“I really hope you’re innocent because you’re doing a lot of talking.” - Chris Hayes to Carter Page
Not a joke. That was said.
Holy shit this is a disaster for him.
Yeh, I can’t believe he agreed to go on air. You’d think that’s what Team Mueller was hoping for. The mice to scurry…
Carter Page is a legitimately crazy person. Reading the Politico bio on him made me think of Lee Harvey Oswald. I hope that someone in the FBI is trailing him right now.
I guess Chris was hoping he could trip him up and get him to actually admit to something but I kept thinking this was as stupid as the last time Chris interviewed him. Page is just a psycho attention whore. (And the foaming mouth was uber creepy.)
Aside from the investigation itself I am curious about the larger impact on the political situation. How will it affect Trump’s rating. He is around 37% and has been there for the last few months. Will this push him to the 35 mark ? After he fired Comey in May his rating dropped quite sharply. Secondly how will it affect tax reform ? It’s already unpopular and will become more so after the details are revealed. I think it would have required a big push from Trump to sell it at least to his own side and keep Republican doubters at bay. Now he and everyone else is going to be distracted by this.
I don’t know that it will do a lot either way, as regards his approval rating. Most of this information won’t get reported at all to the 37% who approve of the President. Failure to enact policy is probably more likely to continue the slow decline of his ratings than any of the crimes that he or his close compatriots have committed.
Senators are probably going to start abandoning him though. On a policy front, that might not mean much, but it opens up resources for Mueller to keep going for certain. And if the House starts impeachment proceedings, you’re already at 50% who would likely vote against the President. You just need 17 more senators to abandon the President.
Not sure about the House. They tend to be crazier/dumber. I expect them to move at the same rate as the 37%.
I’ts a difference in constituency. Senators will generally move slightly behind the movement in their state. Congressmen will generally move behind the movement in their district.*
As the presidential election showed, national polls don’t mean that much. The country is too chaotic in its population spread.
Of the two though, I think Senators not up for reelection this cycle will be the quickest/easiest to away from His Orange Majesty.
- I should note that for both, a shift against Trump will require movement in their state/district WITHIN THE GOP. The Dems are meaningless to them for the most part. Gotta remember the Bannon-factor.
Interesting article in The Economist pointing out that the real target of Mueller’s investigation is not Manafort or Trump or Podesta or Clinton or any of the other myriad individuals - it’s Russia and their actions with regard to the 2016 election. He will almost certainly pick off a number of high profile targets along the way - and not necessarily on only one side of the political fence - but ultimately he’s all about uncovering the truth about Russian interference.
Which, in a weird way, might be good news for the Trump administration in that non-Russian issues will be secondary concerns. On the other hand, and as the article points out, the Feds got Al Capone on tax charges, so even the secondary issues will be fair game if they help get to the prize.
I can’t read it at the moment, so perhaps they make a better case than I’m assuming, but from everything that I have seen it seems like the way that things have split out is that the Senate Intelligence Committee is heading up the question of “What did Russia do and what are we going to do about it?” Mueller is heading up, “What did the Trump campaign and the current White House officials do, and is that a crime?”
Convicting Manafort and Popadopoulos doesn’t strike me in any reasonable way as affecting Russia. Increased sanctions do. Cutting off Facebook and Twitter, securing the Internet, etc. are all things that hurt Russia. Those are the things that the Intelligence Committee is working on.
But of course, the Russians would argue that the West was interfering with their elections, political processes and economic decision-making from the fall of communism until the advent of the saviour Putin.
I’m not a fan of the “Robert E Lee was just trying to defend his home” style of argument. At some point, you have to consider the greater morality of the situation. Defending your homeland when your homeland is accused of crimes against humanity is not a noble thing.
In the case of helping Yeltsin to win his election, we were trying to prevent Russia from slipping back into becoming a Communist state - an economic setup that had killed millions and made the lives of hundreds of millions miserable.
No, I don’t think so. I had a specific issue I was raising, which went over your head.
Which pretty much boils down to, “Putin ran a crooked election, Hillary Clinton said it the results were tainted, so Russians think Clinton interfered in the elections.” In other words, bullshit.
Hypothetically let’s assume Trump and many of the people around him are guilty as sin of collusion with the Russians and they know it. They know that Mueller knows it and can prove it. They know that the evidence will be convincing to anyone convincable, leaving him with about a 25% approval rating (Nixon’s on the day he left office being used as a bottom).
What’s their best play right now? Fire Meuller? Preemptive pardons? Ride it out and try to distance themselves? Is there not a good play here?
You seem to be confused. I am operating under the assumption that you meant the words you posted.
You said this…
You seem to open to the possibility that more information might come out regarding Papadopoulos, his interactions with Russians, and the reactions of those higher up in the Trump campaign to his efforts. I’m just letting you know that a great deal of new information came out yesterday.
Really, Really, damning information. Like someone in the Trump campaign has now admitted to colluding with the Russians during the campaign and higher ups in the campaign were encouraging his efforts at the time. None of that was included in the WaPo story and it’s kind of a big deal so I thought you’d want to know.
This is factually incorrect. Though I assume you know that and are just being cute. But I have limited interest in cute at this time.
If I’m honest, I fail to see what your point was to begin with. You posted a link to information we were all already aware of and implied that there was some deeper meaning to the fact that you were posting it at this time.
The one who is playing “cute” is you, with your attempts to act like there is some higher issue you are addressing, which only people of incredible perspicacity can figure out. :rolleyes:
OK, then maybe I wasn’t clear. Sorry if this was indeed the case.
The WP article I linked to portrayed the reaction of higher-ups in the Trump campaign as pretty uniformly resistant to GP’s attempts to set up these meetings. If that portrayal is correct, then the GP plea agreement is not of great importance as to its implications for the overall issue of Trump-Russia collusion, as it would amount to one minor guy off on his own and the senior campaign people opposed to his efforts.
I’ve read the GP plea agreement, and it’s doesn’t contradict that portrayal and in fact notes that none of the meetings GP attempted to set up actually took place. So I’ve not seen anything new which contradicts the WP story on that point. However, it’s possible that there’s more to come and that the picture will end up looking different.