Most Americans believe Trump owns Trump Tower, making it PERFECT cover for ...

The BBQ Pit
1

… a little “burning of the Reichstag” action.

They have to be getting pretty desperate over at the White House. Mike Flynn is apparently ready to sing like a canary–we know this because Trump’s best buds over at the National Enquirer are attacking Flynn:

http://americablog.com/2017/03/national-enquirer-brands-flynn-russian-spy-trump-just-threw-flynn-bus.html
So, Bannon needs to get a MAJOR distraction up and running, or the Trump Train is going to be heading out of power and possibly into a long stint of federal prosecution and, potentially, convictions.

Whatever they come up with has to be believable, or it will simply lead to MORE investigation …whatever gets attacked, either by actual Muslim patsies (carefully set up and aimed) or by operatives pretending to be Muslims, has to be something that most Americans will assume Trump would never agree to have destroyed.

What better than the New York City Trump Tower–symbol of the man himself, and home of his wife and child?

It’s perfect. If, hypothetically, a massive explosion severely damaged the building and, let’s say, tragically took the life of the President’s wife (and maybe son, or maybe not–but definitely the wife)--------then millions of Americans would respond with something like:

…and so, just as in 1933 when the newly-elected German Chancellor asked for an emergency decree suspending civil liberties in order to protect the German People from those awful Communists who had burned down the Reichstag parliament building…

Now, as then, the sympathies of the people will rise up and grant vast powers to our Protector, Donald J. Trump. And all these investigations and humiliations (couldn’t even get a health-care bill passed with a House and Senate of his own party!) will simply…go away.

The thing is, Trump built Trump Tower nearly forty years ago. It’s old and outmoded, just like women that age (or so Trump seems to believe: he divorced Ivana when she was 43 and Marla when she was 37). And though technically the Trump Organization owns it, it is collateral for some major Trump debts:

http://www.debtwire.com/info/2017/01/27/legal-storm-sweeps-ups-trump-tower-cmbs-loan/

So, yeah, if it were to be effectively destroyed in an attack that leads to the President assuming broad “emergency” powers, who knows what might happen to all those entanglements now ensnaring Trump? Maybe they’d just …cease to exist. Or at the very least, with Trump now in a position similar to Putin’s—able to amass wealth at a previously unimaginable rate–then those entanglements just won’t matter anymore. And Trump will be itching to spend all his new riches in an even more impressive, even more up-to-date, even taller Tower.
…But **the crucial point is that the vast majority of Americans have no idea **that Trump doesn’t own his building outright anymore. They would assume that if Trump Tower were to be attacked, that in itself is proof that Trump et al had nothing to do with the attack.

And that’s a fact of which Bannon will be well-aware.

(Something to watch for: valuables being removed from the premises.)

2

Except nobody is going to give a good whore’s fuck if Trump Tower burns down except the bank who allowed it as security for the loan. Let Trump burn down his own building like a toddler having a temper tantrum and smashing his own toys.

Stranger

3

I think a war with NoKo or Iran to be a much more likely distraction.

4

I just hope when Bruce Willis evacuates, he remembers his father’s watch.

5

The only people crazier than Trump are his rabid opponents.

6

Trump is not crazy. If you had to highlight aspects of him that point to “crazy” as opposed to “dumb and narcissistic”, what would you choose?

7

So Trumpo is going to kill his own wife and his youngest son and thousands of New Yorkers to make himself Emperor Donald I and increase his bank account.

Thanks for the heads up.

8

Trump professes belief in nonsense conspiracies without any basis, shows characteristic paranoia and flat denial of culpability, and speaks as if he alone can save and protect the nation. The extent to which he does so in the face of evidence to the contrary is nothing short of pathological. If he’s not “crazy”, he’s definitely on the train heading straight there.

Stranger

9

Ridiculous conspiracy fantasies about evil things Trump might do. I will save my outrage for things he actually says and does - there’s plenty to go around.

10

You know that it’s not an empty building. The people on those 58 floors who would die don’t matter?
The beautiful thing is that the FBI is now watching the Trump team’s communications very closely. So it would be hard for Bannon to execute a major plot without the FBI knowing about it.

11

I don’t actually want Trump to burn down his building, nor do I think this is a likely attempt at a “Reichstag fire” false flag operation, if for no other reason than that I don’t think Trump’s ego could bear to destroy his flagship operation, nor do I believe Trump actually wants to concoct a false flag attack; he seems perfectly content with just making up baseless threats out of whole cloth without any substance behind them whatsoever… If someone in the camp of Trump backers such as Steve Bannon were to organize such an operation (which I don’t think is outside of conception) I would expect it to be against a government facility or public landmark, thereby justifying limitations to civil freedoms and military action against the purported antagonists.

Stranger

12

Has Mr. Bannon ever executed a plot ? Has he ever murdered anyone ? Has he committed any felony at any time ?

The OP’s tragedy is that with the internet carefully considered warnings and expert analysis of the plots of the powerful are drowned out in the noise. Back in earlier times, say the '50s and '60s, once he’d worked out what the president of the United States and his henchmen were going to do, particularly plans involving massacring thousands of citizens or sending millions to death camps etc. it would have been a simple matter to go to the local police-station and explain his reasoning. Or to call on his local representative, preferably with diagrams and sworn testimony.
Either way some action would have been taken.

13

The fact that even those who despise Trump would doubt he’d consent to damaging the building is precisely what makes it perfect for a major distraction. And the additional facts (that it’s kinda old and Trump likes new and shiny, but mainly that it’s so tied up in legal and financial knots) make his attachment to it less of a sure thing.

In general I’d agree with you that Trump would not be the main guy behind any ‘let’s permit or encourage an attack to happen and that will be our chance to grab power’—he’s just not that focused a person. He wants lots of money and lots of people cheering–he isn’t going to be interested in plotting out the nuts and bolts* of pacification of the populace and conversion of the Internet and free press to something closer to the Chinese model, etc. He has Bannon for that stuff.

And Bannon will be interested—but if he’ll do it, he’ll want to do it with as little chance of arousing suspicions as possible (which is where Trump Tower comes in). A powerful motivator for all these guys is the potential that the Russia-connection investigations could get very hot. If actual prison time looms, then risks may seem worth taking.

To get the public on the side of ‘emergency powers,’ the attacks would have to arouse outrage, but NOT arouse suspicion. And that’s a real problem for Bannon et al–too many people have come to the conclusion that there’s little in the way of conscience at work in that White House, and lots in the way of authoritarian inclinations.

Something people believe Trump loves would be an ideal target because their belief that he has an emotional bond to the target, would allay suspicion. ‘He couldn’t have done that! How can you suggest such a thing!’ Etc.

But as you note, public landmarks would make sense, too, because of the symbolism involved–ideally, people would react with something like ‘an attack on __________ is an attack on US!’ (So to speak.) The more feelings are engaged, the less likely that people will want to examine the event closely.

Your argument here is that no one can execute a plot who has not already executed a plot. Logically, this means that no one can ever execute a plot–which clearly is not the case. You’ve offered a fallacious construction; will anyone find it persuasive?

Your secondary argument is that if we don’t know that A has done something, then A has not done something. That one is just as fallacious as the first.

Oooo! I had no idea I was that important!

It’s a nice try at ‘sarcasm’ but ultimately rather silly, in the face of the subject matter. To entertain the idea that Trump, Bannon, Paul Manafort, Mike Flynn, etc. are people who might do unethical things is simply common sense, rather than tinfoil-hat stuff. (More’s the pity–if only these were men of integrity. Alas, no.)

*For example, the Bannon/Trump efforts to massively ramp up the Border Patrol haven’t gone as smoothly as hoped:

Trump's Plan To Hire 15,000 Border Patrol And ICE Agents Won't Be Easy : NPR

14

Pulling off an operation of this nature would require a degree of competence that we have yet to see from this administration.

15

No, the argument is that it is wrong to ascribe diabolical evil to any person who has not shown any evidence of such nor ever committed a crime.

Just because you dislike Bannon, or the refusal of immigrants, that doesn’t make him Himmler.

If someone stated Jimmy Carter was perhaps going to send anthrax mail to people who didn’t vote Democrat, one would have to look for previous evidence of terroristic atrocity on his part before thinking it a possibility.

16

This is phenomenally stupid.

17

Threads like this one go a long way towards explaining the insanely high demand for tin-foil hats.

18

Many people, including me, have predicted a reichstag fire type incident would be welcomed by 45’s circle. Not at all a crazy idea.

But I rather doubt 45’s circle would do something that could easily be traced back to them. They may not be particularly smart, but they are clever enough to want to avoid getting caught in the act.

Would they directly encourage a terrorist? Not so sure about that.

19

That’s why I predict he’s going to have himself murdered. No way he’d do that–so it’s totally what he’s gonna do!

Seriously, the sentence I’m quoting is a perfect encapsulation of conspiracy-theory logic. Don’t go there.

20

Trump might be able to fool some people, possibly even a majority of people, with a ploy like this, but he wouldn’t be able to fool everyone. And among the people he wouldn’t fool would be the law enforcement agencies who’d be investigating what happened, and reporting on their findings.