-called “dossier,” 35 pages of memos prepared by a former British spy for an anti-Trump client prior to last year’s election.
As NBC News has previously reported, Trump was not told about the contents of the dossier during the formal briefing*
The guy is basically a compulsive liar. He lies about everything even when it’s not to his benefit. I have no idea how people can make “but Trump said…” arguments with a straight face.
I find the man utterly disgusting. He’s not a Republican (which is actually good), and he really is a jerk. I have hired many people over the years, and anyone who acted like him would be fired even if he were a performer. The damage to the team and customers/partners would just be too great. He’s a dick. And, as someone who speaks to colleagues in Europe, South America, and Asia every day, I can tell you he makes this country look bad (relevant, I think, because for years the Republicans have been saying that our allies don’t respect Obama; anecdotally I can tell you everyone I know in other places loves him). But we’re stuck with him, so my coping mechanism will be to make fun of him at every turn and hope that he just flames out- preferably without lighting too much on fire as he does. I want to see him humiliated and laughed at because that is what he deserves.
You have two choices:
Embrace the madness
Start drinking
I do remember reading that lawyers learned decades ago to talk to him in groups of 2 at least, so as to prevent Trump from denying what was said or claiming that he never told something to just one of them.
Notice that even that does not stop Trump from lying, it is just useful to keep him just a little bit honest when the law gets involved. Of course one wonders if his followers will someday care.
“I have picked out just a few excerpts from the Orbis report. It was written, in my opinion, not by an ex British intelligence officer but by a Russian trained in the KGB tradition. It is full of names, dates, meetings, quarrels, and events that are hearsay (one an overheard conversation). It is a collection of “this important person” said this to “another important person.” There is no record; no informant is identified by name or by more than a generic title. The report appears to fail the veracity test in the one instance of a purported meeting in which names, dates, and location are provided. Some of the stories are so bizarre (the Rosneft $12 billion bribe) that they fail the laugh test. Yet, there appears to be a desire on the part of some media and Trump opponents on both sides of the aisle to picture the Orbis report as genuine but unverifiable.”
…
“We have reached a sad state of affairs where an anonymous report, full of bizarre statements, captures the attention of the world media because it casts a shadow over the legitimacy of a President-elect, who has not even taken the oath of office. For example, the Trump dossier is tonight’s lead item on German state television and on BBC. False news has become America’s international export to the world media.”
This may not be entirely related but the rest of Congress wss briefed today on the election hack and democrats came out of the briefing absolutely furious at Comey.
Interesting that all the intel guys agreed that Comey had to be the one to give trump a solo brief on the memos.
I don’t know what’s sadder – that Forbes would print a couple dozen reiterations on the argument (if one may dignify it with that term) that the dossier has to be fake because nobody could have possibly ferreted out Russian secrets for reals, or that you would think we’d buy what the author is selling.
The dossier isn’t “fake”, it just isn’t reliable. But the fact that it exists is reliable, because it does. What we need to ask now is who benefits. Right now, the guy benefiting most is Trump himself, he gets to wave that horseshit around and try to convince us that everything about the Russian interference is equally bogus. I haven’t any doubt that a goodly portion of them will swallow that whole because none of his base are belong to us.