The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Trump-Bannon Open Thread
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Your thoughts?

 
Hide 357 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Thomm says:

    Bannon represented the Nationalist-Leftist agenda*, and hence was a better fit with Bernie Sanders than with Trump (who was never a Nationalist-Leftist).

    That fact that Bannon was not just fired, but is being openly slammed by Trump, is exactly how normal Americans feel about Nationalist-Leftists.

    *Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Davosbane
    It seems Bannon's racial nationalism is reserved for Israel. He's much more of a civic nationalist, at least in rhetoric.
    , @Patrick Harris
    Brannon is not and never was a white nationalist, though he has been happy to adopt a certain winking posture toward the alt-right from time to time.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.
     
    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?
    , @Opinionator
    Trump is a much stronger nationalist than Sanders. I don't know that Sanders is even deserving of the appellation. He is weak on immigration control, which is the sine qua non of immigration. He probably fears nationalist sentiment (except Zionism). On Israel, he is a Zionist who plays the role of damage control agent.

    (In any event, the Left-Right paradigm is obsolete.)

    Bannon chose the right horse. A shame he (Bannon) is so undisciplined. There can be no excuse for taking pot shots at the president with members of the opposition press. The stakes are too high.

    , @Dave Pinsen
    Neither Trump nor Bannon are race nationalists; both have made appeals to black audiences (Bannon two months ago). Both Bannon and Trump are economic nationalists, though I'm not sure Trump has the confidence to stick to his guns against conventional wisdom economic experts surrounding him.
    , @Cucksworth
    Nationalist-leftist sounds an awful lot like National Socialist.

    And yes, my Uncle Adolf was a liberal about everything besides open boarders.
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    "*Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been."

    OH! Way wait! You mean Race-Nationalism as in BLACK-nationalism as a left-wing ideology in economic terms (e.g. gimme gimme that, fool!; Ya'll know what we sayin', dawg, we wants our stuff, now!).

    You didn't actually mean Race-Nationalism as in WHITE-nationalism being left-wing ideology. Race can mean any race, one just has to logically deduce WHICH race is more prone to gimme gimme, 'what's in it for us, fool!' and the conclusion presents itself.

    Ok, now that is clever. And factual.

    Got it. Sometimes just have to read between the lines for the true meaning.

    , @Lagertha
    I am mortified: don't understand why Bannon would decide to throw a grenade at this time? Why? Like 'Nancy:' why, why, why?" How will this (Bannon) spouting stuff, improve stuff for the people that he is supposedly fighting for? I am so disappointed in Bannon - more like, disgusted. He is not a real fighter...fuck him, he is nothing. So, sad, sad, sad, sad....Bannon's behavior breaks my heart.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/trump-bannon-open-thread/#comment-2142674
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Kaz says:

    Sad that Trump has all but confirmed he’s gone full neocon.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Sad that Trump has all but confirmed he’s gone full neocon.
     
    Trump's nothing if not a survivor. He's recognized his best chances of making it past November is to play ball with the most-powerful right-wing contingent since the lefties will never have him. All the stuff he said and did to get elected? Ejected.

    @Dmitry


    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.
     
    Would much rather have had Bannon for president than Trump--at least he stood for something. But he's less electable than a ratcatcher. Same with Jeff Sessions.

    I continue to be amused with my fellow partisans who remain optimistic.

    , @Neoconned
    Exactly now bill Kristol and the mustache are on there on fox news talking about how "kinetic action is now unavoidable" and how regime change in Iran is the only option.

    Trump made a deal w the devil....he'd throw bannon under the bus and go all in for the wars...in return they'll shut the f up about Russia gate

    , @fnn
    Borrowing from Derb, this is what happens when you import a foreign overclass.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Dmitry says:

    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.

    It’s inevitable that this kind of argument would occur. Generally an organization can only have one such person in it at a time – and that’s usually the person at top.

    If you put two of these kind of personalities too closely together, they soon will have this kind of argument. A drama not of much interest though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Not Raul
    Bannon is right, though: if the Trump campaign had to send anyone to see the Russians, it should have been lawyers, and they shouldn’t have met at the Trump Tower.
    , @AnotherDad

    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.
     
    Yeah, i don't understand all these worms who leave the White House and then run off to gossip to reporters, or sell some gossipy b.s. themselves.

    Loyalty is a virtue. If you need to bitch to your wife or your friends fine. But you don't bitch to any reporters. You don't piss on the guy who hired you. And yes, even if you got fired. And even if the President isn't singing your praises. If politics is actually about anything real--i.e. real ideas and principals--then your job is not to wreck the administration and policies you support. The only call for it would be if there's some higher loyalty--to your nation or morality--that compels you to call out the behavior of you old boss. In which case you should be forthright and clear about it.

    Bannon seems to be a motormouth who is just--potentially--damaging Trump. Giving anti-Trump ammunition precisely to the pond scum with an anti-nationalist agenda. How this is respectible or honorable behavior is beyond me.

    Of course, this Michael Wolff guy is apparently such a lying POS of that--at least in this case--the stuff might be essentially made up and Bannon innocent.
    , @Lagertha
    haha! but, they must work together towards the agenda they forged, for better or for worse. As a woman, and a fighter, I am shocked that they are so, both, so, so, soooooo cucked. I am more insulted by their absolute weakness, than anything else. They are both dead to me now.

    God, I hate Baby Boomers like Trump, Clinton, Bannon, Sanders, etc., and Greatest Generation people!!! I am beginning to hate Millennials - can't be trusted! Pox on all of them. Bring on the apocalypse- bring on climate armageddon...who gives a crap? Bring on anarchy- love it :) Bring in death, destruction, crazy-time, violence....no one cares...certainly not the elite...or our cucked govt officials! Govt sucks...govt employees are morons.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. KM32 says:

    What would you expect of a carnival barker reality TV show star? That he was serious about all of this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    What would you expect of a carnival barker reality TV show star? That he was serious about all of this?
     
    At least as serious as a spendthrift "community organizer".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Tipsy says:

    It’s probably not likely, but could it be that this is a setup of Michael Wolff and the MSM?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    No, not a deliberate one. It is conceivable that Wolff got quotes and facts wrong and will have to issue a retraction.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Bannon 2020

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. Davosbane says:
    @Thomm
    Bannon represented the Nationalist-Leftist agenda*, and hence was a better fit with Bernie Sanders than with Trump (who was never a Nationalist-Leftist).

    That fact that Bannon was not just fired, but is being openly slammed by Trump, is exactly how normal Americans feel about Nationalist-Leftists.

    *Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.

    It seems Bannon’s racial nationalism is reserved for Israel. He’s much more of a civic nationalist, at least in rhetoric.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    "It seems Bannon’s racial nationalism is reserved for Israel."

    As is Trump's.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @Thomm
    Bannon represented the Nationalist-Leftist agenda*, and hence was a better fit with Bernie Sanders than with Trump (who was never a Nationalist-Leftist).

    That fact that Bannon was not just fired, but is being openly slammed by Trump, is exactly how normal Americans feel about Nationalist-Leftists.

    *Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.

    Brannon is not and never was a white nationalist, though he has been happy to adopt a certain winking posture toward the alt-right from time to time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @rogue-one
    White nationalism is a dead end. No sane person would go that route. Civic nationalism seems to be the most promising and acceptable option today.

    America First can win. Whites First cannot.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. I’m glad that Bannon has been exposed as the charlatan he’s always been. That is the true Trumpian gift, that unique ability to shred the pretensions of others. Trump has a real genius for that; possibly it is his only genius. That is why Trump is not nearly as effective at dealing with people who are grounded in reality and who are also packing some guts and brains. Xi Jinping rolled up Trump like a cheap carpet when the met in Mar-a-Lago, and Putin simply brushes him off. Iran and North Korea have both made it clear that they won’t be intimidated. There is a lesson in all of this. If you’re capable of calling Trump’s bluff then Trump doesn’t have anything; but if all you’re holding is a pair of deuces, Trump will make you regret that you ever even thought about messing with him.

    Bannon is a very sad man and it irritates me to no end that there were many who looked upon him like he was some sort of Alt-Right colossus, a paragon of wisdom and an architect of victory. He is a flaky, self-aggrandizing mountebank who should not be trusted, and the movement he co-opted deserves much better representation than him.

    Read More
    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Troll: silviosilver
    • Replies: @utu
    Bannon was the only one there with some brain and vision that could be articulated.
    , @Dissident
    I’m glad that Bannon has been exposed as the charlatan he’s always been.

    Why do you consider Bannon a "charlatan" and how has he been exposed as one? Kindly elaborate.
    , @David Davenport
    Mr. Intelligent Being-in-the-world:

    When are you going to enlighten us with a succinct precis of of Martin Heidegger's philosophy?

    That should be easy for you, since you're so intelligent.


    ( "Dasein," not "Das Sein," was Heidegger's neologism for a special state of being. )

    , @Father O'Hara
    The reports of Bannon's death have been greatly exaggerated.
    Stay tuned!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. When Trump got in, I said that Trump’s kids were going to be a problem. Today’s attack on them by Bannon was retaliation for them winning with their Father over Bannon. Bannon wanted Trump to be “Trump.” The kids wanted to pull him to the left. They won and Bannon was fired. So he hit back at them.

    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don’t outshine your boss.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don’t outshine your boss.

    That's what got NYPD police chief Bill Bratton fired by Mayor Giuliani, even though they were doing good work together.

    , @istevefan

    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don’t outshine your boss.
     
    Was that Bannon's fault that Time put him on the cover? I thought at the time it was a deliberate ploy by Time to sow discord. The media figured Trump had an ego and so they felt they could get under his skin by making it look like others were the real brains behind the campaign.

    I think Bannon was dumb to be interviewed, but I don't know if he knew he was going to be the cover boy.
    , @Mr. Anon

    When Trump got in, I said that Trump’s kids were going to be a problem. Today’s attack on them by Bannon was retaliation for them winning with their Father over Bannon. Bannon wanted Trump to be “Trump.” The kids wanted to pull him to the left. They won and Bannon was fired. So he hit back at them.
     
    Bannon has not exactly covered himself in glory since being appointed to the Trump administration, and certainly not since leaving it.

    I agree with you that it was a bad sign (and I thought so at the time) when Trump brought his children and in-laws into his administration. Ivanka and Jared Kushner probably are not and never were even Republicans, let alone Trump-Republicans. If Trump had not run, what are the chances that Ivanka and Jared would have voted for Hillary Clinton and donated to her campaign? Pretty high, I expect. Why should any conservative welcome such people holding positions of high council in the administration.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Kaz
    Sad that Trump has all but confirmed he's gone full neocon.

    Sad that Trump has all but confirmed he’s gone full neocon.

    Trump’s nothing if not a survivor. He’s recognized his best chances of making it past November is to play ball with the most-powerful right-wing contingent since the lefties will never have him. All the stuff he said and did to get elected? Ejected.

    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.

    Would much rather have had Bannon for president than Trump–at least he stood for something. But he’s less electable than a ratcatcher. Same with Jeff Sessions.

    I continue to be amused with my fellow partisans who remain optimistic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    I continue to be amused with my fellow partisans who remain optimistic.
     
    Yes, because despair is always a winning strategy, right Spanky?
    , @Anonym
    Trump’s nothing if not a survivor. He’s recognized his best chances of making it past November is to play ball with the most-powerful right-wing contingent since the lefties will never have him. All the stuff he said and did to get elected? Ejected.

    If there is no wall Trump is going to get primaried. I think also with DACA but less sure.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Sunbeam says:

    Well whatever Trump wants to do.

    My support is 100% behind Bannon for what it’s worth.

    Have to wonder if Trump thinks he won because of his persona and charisma, as opposed to the message he ran on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Not Raul
    I agree.

    Trump would not have won without Bannon.

    He talks too much sometimes; but he was never anywhere near being the biggest leaker in the White House. Kellyanne Conway and some others are much worse. It’s a shame Conway hasn’t been fired yet. She was on team Cruz, and was bashing Trump right up until she jumped from a sinking ship on to the Trump bandwagon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. EdwardM says:

    Is this more (a) in line with the caricature of Trump as thin-skinned, not wanting to share credit or accept criticism, etc. or (b) a calculation to mollify and build a bridge to the Establishment, make Bannon into a lightening rod from whom Trump can distance himself — for which Bannon’s attacks in the book provided the perfect invitation?

    Needless to say, I don’t buy into the media caricature of Trump, but I can’t imagine that it’s fully calculated as in scenario (b).

    Even if everything he said in his statement about Bannon’s role, access, leaks, and mental health is true, I don’t really like the look of throwing Bannon under the bus. Even if Steve Bannon’s strategizing was not instrumental in getting Trump elected (and I believe that it was), the constituency and ideas that Bannon represents were. Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside, I believe that Bannon’s efforts to create a party-within-a-party of pro-Trumpism Republican members of Congress would serve benefit the president’s agenda, and there doesn’t appear to be anyone else capable of and inclined to spearhead such an effort.

    Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party.

    Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn’t as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country. Yet Steve had everything to do with the loss of a Senate seat in Alabama held for more than thirty years by Republicans. Steve doesn’t represent my base—he’s only in it for himself.

    Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.

    We have many great Republican members of Congress and candidates who are very supportive of the Make America Great Again agenda. Like me, they love the United States of America and are helping to finally take our country back and build it up, rather than simply seeking to burn it all down.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Even if everything he said in his statement about Bannon’s role, access, leaks, and mental health is true, I don’t really like the look of throwing Bannon under the bus.

    Throw Bannon under the bus?? Are you out of your mind? Bannon--reportedly-- has accused the Trump campaign of treason. This, in the middle of a criminal investigation into the campaign and the administration that has treason within its scope, whether as a criminal matter or as a pretext for impeachment. Bannon deserves no quarter.

    Assuming the statements were accurately reported.

    , @istevefan

    Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside,...
     
    First, I thought Bannon was for Mo Brooks. And since Mo got torpedoed by the GOPe in favor of Luther Strange. Bannon then supported Moore.

    Second, the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history, or at least in my lifetime. Five minutes after the so called scandal hit the news in early November, the GOPe led the calls for Moore to withdraw. They proceeded to starve his campaign of money and supply endless talking points in favor of the opposition right up to the last day of the campaign when Senator Shelby told the world he did not vote for Moore.

    The debacle of the Moore campaign was not Bannon's fault. It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don't get their way, they don't return the favor.

    BTW, I haven't heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it's "mission accomplished" and we will never hear of it again.
    , @Eagle Eye

    When [Bannon] was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.
     
    Wow - wonder who wrote this?

    Most likely the author is some deep-cover operative in the entourage of Jared Kushner but actually reporting to the Democrats and/or Deep State. Trump himself has generally not tended to be gratuitously vicious about former staff and associates.

    As always, the question is cui bono. Throwing former allies under the bus is never admirable but sometimes happens in the rough-and-tumble of high-level politics.

    However, this statement goes far beyond disowning a former high-level adviser. It gratuitously twists the knife in a way that seems wholly unnecessary and counter-productive. The REAL EFFECT will most likely be an accelerating run of quiet defections by members of Trump's entourage to the Deep State and Democratic/Clinton machines which can offer better long-term security, financially and politically.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @Bill Millan
    When Trump got in, I said that Trump's kids were going to be a problem. Today's attack on them by Bannon was retaliation for them winning with their Father over Bannon. Bannon wanted Trump to be "Trump." The kids wanted to pull him to the left. They won and Bannon was fired. So he hit back at them.

    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don't outshine your boss.

    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don’t outshine your boss.

    That’s what got NYPD police chief Bill Bratton fired by Mayor Giuliani, even though they were doing good work together.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Not Raul
    And the man Giuliani replaced him with was a disaster.

    What is it with people born in the mid-40s to early 50s? As a group, they seem overpopulated with narcissists.
    , @Redman
    Very true. And I sided with Rudy on that as well. Bratton had too big of an ego and political ambition. Rudy wanted the spotlight and, frankly, deserved it in the early years of his mayoralty.

    But Bratton was always given too much credit for the lower crime rates. Time has shown that the improving NYC economy and increasing gentrification had a more significant impact.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. utu says:

    I would like to know when and what circumstances did Wolff interview Bannon and go the quote about the “treason”? Was it after he was fired in August 2017 or before?

    We will see whether Mercer family will cut off money for Breitbart or demand Bannon resignation from Breitbart?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Bannon should be appearing on the networks 24/7 and explaining himself.
    , @Dave Pinsen
    The Hill says Rebekah Mercer isn't happy with Bannon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @Thomm
    Bannon represented the Nationalist-Leftist agenda*, and hence was a better fit with Bernie Sanders than with Trump (who was never a Nationalist-Leftist).

    That fact that Bannon was not just fired, but is being openly slammed by Trump, is exactly how normal Americans feel about Nationalist-Leftists.

    *Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.

    Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.

    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomm

    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?
     
    Yes.

    Remember that they were Democrats, and that the subsequent KKK was (and still is) Democrat to this day.

    The economic benefits to both blacks and poorer whites once slavery gave way to sharecropping are well-documented.
    , @Mr. Anon
    Commenter "Thomm" says a lot of things. He is a bloviating nitwit.
    , @The Man From K Street

    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?
     
    Actually, yes, you could say that. The chief southern apologists and theorizers like George Fitzhugh in the 1850s quite literally said that the slave economy was the most "practical" form of socialism.
    Second, the slave economy was the inevitable expression of the Lockean liberalism that many at thbe time thought was the inspiring spirit of the American Revolution. Anti-Lockeans like Orestes Brownson (who hated the CSA) argued it was classical republicanism, not liberalism.
    Third, you can't have it both ways and argue (ridiculously) that the tariff caused the war, without conceding that the pro-tariff Northerners were the economic nationalists as opposed to the free trade South.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. If Bannon really made the comments attributed to him regarding Don Jr.’s meeting it is well nigh inexcusable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. Whether this rift is serious or no is of little importance. Neither man has value if he faults on highly restrictive immigration. If the Don caves on restricting immigration from all corners, half of the forty percent approval will evaporate, to be replaced by maybe fifteen percent approval from goodthinkers who are pleased he is doing the right thing, but are fundamentally disloyal in that they only give approval to those who are weak and well thought of. He has accomplished the first necessary step – to become the center of attention and authority – now for step two.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. @Anonymous

    Sad that Trump has all but confirmed he’s gone full neocon.
     
    Trump's nothing if not a survivor. He's recognized his best chances of making it past November is to play ball with the most-powerful right-wing contingent since the lefties will never have him. All the stuff he said and did to get elected? Ejected.

    @Dmitry


    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.
     
    Would much rather have had Bannon for president than Trump--at least he stood for something. But he's less electable than a ratcatcher. Same with Jeff Sessions.

    I continue to be amused with my fellow partisans who remain optimistic.

    I continue to be amused with my fellow partisans who remain optimistic.

    Yes, because despair is always a winning strategy, right Spanky?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Heh... you said 'winning'...

    Here's a clue. After despair (probably during your early teenage years, when you begin to figure things out) comes resignation, and then a few more phases before you get to amusement. You'll come along, eventually.

    , @Neoconned
    I don't know Charles. We Americans tend to have this perverse optimism about us. Where we care about attitude more than results.

    I'm w the poster anonymous here.

    I'm a natural pessimist and shrewd. I see the worst in ppl and plan accordingly. Those Midwest voters who elected Trump will not sit around forever.

    Many I recall reading voted for him "just to try something new"...thus far he's been long rhetoric and funny one liners and not much in actual results.

    A lot of those Midwest union types, if hasn't produced TANGIBLE results by next yr will start looking for a new choice out of desperation and cynicism....or simply do what they've done for decades and resign themselves to the fact Trump is Dubya term 3 and they need to stay home in 3 years....

    The thing about "the alt right" is it doesn't even exist. It's something Hillary's advisors pulled from their ass and lumped a bunch of random and non connected ppl together who have no real connection. The media took a buzzword and stupidly ran w it thinking it's an actual movement when we predate Hillary's failed campaign and definitions

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Label this thread blackpilled eeyore clubhouse TIA.

    Breitbart has been screaming about being stabbed in the back (like Ann, like Krikorian) since Jan 22nd, much like the people here.

    Look at how fast Bannon and Breitbart turned on Paul Nehlen simply for naming the Jew. THAT’s the paladin some of you are pining your hopes on, some one who REEEEEs simply for reading culture of critique?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Breitbart has been screaming about being stabbed in the back (like Ann, like Krikorian) since Jan 22nd, much like the people here.

    Stabbed in the back by whom? Over what?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Thomm says:
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. @Thomm
    Bannon represented the Nationalist-Leftist agenda*, and hence was a better fit with Bernie Sanders than with Trump (who was never a Nationalist-Leftist).

    That fact that Bannon was not just fired, but is being openly slammed by Trump, is exactly how normal Americans feel about Nationalist-Leftists.

    *Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.

    Trump is a much stronger nationalist than Sanders. I don’t know that Sanders is even deserving of the appellation. He is weak on immigration control, which is the sine qua non of immigration. He probably fears nationalist sentiment (except Zionism). On Israel, he is a Zionist who plays the role of damage control agent.

    (In any event, the Left-Right paradigm is obsolete.)

    Bannon chose the right horse. A shame he (Bannon) is so undisciplined. There can be no excuse for taking pot shots at the president with members of the opposition press. The stakes are too high.

    Read More
    • Agree: Malcolm X-Lax
    • Replies: @Thomm

    Trump is a much stronger nationalist than Sanders.
     
    Trump is a nationalist, but not a race nationalist.

    Any viewing of The Apprentice will quickly reveal that he treats black people quite well (often favoring them).
    , @Bernardista

    He is weak on immigration control, which is the sine qua non of immigration.
     
    Neither Trump or Bernie had stances on immigration which I could agree with.
    Bernie has said ' A nation state cannot exist without borders. ' Very true.

    And neither can a Democratic Socialist provide the American people with single payer health care and free higher education (community college) while opening the floodgates to uncontrolled immigration.
    The cost would be too great, not to mention the task of vetting and monitoring the immigrants after they arrive here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Thomm says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.
     
    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?

    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?

    Yes.

    Remember that they were Democrats, and that the subsequent KKK was (and still is) Democrat to this day.

    The economic benefits to both blacks and poorer whites once slavery gave way to sharecropping are well-documented.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Yes. Remember that they were Democrats …
     
    So? You still haven’t explained how slave-holding states practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms.” You only offered postbellum non-sequiturs.
    , @Pincher Martin
    You have no clue what you're talking about.

    The slaveholders of that era were against a tariff and for free trade, the opposite of what free northerners of the time generally supported. The tariff was the most important economic issue of the nineteenth century.

    The slaveholders of the nineteenth century also widely supported Jeffersonian and Jacksonian principles in their economic views. Those include limited government, a small and weak central state, and strong local and state governments. They were widely supportive of Laissez faire economics, as opposed to the strong support the Whigs of the time show for spending federal and state monies on infrastructure.

    Democrats in the 19th century were not like Democrats today in their economic views. Stop projecting your own views into the past.


    "The economic benefits to both blacks and poorer whites once slavery gave way to sharecropping are well-documented."
     
    You'll have to explain to everyone what those economic benefits were. Slavery was undoubtedly a very bad thing, but that's not because the antebellum south was retarded economically. If it had been a separate nation in 1860, the antebellum south would've been one of the wealthiest states in the world, lagging only the northern United States, Great Britain, and one other country whose name I've forgotten. By some estimates, the southern white population was wealthier than whites in the Northeast on a per capita basis.
    , @Mr. Anon
    You are a bloviating nitwit.
    , @Shitposter
    I think we've found Dinesh D'Souza's account on here
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. map says:

    This is all staged.

    Trump and Bannon are just trolling the media with this act.

    Bannon is the editor of Breitbart. It is well within his power to pen an op-ed criticizing Trump. Why hasn’t he? Why do we have to hear about these feuds from third-party, leftist sources?

    Why do any of this? Three reasons:

    First, the leftist media is just therapy for leftists. It exists to assuage their feelings of fear and dread. Put something in the media that the left likes, and they will get a nice dopamine rush from the effect.

    Second, following from the first, Trump and Bannon can run the news cycle more effectively. First, Trump sends a tweet about his finger on the big nuclear button, and leftists start fainting all over the place. Then, send “news” about a Trump/Bannon feud and the dopamine rush assuages their fear. The entire process crowds out anything else from the news cycle so that stuff can happen in the background.

    Third, a Trump/Bannon feud drives traffic to Breitbart. Why is this important? Breitbart is a back-channel to the Trump base. The comments that appear are a snapshot of what the base is thinking about various topics. This gives Trump another way of taking the temperature of the population when he does something that is polarizing.

    This is why Bannon left the White House…to run this kind of media campaign for Trump. It’s very similar to how tv shows will have you download apps, go to a website or enter a sweepstakes as a measure of who is actually watching to check their Nielsen ratings.

    If there was a real dispute between Trump and Bannon, then what is keeping Bannon afloat? Who is running Breitbart? How is Breitbart getting all of its traffic? Trust me. The Mercers are still there and Trump is still there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Looks like you are imagining too many dimensions in this game.
    , @Moses

    This is all staged.
     
    I had the same thought. Too much voltage here for it to be real. Trump is not hurt by the exchange at all. In fact, he gets more street cred with the cucks (and lefties, somewhat) by distancing himself from Bannon. Bannon gets higher profile and clicks. Everyone wins.

    But hell, who can tell.
    , @Tex

    This is all staged.

    Trump and Bannon are just trolling the media with this act.
     
    Bingo.

    While I get a little tired of the "it's all 12-d underwater chess", I think you are closer to the mark than many others. Trump is a veteran of wrestling and reality TV. That's to say a master of kayfabe and not breaking character. He certainly knows that the media are 115% bullshit. Misdirection is Trump's forte.

    He might be irritated with Bannon, but the likelihood that it's all ramped up for effect is pretty high.
    , @Twodees Partain
    "Breitbart is a back-channel to the Trump base. The comments that appear are a snapshot of what the base is thinking about various topics. This gives Trump another way of taking the temperature of the population when he does something that is polarizing."

    That gave me an unpleasant mental image of Trump wielding a rectal thermometer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @utu
    I would like to know when and what circumstances did Wolff interview Bannon and go the quote about the "treason"? Was it after he was fired in August 2017 or before?

    We will see whether Mercer family will cut off money for Breitbart or demand Bannon resignation from Breitbart?

    Bannon should be appearing on the networks 24/7 and explaining himself.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. GW says:

    By bringing up the Russian conspiracy and “treason,” Bannon has certifiably lost his mind. Whatever valid points he may have regarding Trump’s hesitance to initiate a full nationalist agenda pale in comparison to this most recent own-goal.

    Hopefully this episode will bring much needed changes to Breitbart, a website that saw tremendous influence riding the Trump wave but has recently become unfocused, tabloidy, and hysterical. They ran off McHugh while still finding time to complain about mere rumors of Trump moderating this position or that.

    Compare that with the Daily Caller which has been running Peter Brimelow articles.

    Read More
    • Agree: snorlax
    • Replies: @Chief Seattle
    I wanted to like Breitbart, but their news stories are not very original or informing and use all of the cheap adjectives so it reads like a mirror image of HuffPo or Slate. And the comments are numerous, but mostly dittoheads.

    I don't like the public Bannon dispute though. We'll see soon weather Trump caves on immigration. If he does, he'll lose his base overnight.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @Jack Hanson
    Label this thread blackpilled eeyore clubhouse TIA.

    Breitbart has been screaming about being stabbed in the back (like Ann, like Krikorian) since Jan 22nd, much like the people here.

    Look at how fast Bannon and Breitbart turned on Paul Nehlen simply for naming the Jew. THAT's the paladin some of you are pining your hopes on, some one who REEEEEs simply for reading culture of critique?

    Breitbart has been screaming about being stabbed in the back (like Ann, like Krikorian) since Jan 22nd, much like the people here.

    Stabbed in the back by whom? Over what?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Claiming that Trump is going to 100% fold over immigration uh huh uh huh totally.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Thomm says:
    @Opinionator
    Trump is a much stronger nationalist than Sanders. I don't know that Sanders is even deserving of the appellation. He is weak on immigration control, which is the sine qua non of immigration. He probably fears nationalist sentiment (except Zionism). On Israel, he is a Zionist who plays the role of damage control agent.

    (In any event, the Left-Right paradigm is obsolete.)

    Bannon chose the right horse. A shame he (Bannon) is so undisciplined. There can be no excuse for taking pot shots at the president with members of the opposition press. The stakes are too high.

    Trump is a much stronger nationalist than Sanders.

    Trump is a nationalist, but not a race nationalist.

    Any viewing of The Apprentice will quickly reveal that he treats black people quite well (often favoring them).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. utu says:
    @Intelligent Dasein
    I'm glad that Bannon has been exposed as the charlatan he's always been. That is the true Trumpian gift, that unique ability to shred the pretensions of others. Trump has a real genius for that; possibly it is his only genius. That is why Trump is not nearly as effective at dealing with people who are grounded in reality and who are also packing some guts and brains. Xi Jinping rolled up Trump like a cheap carpet when the met in Mar-a-Lago, and Putin simply brushes him off. Iran and North Korea have both made it clear that they won't be intimidated. There is a lesson in all of this. If you're capable of calling Trump's bluff then Trump doesn't have anything; but if all you're holding is a pair of deuces, Trump will make you regret that you ever even thought about messing with him.

    Bannon is a very sad man and it irritates me to no end that there were many who looked upon him like he was some sort of Alt-Right colossus, a paragon of wisdom and an architect of victory. He is a flaky, self-aggrandizing mountebank who should not be trusted, and the movement he co-opted deserves much better representation than him.

    Bannon was the only one there with some brain and vision that could be articulated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @EdwardM
    Is this more (a) in line with the caricature of Trump as thin-skinned, not wanting to share credit or accept criticism, etc. or (b) a calculation to mollify and build a bridge to the Establishment, make Bannon into a lightening rod from whom Trump can distance himself -- for which Bannon's attacks in the book provided the perfect invitation?

    Needless to say, I don't buy into the media caricature of Trump, but I can't imagine that it's fully calculated as in scenario (b).

    Even if everything he said in his statement about Bannon's role, access, leaks, and mental health is true, I don't really like the look of throwing Bannon under the bus. Even if Steve Bannon's strategizing was not instrumental in getting Trump elected (and I believe that it was), the constituency and ideas that Bannon represents were. Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside, I believe that Bannon's efforts to create a party-within-a-party of pro-Trumpism Republican members of Congress would serve benefit the president's agenda, and there doesn't appear to be anyone else capable of and inclined to spearhead such an effort.

    Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party.

    Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn’t as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country. Yet Steve had everything to do with the loss of a Senate seat in Alabama held for more than thirty years by Republicans. Steve doesn’t represent my base—he’s only in it for himself.

    Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.

    We have many great Republican members of Congress and candidates who are very supportive of the Make America Great Again agenda. Like me, they love the United States of America and are helping to finally take our country back and build it up, rather than simply seeking to burn it all down.
     

    Even if everything he said in his statement about Bannon’s role, access, leaks, and mental health is true, I don’t really like the look of throwing Bannon under the bus.

    Throw Bannon under the bus?? Are you out of your mind? Bannon–reportedly– has accused the Trump campaign of treason. This, in the middle of a criminal investigation into the campaign and the administration that has treason within its scope, whether as a criminal matter or as a pretext for impeachment. Bannon deserves no quarter.

    Assuming the statements were accurately reported.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bliss
    • Replies: @EdwardM
    Bannon said, according to the book, that Trump Jr.'s meeting with that Russian lawyer claiming to have dirt on Hillary Clinton was "treasonous" and "unpatriotic." I don't endorse those comments, but it does seem (if we believe the leaked communications from the Trump team and other media reports) ham-handed in how they approached it. He added that, if they thought that the information might have been useful, they should have sent lawyers or other surrogates to meet the Russians in New Hampshire, not Trump Jr. in Trump Tower. And if the information amounted to Russian interference in our election, they should have called the FBI. These are fair points.

    This is just rhetoric from a book. Again, even if Trump takes legitimate exception to it, it does not follow that Bannon was not helpful in crafting the Trump agenda and getting him elected. Why turn it into that?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. utu says:
    @map
    This is all staged.

    Trump and Bannon are just trolling the media with this act.

    Bannon is the editor of Breitbart. It is well within his power to pen an op-ed criticizing Trump. Why hasn't he? Why do we have to hear about these feuds from third-party, leftist sources?

    Why do any of this? Three reasons:

    First, the leftist media is just therapy for leftists. It exists to assuage their feelings of fear and dread. Put something in the media that the left likes, and they will get a nice dopamine rush from the effect.

    Second, following from the first, Trump and Bannon can run the news cycle more effectively. First, Trump sends a tweet about his finger on the big nuclear button, and leftists start fainting all over the place. Then, send "news" about a Trump/Bannon feud and the dopamine rush assuages their fear. The entire process crowds out anything else from the news cycle so that stuff can happen in the background.

    Third, a Trump/Bannon feud drives traffic to Breitbart. Why is this important? Breitbart is a back-channel to the Trump base. The comments that appear are a snapshot of what the base is thinking about various topics. This gives Trump another way of taking the temperature of the population when he does something that is polarizing.

    This is why Bannon left the White House...to run this kind of media campaign for Trump. It's very similar to how tv shows will have you download apps, go to a website or enter a sweepstakes as a measure of who is actually watching to check their Nielsen ratings.

    If there was a real dispute between Trump and Bannon, then what is keeping Bannon afloat? Who is running Breitbart? How is Breitbart getting all of its traffic? Trust me. The Mercers are still there and Trump is still there.

    Looks like you are imagining too many dimensions in this game.

    Read More
    • Replies: @map
    Everything about the Trump campaign and the Trump administration is unusual. The typical attacks against Trump, attacks that would have crushed a normal Republican candidate and administration, never panned out.

    There is a reason for that.

    There is a deeper game that is being played. The Trump agenda is being implemented indirectly and, because of indirection, it is much more difficult to defend against, albeit it is slow.
    , @Lurker
    But why not? After all that is often how mainstream politics/MSM operate.
    , @Deckin
    I don't think anyone here ought to have much confidence in the reality of this latest dust-up. If this feud is real, why is Breitbart not screaming about it on the site and why is Bannon now defending Trump publicly? How many times have these things been screamed from the top of the MSM's lungs only to either blow back in their face or fizzle out? This has all the markers of past MSM failures: lots of leaks; lots of reports based on excerpts. We'll see.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Not Raul says:
    @Dmitry
    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.

    It's inevitable that this kind of argument would occur. Generally an organization can only have one such person in it at a time - and that's usually the person at top.

    If you put two of these kind of personalities too closely together, they soon will have this kind of argument. A drama not of much interest though.

    Bannon is right, though: if the Trump campaign had to send anyone to see the Russians, it should have been lawyers, and they shouldn’t have met at the Trump Tower.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Why?
    , @Anon
    Politicians don't farm out the job of professional diplomacy to lawyers. Diplomatic negotiations are not a court case.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Did Bannon actually say, on the record, that Don Jr.’s meeting was “treasonous”? Has he admitted to this?

    If so, just unto itself, his saying this is both unbelievably stupid and out-of-control vicious and damaging. I don’t care what scores he’s trying to settle. The man has no place in any kind of politics, or a position of influence. He makes Trump look like a circumspect, reliable guy.

    But, again, did Bannon say it on the record, and in the literal manner being suggested?

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Even it was made off the record, it would still be egregious. On many levels.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Not Raul says:
    @Steve Sailer
    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don’t outshine your boss.

    That's what got NYPD police chief Bill Bratton fired by Mayor Giuliani, even though they were doing good work together.

    And the man Giuliani replaced him with was a disaster.

    What is it with people born in the mid-40s to early 50s? As a group, they seem overpopulated with narcissists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Luckiest generation in history besides the Vietnam war, which many of them got out of having to fight.
    , @The Alarmist

    "What is it with people born in the mid-40s to early 50s? As a group, they seem overpopulated with narcissists."
     
    They seem to confuse themselves with the so-called Greatest Generation without having to actually stare down the muzzle of the bad guys' guns.
    , @Melendwyr
    You are jesting, right? Baby Boomer theory would seem to require no explanation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. J.Ross says: • Website

    Here is the actual quote, from anti-Trump newspaper the Grauniad quoting anti-Trump author Michael Wolff:

    Soon after, Wolff writes, Bannon remarked mockingly: “The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor – with no lawyers. They didn’t have any lawyers.

    “Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad 5h1t, and I happen to think it’s all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately.”

    “Soon after” as in this was Bannon’s initial reaction to the the first NYT story about this. I was under the impression that Bannon had just said this, because that’s how it’s being misreported. Their reaction to rebuttal and public disinterest is to just re-run the story like it was fresh. These elites are out of ideas.
    I saw no mention of Fusion GPS anywhere in the Grauniad article. This is a non-story. This is case four thousand and eight of them running around screaming “I CONFESS, MOZART, I KILLED YOU.” Trump is still alive, he’s still president, and something Bannon said half a year ago before we knew about Fusion GPS setting the meeting up does not matter.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bubba
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. Altai says:

    Trumps gone full Kushner. The current madness with naming (All of) Jerusalem capital of Israel and potentially stoking the protests in Iran does not portent good times. It does, however have a silver lining of potentially being a disaster for Netanyahu’s brand of aggression without consequences if it leads to finally toppling the whole mess ontop of him. Israel has overreached and payed a heavy price before, perhaps such a potentially violent, intense correction is better than years of meddling and civil wars. It also lays bare the Israel lobby front and centre of a man the media has been telling everyone to hate. But in the meantime there is the possibility of Lebanon being turned into the next sectarian battlefield by Israel and Saudi after having spent decades recovering from the last civil war. The Iran situation could good really wrong too.

    By tying meddling and wars in the middle east directly to Israel Trump removes the essential motivation-laundering of the ‘patriotic’ neo-con agenda that carefully removes mention of Israel at all times.

    Though I have to say when they’re doing the whole nuclear brinkmanship with North Korea/CCP, why the hell would they open this second can of worms now? Were they afraid Trump would be weakened by the midterms? Or is the stand-off with North Korea a benefit by being more important and thus allowing them to get away with things they wouldn’t otherwise?

    Read More
    • Replies: @LondonBob
    https://twitter.com/TOOEdit/status/948626235705274368

    Trumps has been led down a dark alley by his son in law.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. eD says:

    Michael Wolff is coming out with a new book on the Trump White House. Apparently he got unprecedented access. New York Magazine published an extended article on the subject:

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html

    Its fair to warn people here that its pretty ugly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    How ugly? Kremlin pay stubs? Remember, the Democrats set the bar at Trump being a traitor Putin puppet. Anything short of that is just cat ladies griping. The Democrats did this at the same time that the most important Democrats in Congress entrusted all of their IT services into the hands of a Pakistani intelligence agent with a flair for Seinfeldishly cheap fraud. They did so after stealing multiple state primaries from Bernie.
    , @MEH 0910

    He ­reprimanded the housekeeping staff for picking up his shirt from the floor: “If my shirt is on the floor, it’s because I want it on the floor.”
     
    I like that. I hope Wolff didn't make that up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Allen says:

    I like Bannon, but I really don’t understand why he would make comments like this. Even if he soured on Trump, why would you give quotes to a leftist like Michael Wolff?

    I’m still confused why, after being dismissed by Trump, Bannon gave an interview to the neocon Weekly Standard of all publications. Why give anything potentially useful to those who are you ideological enemies?

    Bannon’s prior strategy of supporting populist candidates like Roy Moore made sense, even if he privately no longer liked what Trump was doing. Likewise Trump’s present criticism of Bannon makes sense, even if he’s just trying to protect himself from negative press. But what does Bannon gain by publicly turning against Trump and getting positive press from CNN?

    It doesn’t help his nationalist movement, doesn’t help the Breitbart brand, and only empowers the establishment GOP and leftists whom he claims to hate. There must be something else going on behind this or else Bannon really is as self-absorbed as his worst detractors claimed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Neil Templeton
    I don't know Steve Bannon, but from what I see and read I would guess he's self aware rather than self absorbed. Regarding empowering the establishment GOP and leftists, who cares? The goal is not to win the heavily invested sanctimonious weaklings feeding on a stale dish of righteous pablum, but rather to persuade a popular majority that the heavily advertised moral high road is a con, and to show them that salvation requires that they abandon the path cheerfully lit by decades of false promises and television fantasy, instead choosing the flinty path of accountability and saying no.
    , @Anon
    Bannon is too erratic and flaky to be the leader of a cause. It's morally wrong to backstab your own side for money and silly attention-seeking. Bannon needs to be gone for good.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @Tipsy
    It's probably not likely, but could it be that this is a setup of Michael Wolff and the MSM?

    No, not a deliberate one. It is conceivable that Wolff got quotes and facts wrong and will have to issue a retraction.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @candid_observer
    Did Bannon actually say, on the record, that Don Jr.'s meeting was "treasonous"? Has he admitted to this?

    If so, just unto itself, his saying this is both unbelievably stupid and out-of-control vicious and damaging. I don't care what scores he's trying to settle. The man has no place in any kind of politics, or a position of influence. He makes Trump look like a circumspect, reliable guy.

    But, again, did Bannon say it on the record, and in the literal manner being suggested?

    Even it was made off the record, it would still be egregious. On many levels.

    Read More
    • Agree: PV van der Byl
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. J.Ross says: • Website

    By the way, while digging up the actual quote and context that puts paid to all this bluster, I stumbled across this:

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2018/01/03/vice-media-collapse-president-chief-digital-officer-bring-number-staffers-accused-misconduct-7/

    The left-wing news site Vice has suspended its own president, Andrew Creighton, and chief digital officer, Mike Germano, over claims of sexual misconduct, the New York Times reports.

    As of now, seven Vice staffers have faced allegations of this kind. In November, Vice suspended Jason Mojica, who ran the documentary division. A few weeks later, three unnamed Vice staffers were fired for sexual misconduct. Vice producer Rhys James was suspended in November.

    Can you imagine this happening under — er, excuse me, with — Vice co-founder Gavin McInnes still in charge?
    The same Vice witchfinders who threw Gavin out are now in serious legal and career trouble. Balance that with Bannon cursing under his breath six months ago. One of these is a consequential story and one is not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @GW
    So Bannon appears not to have directly said the meeting constituted treason as was first reported, but rather that it was a bad idea regardless of the legality.

    But this just further highlights Bannon’s indiscretion, namely talking to a sh*tlib reporter and expecting to have his intentions accurately perceived. You’d think he’d be smarter than that.

    Alas he’s not. Today Breitbart had an article up quoting Bannon praising Trump, right next to a separate one of Don Jr. roasting Bannon...all on the very website he runs! He has the means to completely pour cold water on the whole thing, and instead plays up the soap opera of which he is a central piece.

    As Trump put it, not everyone knows how to win. Why Bannon can’t stick to bashing illegal aliens, the Democrat Party, and the well-hated antifags? He’s unfocused and full of himself. Time for Breitbart to make a change.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Not Raul
    Bannon is right, though: if the Trump campaign had to send anyone to see the Russians, it should have been lawyers, and they shouldn’t have met at the Trump Tower.

    Why?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Correction:

    Immigration control is the sine qua non of NATIONALISM.
    , @Maj. Kong
    Russia is regarded as an enemy by probably at least 75% of Americans. We are the exception here, and Russia doesn't have as much as it did a few years ago to spend on propaganda to bolster their image.

    The left has repeatedly called Sebastian Gorka a "Nazi" based on him visiting some Hungarian group years ago, even though Gorka is a strong Zionist.

    Don Jr. and Jared aren't exactly geniuses, and both are frankly neophytes when it comes to power politics. Yes, it is minimal compared to Clinton standards, but there is no use complaining about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. J.Ross says: • Website
    @eD
    Michael Wolff is coming out with a new book on the Trump White House. Apparently he got unprecedented access. New York Magazine published an extended article on the subject:

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html

    Its fair to warn people here that its pretty ugly.

    How ugly? Kremlin pay stubs? Remember, the Democrats set the bar at Trump being a traitor Putin puppet. Anything short of that is just cat ladies griping. The Democrats did this at the same time that the most important Democrats in Congress entrusted all of their IT services into the hands of a Pakistani intelligence agent with a flair for Seinfeldishly cheap fraud. They did so after stealing multiple state primaries from Bernie.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. I think that the bloom went off Bannon for me over the Alabama disaster. Now we are finding out that Bannon wasn’t as influential as we thought he was. Trump won on 3 issues: immigration, trade deals and pointless, endless wars, If these issues are indeed Trump’s and not Bannon’s influence, then who needs Bannon?

    I might say, so far, Trump has only been 100% on trade deals, he’s on the right path with immigration, but we still don’t have a wall. And really disturbing how he didn’t pull out of Afghanistan, and all this blustering about Iran, which i don’t care about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Um, why is Bannon responsible for the outcome in Alabama? Moore loses with or without Bannon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. istevefan says:
    @Bill Millan
    When Trump got in, I said that Trump's kids were going to be a problem. Today's attack on them by Bannon was retaliation for them winning with their Father over Bannon. Bannon wanted Trump to be "Trump." The kids wanted to pull him to the left. They won and Bannon was fired. So he hit back at them.

    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don't outshine your boss.

    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don’t outshine your boss.

    Was that Bannon’s fault that Time put him on the cover? I thought at the time it was a deliberate ploy by Time to sow discord. The media figured Trump had an ego and so they felt they could get under his skin by making it look like others were the real brains behind the campaign.

    I think Bannon was dumb to be interviewed, but I don’t know if he knew he was going to be the cover boy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    Was that Bannon’s fault that Time put him on the cover?
     
    Does anybody really read Time Magazine any more? It was influential at one time, but now circulation is down to 3 million, mostly in dentist waiting rooms, making it the eleventh most circulated magazine in the United States, in an era when the Internet has taken over and all magazines and newspapers have a shrinking readership.

    Its most famous feature is the Person of the Year, which includes previous winners like Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin, however these days this award is about as important as Playmate of the Year.
    , @bartok
    Bannon could have held a press conference denouncing the idea of 'President Bannon', ridiculing Time's content-free journalism, etc.

    Why didn't he?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. newrouter says:

    Does Bannon understand :”that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!”?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. Bubba says:

    Jared “Fredo” Kushner is very dangerous to President Trump. And we all know that “Javanka” (credit to Breitbart.com) are both dolts and Steve Bannon has been shouting this from the mountaintops. It’s more than obvious by now that corruption runs within Jared’s bloodlines and he can’t help himself. Jared will most likely end up turning evidence on President Trump to avoid (or lessen) a prison sentence like his daddy received. Gov. Chris Christie put Kushner Sr. in jail and it’s too bad President Trump didn’t appoint him as AG. Sessions has been a total failure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. @Thomm

    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?
     
    Yes.

    Remember that they were Democrats, and that the subsequent KKK was (and still is) Democrat to this day.

    The economic benefits to both blacks and poorer whites once slavery gave way to sharecropping are well-documented.

    Yes. Remember that they were Democrats …

    So? You still haven’t explained how slave-holding states practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms.” You only offered postbellum non-sequiturs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    Yep. He has an anachronistic view of American political economics in the nineteenth century.

    It's not enough for him to simply say, "Slavery was morally wrong and it's a good thing it was ended." He has to spread more tar on the tar baby by assigning all sorts of horrible economic consequences to the practice.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. This is fun. Bannon just turned heel (or babyface, depending on your opinion)

    Kayfabe or something.

    Hossein Khosrow Ali Vaziri for Shah!

    Read More
    • LOL: MEH 0910
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. istevefan says:
    @EdwardM
    Is this more (a) in line with the caricature of Trump as thin-skinned, not wanting to share credit or accept criticism, etc. or (b) a calculation to mollify and build a bridge to the Establishment, make Bannon into a lightening rod from whom Trump can distance himself -- for which Bannon's attacks in the book provided the perfect invitation?

    Needless to say, I don't buy into the media caricature of Trump, but I can't imagine that it's fully calculated as in scenario (b).

    Even if everything he said in his statement about Bannon's role, access, leaks, and mental health is true, I don't really like the look of throwing Bannon under the bus. Even if Steve Bannon's strategizing was not instrumental in getting Trump elected (and I believe that it was), the constituency and ideas that Bannon represents were. Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside, I believe that Bannon's efforts to create a party-within-a-party of pro-Trumpism Republican members of Congress would serve benefit the president's agenda, and there doesn't appear to be anyone else capable of and inclined to spearhead such an effort.

    Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party.

    Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn’t as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country. Yet Steve had everything to do with the loss of a Senate seat in Alabama held for more than thirty years by Republicans. Steve doesn’t represent my base—he’s only in it for himself.

    Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.

    We have many great Republican members of Congress and candidates who are very supportive of the Make America Great Again agenda. Like me, they love the United States of America and are helping to finally take our country back and build it up, rather than simply seeking to burn it all down.
     

    Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside,…

    First, I thought Bannon was for Mo Brooks. And since Mo got torpedoed by the GOPe in favor of Luther Strange. Bannon then supported Moore.

    Second, the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history, or at least in my lifetime. Five minutes after the so called scandal hit the news in early November, the GOPe led the calls for Moore to withdraw. They proceeded to starve his campaign of money and supply endless talking points in favor of the opposition right up to the last day of the campaign when Senator Shelby told the world he did not vote for Moore.

    The debacle of the Moore campaign was not Bannon’s fault. It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don’t get their way, they don’t return the favor.

    BTW, I haven’t heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it’s “mission accomplished” and we will never hear of it again.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu, Travis
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Agreed, the establishment GOP needs to be punished because they are less able than the pink hats to comprehend what happened last November. The elite plan for dealing with Trump continues to appear to be "pretend like nothing happened and press on with riotously unpopular policies."
    , @Anonymous

    I haven’t heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it’s “mission accomplished” and we will never hear of it again.
     
    Thank you for pointing this out. Yep, stories only last so long as they're useful.

    Meanwhile, the correct use of "whom" in the statement attributed to President Trump indicates that he didn't write it himself. Or that he has an alert, educated proofreader.
    , @Pericles
    Also the mysteriously massive Democrat turnout. I, for one, am curious about how that came about. Then the judges for some reason quickly ordered the voting evidence destroyed.
    , @27 year old

    BTW, I haven’t heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it’s “mission accomplished” and we will never hear of it again.
     
    I think we will eventually find out that large sums were given to them by democrat operators, but nobody will care.
    , @Bill

    It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don’t get their way, they don’t return the favor.
     
    Yes, that's how the GOP always treats its voters. If its voters want to be treated better, they must speak the language the GOP understands. For loyalty, you get the shaft. So, try something else.
    , @Twodees Partain
    "the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history"

    Yes, there's that, but let's not rule out massive fraud in tallying the votes. Deletion of the count records makes the case for fraud, IMO.
    , @EdwardM
    Agree, although I think Bannon was for Moore in the primary (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/roy-moore-tests-the-limits-of-bannon/545948/).

    That doesn't mean that Bannon is to blame for the left's successful hit job on him, but, at the end of the day, his influence will be measured by successful elections -- from finding candidates to winning primaries to overcoming the institutional opposition and getting them over the finish line.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. peterike says:

    Here’s a correction of a minor point made in this “devastating” new book. But it suggests the fact vetting was not exactly diligent.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/01/if-its-too-good-to-check-it-probably-isnt-true.php

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    Strong and increasing smell of a fake news hit job about that book, if you ask me.

    Bannon appears to have affirmed his loyalty on Twitter btw. (I assume it's his account.)

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon/status/948847059368636416

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. 1. The big deal quote sounds totally fake. Bannon used the democrat talking point of “meeting with a foreign government”?? Okay…

    2. Michael Wolff- who? Why would this nobody have unprecedented access to team Trump?

    3. Slate.com put out a piece today saying Michael Wolff has a history of just making shit up, pretending to have had extensive contact with sources when he had never met them, etc. They also noted:

    Wolff is a longtime business/media writer fond of writing about Michael Wolff’s social status among the “moguls” and “tycoons” who have “power lunches” at New York restaurants. (Wrote Wolff, once, about an ostensibly important restaurant where he apparently often ate lunch: “I have a table. It’s table No. 5, which is a very good table.” Nice!) He has tried on several occasions to become a mogul/tycoon himself by launching media businesses but has not been successful.

    Ouch… what a loser.

    3. I wonder what “Q anon” has to say about this? Lol.

    4. Let’s assume it’s all true and Trump and Bannon really hate eachother. What’s the impact to us and what we want?

    5. Ultimately this feud doesn’t matter. We should wait and see and continue to push for what we want in the ways that we can.

    Read More
    • Agree: Chrisnonymous
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. peterike says:

    Our distinguished author, Michael Wolff. Nauseating even to look at him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Admitted plagiarist Gerald Posner is more nauseating to look at, because he has this creepily inappropriate boy face and cut.

    http://images.gawker.com/18k3fa15v5tjajpg/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. whorefinder says: • Website

    Seems bad (if true—Wolff has been accused of making up quotes before), but nothing major, just fallout from a once-close relationship. Ho-hum, someone who’s not a judge or jury sitting in court thinks something Trump’s guys did might have been “treason.” Yawn. Wake me when we get the indictment, then we can talk about proof.

    Of course, it could be a ploy by Trump-Bannon. Mike Cernovich has correctly noted that, right now, he doesn’t see how this could benefit Bannon or Trump. Bannon knows the media inside and out, and knew what this would do to them, but to what purpose? Bannon is a long-term thinker, he doesn’t do things to pop off.

    Non-conspiratorial guess: Bannon is pissed at Trump, thinks what happened was bad, and doesn’t see Trump accomplishing what Bannon wants. So he’s publicly distancing himself from Trump and insulting him, trying to backbite out the door and distance himself from any stain. Donna Brazile-esque.

    Conspiratorial guess: Bannon is doing this to stir the media chum and distance himself from Trump to work behind the scenes, but with seemingly greater credibility to the corporates. Bannon can plausibly be an anti-Trump guy promoting Trump’s agenda without being seen as just part of the extended administration. A la Roger Stone has done since being fired by Trump early on but still supporting him and doing Alex Jones regularly.

    In any event, Trump’s a pragmatist, if Bannon turned back into loving him in 6 months he’d be forgiven, though Trump would likely take some fun out of embarrassing Bannon. Trump hates you intensely when you cross him but loves you intensely if you come back to him. You’re either a worthless loser or else the greatest. Caesar-like.

    Read More
    • Replies: @neprof
    Bannon has denied making the statements:

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon?lang=en

    Claims Wolff took his comments "out of context". Wolff probably interviewed Bannon after 7 pm knowing he had his daily fill of booze. Like a lot of Irish heavy drinkers, Bannon may have got the mean, self-absorbed side of him to talk too much.

    One reason I think Trump didn't want Bannon around was his drinking. Which can make a smart, reasonable man (before noon) change into an intolerable alpha male by evening.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. J.Ross says: • Website
    @istevefan

    Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside,...
     
    First, I thought Bannon was for Mo Brooks. And since Mo got torpedoed by the GOPe in favor of Luther Strange. Bannon then supported Moore.

    Second, the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history, or at least in my lifetime. Five minutes after the so called scandal hit the news in early November, the GOPe led the calls for Moore to withdraw. They proceeded to starve his campaign of money and supply endless talking points in favor of the opposition right up to the last day of the campaign when Senator Shelby told the world he did not vote for Moore.

    The debacle of the Moore campaign was not Bannon's fault. It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don't get their way, they don't return the favor.

    BTW, I haven't heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it's "mission accomplished" and we will never hear of it again.

    Agreed, the establishment GOP needs to be punished because they are less able than the pink hats to comprehend what happened last November. The elite plan for dealing with Trump continues to appear to be “pretend like nothing happened and press on with riotously unpopular policies.”

    Read More
    • Agree: Seamus Padraig
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Does he try to look like he’s just about to come back from a three-week bender? I mean, for chrissakes. He’s a public figure!

    Read More
    • Agree: Desiderius
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. Tiny Duck says:

    Conservatives are joke

    white men are pathetic

    Can you guys get it together?

    Read More
    • Agree: Opinionator
    • Replies: @fish

    Ohs Tinys.....white mens cants gets its togethers.....only lensert and Tinys cans gets its togethers..... iffen yous gets mys meanings.

    Lensert “I bein likes to Drive” Pissed
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The thing that interested me about that Michael Wolff hype-excerpt was that certain names never came up (e.g. Stephen Miller)– Reince was represented thinly & it seemed off. I’m guessing Kellyanne Conway (Mercer deputy from way back) gave him no usable dirt. I realize Wolff is more comfortable leaking gossip from Manhattanite media mouths like Rupert Murdoch but he obviously didn’t try to talk to everyone in the West Wing despite his b.s. touting of journalistic bonafides. P.S. Justin Timberlake is flying to white: http://theoutline.com/post/2839/justin-timberlake-man-of-the-woods-pivot

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    He'll have to knock up Jessica Biel a few more times for me to even consider accepting him as a white man.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. OT: Israel offers to pay African migrants to leave, threatens jail

    http://news.trust.org/item/20180103115805-egc1s

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  60. @David Havelka
    I think that the bloom went off Bannon for me over the Alabama disaster. Now we are finding out that Bannon wasn't as influential as we thought he was. Trump won on 3 issues: immigration, trade deals and pointless, endless wars, If these issues are indeed Trump's and not Bannon's influence, then who needs Bannon?

    I might say, so far, Trump has only been 100% on trade deals, he's on the right path with immigration, but we still don't have a wall. And really disturbing how he didn't pull out of Afghanistan, and all this blustering about Iran, which i don't care about.

    Um, why is Bannon responsible for the outcome in Alabama? Moore loses with or without Bannon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. OT: Netanyahu statement regarding deportations:

    http://www.pmo.gov.il/English/MediaCenter/Spokesman/Pages/spokeStart030118.aspx

    “Every country must guard its borders. Guarding the borders against illegal infiltration is both a right and a fundamental obligation of a sovereign state. To this end, we carried out two good actions…”

    “…I am pleased that we are getting underway; this problem will be solved. Israel is, in effect, one of the only countries in the world that has succeeded in taking control of this phenomenon, and this has become more vital, and not less, in the restless world in which we live.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The phrase 'cognitive dissonance' never had such impact as it does when we consider the chosenites' somewhat dissimilar stance regarding America. And Europe. (And Canada, and Australia, and NZ, I grant these things!) But only those--what could it be that they have (or had) in common?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. J.Ross says: • Website
    @peterike
    Our distinguished author, Michael Wolff. Nauseating even to look at him.

    https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/01/12/National-Politics/Images/Botsford170112Trump10306.JPG

    Admitted plagiarist Gerald Posner is more nauseating to look at, because he has this creepily inappropriate boy face and cut.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
    He has that same sort of elflike,kind of eastern European look that Polanski has.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Ebony capsule.

    -Trump is a one term President.

    -MAGA populist nationalist agenda is certainly not happening.

    How much Steve Bannon’s inglorious fall affected the failure of the America first agenda isn’t so clear but it doesn’t need to be. The writing is on the wall.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    What is "Ebony capsule"?
    , @Anonymous

    -Trump is a one term President.

    -MAGA populist nationalist agenda is certainly not happening.
     
    Am I missing something or are you all missing something? Come November of this year, the Dems take veto-proof majorities in both Houses of Congress and Trump is an afterthought at best. The MSM and the Forces of Reaction they represent aren't going to make the same mistake twice. Trump should get out in front of this and replace 'MAGA' with "Après moi, le Déluge."

    Hope you all enjoyed your little fantasy while it lasted. Demographic replacement is forever.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “They’re going to crack Don Junior like an egg on national TV,” Bannon knows the Kushners are going to betray Don Jr. and he is sickened by it.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bubba
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  65. @istevefan

    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don’t outshine your boss.
     
    Was that Bannon's fault that Time put him on the cover? I thought at the time it was a deliberate ploy by Time to sow discord. The media figured Trump had an ego and so they felt they could get under his skin by making it look like others were the real brains behind the campaign.

    I think Bannon was dumb to be interviewed, but I don't know if he knew he was going to be the cover boy.

    Was that Bannon’s fault that Time put him on the cover?

    Does anybody really read Time Magazine any more? It was influential at one time, but now circulation is down to 3 million, mostly in dentist waiting rooms, making it the eleventh most circulated magazine in the United States, in an era when the Internet has taken over and all magazines and newspapers have a shrinking readership.

    Its most famous feature is the Person of the Year, which includes previous winners like Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin, however these days this award is about as important as Playmate of the Year.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Jonathan Mason:

    I know and you know that Time's influence is greatly diminished, but does DJT know?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Dmitry says:

    Funny to read all excited commentators trying to read complicated ideological disputes into typical personnel dramas that most of us have seen working in any other organizations.

    This looks like a standard personnel drama, that happens when you have a few people with difficult personalities.

    Bannon is such personality, as is Trump. When Bannon felt there wasn’t enough attention paid to him, or that people had slighted him – he started to create some kind of mischief.

    Probably if job roles were reversed (not that Trump could even to contemplate working underneath somebody else), a similar story would have unfolded.

    Such drama or intrigues at the royal court, is not motivated much differently than other workplaces, or even school playgrounds – and just as rarely for high-minded or intellectual reasons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  67. @GW
    By bringing up the Russian conspiracy and “treason,” Bannon has certifiably lost his mind. Whatever valid points he may have regarding Trump’s hesitance to initiate a full nationalist agenda pale in comparison to this most recent own-goal.

    Hopefully this episode will bring much needed changes to Breitbart, a website that saw tremendous influence riding the Trump wave but has recently become unfocused, tabloidy, and hysterical. They ran off McHugh while still finding time to complain about mere rumors of Trump moderating this position or that.

    Compare that with the Daily Caller which has been running Peter Brimelow articles.

    I wanted to like Breitbart, but their news stories are not very original or informing and use all of the cheap adjectives so it reads like a mirror image of HuffPo or Slate. And the comments are numerous, but mostly dittoheads.

    I don’t like the public Bannon dispute though. We’ll see soon weather Trump caves on immigration. If he does, he’ll lose his base overnight.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Bill B. says:

    I finally got around to reading the full 35-page Christopher Steele “dossier” on Trump that was paid for by the Democrats and supposedly supplied by the Russians.

    It is, as widely recognised, crap.

    But I have done work, for corporates, not dissimilar to this years ago. I recognise the style. Desperately inflating extremely thin material. Inventive repetition. Filled with usefully vague but just about plausible anecdotes designed to tickle a receptive audience.

    One killer anecdote – golden showers – designed to be excused by the Mandy Rice Davis response “Well he would say that wouldn’t he.”

    The report trips up with a deniable “fact” saying that Trump’s lawyer went to Prague; easily denied by the lawyer who said he has never been to Prague.

    Has anyone ever thought they the whole thing was entirely made up? In other words it is entirely, or almost entirely, fiction? That in fact the Russians never had much to do with this report?

    I once knew a journalist who claimed to have terrific sources inside the Burmese military junta. In other words he was a charlatan…

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    The report trips up with a deniable “fact” saying that Trump’s lawyer went to Prague; easily denied by the lawyer who said he has never been to Prague.
     
    Denials (even by Czech diplomat) that Mohammed Atta was not in Prague meeting Iraqi agents did not stop the US from invading Iraq.
    , @Mr. Anon

    Has anyone ever thought they the whole thing was entirely made up? In other words it is entirely, or almost entirely, fiction? That in fact the Russians never had much to do with this report?
     
    It would certainly increase the profitibility of the job to simply make it all up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Redman says:
    @Steve Sailer
    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don’t outshine your boss.

    That's what got NYPD police chief Bill Bratton fired by Mayor Giuliani, even though they were doing good work together.

    Very true. And I sided with Rudy on that as well. Bratton had too big of an ego and political ambition. Rudy wanted the spotlight and, frankly, deserved it in the early years of his mayoralty.

    But Bratton was always given too much credit for the lower crime rates. Time has shown that the improving NYC economy and increasing gentrification had a more significant impact.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bubba
    "Gentrification" in NYC (and everywhere else in the USA) means moving African Americans to section 8 housing in white suburbs so politically connected developers can make billions. It's just moving the crime and welfare problems to those who moved away from it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Berty says:

    Bannon didn’t win Trump the election, but he helped focus the campaign’s message into one that could resonate with all the right voters. For that he deserves recognition. Trump doesn’t seem to realize that it was his message that won the election, not him. Polls consistently showed that large numbers of his voters disliked him as a person and didn’t really trust him but voted for him anyway. Now he’s at 60% disapproval in Iowa and 52% approval in Mississippi. Not really a good place to be.

    He needs to stop this shit. Focus on trade and immigration this year and forget about pointless tweet fights that the people hate and Paul Ryan’s retarded plan to cut Medicaid. Because otherwise you’re looking at a bloodbath in November and frankly I’m finding less and less reason to defend him as this garbage continues with no end in sight.

    Read More
    • Agree: Travis, Dissident
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Good post.
    , @utu

    Trump doesn’t seem to realize that it was his message that won the election, not him.
     
    This cuts to the core. Perfect insight.

    He needs to stop this shit.
     
    He probably is incapable. The "this shit" is him.
    , @Dutch Boy
    Quite correct. I voted for Trump because I considered him the best of a very bad lot of candidates and I thought HRC would be a national disaster (that Trump is not HRC continues to be his major virtue, IMO). As for Trump personally - yuck!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Dissident says:
    @Intelligent Dasein
    I'm glad that Bannon has been exposed as the charlatan he's always been. That is the true Trumpian gift, that unique ability to shred the pretensions of others. Trump has a real genius for that; possibly it is his only genius. That is why Trump is not nearly as effective at dealing with people who are grounded in reality and who are also packing some guts and brains. Xi Jinping rolled up Trump like a cheap carpet when the met in Mar-a-Lago, and Putin simply brushes him off. Iran and North Korea have both made it clear that they won't be intimidated. There is a lesson in all of this. If you're capable of calling Trump's bluff then Trump doesn't have anything; but if all you're holding is a pair of deuces, Trump will make you regret that you ever even thought about messing with him.

    Bannon is a very sad man and it irritates me to no end that there were many who looked upon him like he was some sort of Alt-Right colossus, a paragon of wisdom and an architect of victory. He is a flaky, self-aggrandizing mountebank who should not be trusted, and the movement he co-opted deserves much better representation than him.

    I’m glad that Bannon has been exposed as the charlatan he’s always been.

    Why do you consider Bannon a “charlatan” and how has he been exposed as one? Kindly elaborate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Yes, consider that Bannon's natural competition, the people he is being a "charlatan" by usurping, are the scum in "Our Brand Is Crisis," Karl Rove, Rick Wilson, and the brothers Podesta. How does Bannon not win that contest (and especially on authenticity) every single time?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @BEER/ we're all going to die
    Ebony capsule.

    -Trump is a one term President.

    -MAGA populist nationalist agenda is certainly not happening.

    How much Steve Bannon's inglorious fall affected the failure of the America first agenda isn't so clear but it doesn't need to be. The writing is on the wall.

    What is “Ebony capsule”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    Black pill.
    , @J.Ross
    Despair. Tricking you into feeding the archons with negative energy. There's only one pill, it doesn't make you despair, it actually makes despair impossible, and it's not black or blue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Dan Hayes says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    Was that Bannon’s fault that Time put him on the cover?
     
    Does anybody really read Time Magazine any more? It was influential at one time, but now circulation is down to 3 million, mostly in dentist waiting rooms, making it the eleventh most circulated magazine in the United States, in an era when the Internet has taken over and all magazines and newspapers have a shrinking readership.

    Its most famous feature is the Person of the Year, which includes previous winners like Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin, however these days this award is about as important as Playmate of the Year.

    Jonathan Mason:

    I know and you know that Time’s influence is greatly diminished, but does DJT know?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @Thomm

    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?
     
    Yes.

    Remember that they were Democrats, and that the subsequent KKK was (and still is) Democrat to this day.

    The economic benefits to both blacks and poorer whites once slavery gave way to sharecropping are well-documented.

    You have no clue what you’re talking about.

    The slaveholders of that era were against a tariff and for free trade, the opposite of what free northerners of the time generally supported. The tariff was the most important economic issue of the nineteenth century.

    The slaveholders of the nineteenth century also widely supported Jeffersonian and Jacksonian principles in their economic views. Those include limited government, a small and weak central state, and strong local and state governments. They were widely supportive of Laissez faire economics, as opposed to the strong support the Whigs of the time show for spending federal and state monies on infrastructure.

    Democrats in the 19th century were not like Democrats today in their economic views. Stop projecting your own views into the past.

    “The economic benefits to both blacks and poorer whites once slavery gave way to sharecropping are well-documented.”

    You’ll have to explain to everyone what those economic benefits were. Slavery was undoubtedly a very bad thing, but that’s not because the antebellum south was retarded economically. If it had been a separate nation in 1860, the antebellum south would’ve been one of the wealthiest states in the world, lagging only the northern United States, Great Britain, and one other country whose name I’ve forgotten. By some estimates, the southern white population was wealthier than whites in the Northeast on a per capita basis.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bill
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    Pincher, this ridiculous talking point of the democrats being the founders of the KKK, etc. is only used by historically illiterate imbeciles who still somehow think that the GOP is the virtuous (though stupid) party. If Thomm even reads your response, he won't understand it.
    , @Neil Templeton
    True, but gross product stats distract from the main point in the antebellum South, that even the poorer white families had enormous liberty relative to the Current Year, often including their own piece of land to work and loaf on. That, native belligerence, and the pride developed from living an independent life fueled the out-of-market fighting power of the Confederacy. The northern frontier peoples drew from a similar deck, but they weren't facing an existential threat.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Yes. Remember that they were Democrats …
     
    So? You still haven’t explained how slave-holding states practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms.” You only offered postbellum non-sequiturs.

    Yep. He has an anachronistic view of American political economics in the nineteenth century.

    It’s not enough for him to simply say, “Slavery was morally wrong and it’s a good thing it was ended.” He has to spread more tar on the tar baby by assigning all sorts of horrible economic consequences to the practice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. This topic tempts me to unload a lot of thoughts I’ve had on Trump, Bannon, populism, etc. but I’ll try to be concise.

    For one, I agree with Ann Coulter, Kris Kobach and others: Immigration is the number one issue. Lose on that, and all is lost. That’s why I supported Trump, despite the defects of his personality. (OK, I’ll admit I find the way he upsets Leftist race-baiters kinda funny–in fact the whole world of 4chan memes and stuff amused me in ways I never would have believed of myself a few years ago.) And this is why I hope and pray the Mueller investigation doesn’t uncover some nitpicky Russian connection or business deal of the sort no other politician would ever be indicted on. So on similar grounds, I’m not happy that Bannon seems to be undercutting the only hope we seem to have on at least stopping the bleeding on immigration. (I feel the clock is ticking so fast, that we can’t just wait another 4, 8 or 12 years for the “perfect” populist-Right candidate to come along.)

    But I do agree with others that Bannon is probably way more of a thinker than Trump or most of his inner circle. In an absolute sense, I’m tempted to think that Bannon is more of a genuine right-wing populist, but the fact is he is not president and so only has the power of Breitbart–which is meaningless power without politicians to enact policy.

    Also, to walk back a bit my first comment on Bannon messing things up: it’s not like he’s a lawyer. His opinion of it being treasonous doesn’t make it so. Putting him under oath to say he was upset with Don Jr. won’t make Don Jr’s actions suddenly illegal. Yes, Trump’s own kids and many in the WH staff seem to be neocons/neoliberals, and perhaps Bannon is genuinely upset at this. I’m not sure how this shakes out in any positive way, though. I think going after Trump’s family is a sure way to fall out of grace with Trump permanently (unless this is indeed an orchestrated PR effort.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Bannon believes that the immigration issue is everything.
    , @Opinionator
    It's pretty bad. But Bannon is talented (if flawed) and we need to have EVERYBODY on board. Hopefully he can admit his characterization of the meeting was mistaken and apologize.
    , @Maj. Kong
    Don Jr. retweeted Kevin MacDonald during the campaign, but he doesn't seem like someone that would actually read the books. He and Eric have a typical jock mindset and don't seem to be self-reflective at all.

    Think of it this way, who would be better at running Breitbart, Bannon or Ron Unz? It could be worse, Ben Shapiro could be brought back.

    Bannon is a good example of "appearance is ideology". You can't be serious when you are a thrice-divorced overweight slob. I don't have much regard for Richard Spencer, but you can't call the man unkempt.


    http://www.rooshv.com/appearance-is-ideology
    , @Berty
    I'm coming around to the idea that Trump doesn't think about anything, he just reacts. He's addicted to television and listening to people talk about him. When people aren't talking about him, as they haven't been since the tax bill passed, he has to do something to make them talk. So he tweets. Or he releasing some statement announcing some policy change. Of course he never follows that up with anything concrete or has his advisers do it for him, so ultimately nothing changes as the machines of government continue on. This has the effect of making him look completely impotent, but he doesn't care because he gets to hear himself being talked about. His poll numbers are awful and get worse every time he pulls some stunt like the NK tweet, but he doesn't care because he thinks they're all fake. Jared and Ivanka have apparently free range to do as they like despite nobody ever voting for them and Trump apparently won't even consider sending them away for a moment.

    I'm not a huge Bannon fan but considering all of this I can't blame him for deciding to simply lay his cards on the table and let the people decide which story is true. This entire administration is turning into a dumpster fire.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @Berty
    Bannon didn't win Trump the election, but he helped focus the campaign's message into one that could resonate with all the right voters. For that he deserves recognition. Trump doesn't seem to realize that it was his message that won the election, not him. Polls consistently showed that large numbers of his voters disliked him as a person and didn't really trust him but voted for him anyway. Now he's at 60% disapproval in Iowa and 52% approval in Mississippi. Not really a good place to be.

    He needs to stop this shit. Focus on trade and immigration this year and forget about pointless tweet fights that the people hate and Paul Ryan's retarded plan to cut Medicaid. Because otherwise you're looking at a bloodbath in November and frankly I'm finding less and less reason to defend him as this garbage continues with no end in sight.

    Good post.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. MEH 0910 says:
    @Opinionator
    What is "Ebony capsule"?

    Black pill.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Ah. Thank you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  80. For Ivanka, it was all business — building the Trump brand, the presidential campaign, and now the White House. She treated her father with a degree of detachment, even irony, going so far as to make fun of his comb-over to others. She often described the mechanics behind it to friends: an absolutely clean pate — a contained island after scalp-reduction ­surgery — surrounded by a furry circle of hair around the sides and front, from which all ends are drawn up to meet in the center and then swept back and secured by a stiffening spray. The color, she would point out to comical effect, was from a product called Just for Men — the longer it was left on, the darker it got. Impatience resulted in Trump’s orange-blond hair color.

    Thank goodness Trump can’t read.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Dissident
    Might it not possibly prove better for the country, though, if The President were to have a falling-out with his daughter Ivanka?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. map says:
    @utu
    Looks like you are imagining too many dimensions in this game.

    Everything about the Trump campaign and the Trump administration is unusual. The typical attacks against Trump, attacks that would have crushed a normal Republican candidate and administration, never panned out.

    There is a reason for that.

    There is a deeper game that is being played. The Trump agenda is being implemented indirectly and, because of indirection, it is much more difficult to defend against, albeit it is slow.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    That's pretty cryptic.
    , @MarcB.

    There is a deeper game that is being played. The Trump agenda is being implemented indirectly and, because of indirection, it is much more difficult to defend against, albeit it is slow.
     
    That's been my perception as well. During the first three months of his presidency, President Trump came across as a hostage of the Establishment, telegraphing his circumstances through blinks, facial expressions and odd turns of phrase that were often at odds with the MAGA agenda. As his first year in office has progressed, it's clear to me that he is taking a more gradual approach to pushing though his agenda while figuring out the tricks from the inside. This has got to be a difficult operating style for someone so adept at the frontal attack.

    Whatever is going on between Bannon and Trump doesn't add up. There were a lot of ways they could have aired their creative differences without going scorched earth through Leftist media intermediaries. This fight is straight out of the Vince McMahon playbook.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. utu says:
    @Berty
    Bannon didn't win Trump the election, but he helped focus the campaign's message into one that could resonate with all the right voters. For that he deserves recognition. Trump doesn't seem to realize that it was his message that won the election, not him. Polls consistently showed that large numbers of his voters disliked him as a person and didn't really trust him but voted for him anyway. Now he's at 60% disapproval in Iowa and 52% approval in Mississippi. Not really a good place to be.

    He needs to stop this shit. Focus on trade and immigration this year and forget about pointless tweet fights that the people hate and Paul Ryan's retarded plan to cut Medicaid. Because otherwise you're looking at a bloodbath in November and frankly I'm finding less and less reason to defend him as this garbage continues with no end in sight.

    Trump doesn’t seem to realize that it was his message that won the election, not him.

    This cuts to the core. Perfect insight.

    He needs to stop this shit.

    He probably is incapable. The “this shit” is him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    This cuts to the core. Perfect insight.

    Well, the statement contains two propositions. I'd say it is true that his nationalist platform was an important factor in his popularity. However, reports and Trump's own conduct suggest he realizes that immigration, trade, and less interventionism are important.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Opinionator
    What is "Ebony capsule"?

    Despair. Tricking you into feeding the archons with negative energy. There’s only one pill, it doesn’t make you despair, it actually makes despair impossible, and it’s not black or blue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    What is that pill?
    , @BEER/ we're all going to die
    The White Pill? Do tell. I want some. Willing to pay premium.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. utu says:
    @Bill B.
    I finally got around to reading the full 35-page Christopher Steele "dossier" on Trump that was paid for by the Democrats and supposedly supplied by the Russians.

    It is, as widely recognised, crap.

    But I have done work, for corporates, not dissimilar to this years ago. I recognise the style. Desperately inflating extremely thin material. Inventive repetition. Filled with usefully vague but just about plausible anecdotes designed to tickle a receptive audience.

    One killer anecdote - golden showers - designed to be excused by the Mandy Rice Davis response "Well he would say that wouldn't he."

    The report trips up with a deniable "fact" saying that Trump's lawyer went to Prague; easily denied by the lawyer who said he has never been to Prague.

    Has anyone ever thought they the whole thing was entirely made up? In other words it is entirely, or almost entirely, fiction? That in fact the Russians never had much to do with this report?

    I once knew a journalist who claimed to have terrific sources inside the Burmese military junta. In other words he was a charlatan...

    The report trips up with a deniable “fact” saying that Trump’s lawyer went to Prague; easily denied by the lawyer who said he has never been to Prague.

    Denials (even by Czech diplomat) that Mohammed Atta was not in Prague meeting Iraqi agents did not stop the US from invading Iraq.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Dissident
    I’m glad that Bannon has been exposed as the charlatan he’s always been.

    Why do you consider Bannon a "charlatan" and how has he been exposed as one? Kindly elaborate.

    Yes, consider that Bannon’s natural competition, the people he is being a “charlatan” by usurping, are the scum in “Our Brand Is Crisis,” Karl Rove, Rick Wilson, and the brothers Podesta. How does Bannon not win that contest (and especially on authenticity) every single time?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    The previous 2 Republican campaign chairs (Schmidt and Stevens) are social liberal RINOs with an open disgust towards the party base. The party hasn't had an authentic organizer since Lee Atwater.

    Bannon has embarrassed himself and his organization. At the least, he should take a leave of absence. At the most, he should consider exile in Argentina.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @MEH 0910
    Black pill.

    Ah. Thank you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @Anonymous IV
    This topic tempts me to unload a lot of thoughts I've had on Trump, Bannon, populism, etc. but I'll try to be concise.

    For one, I agree with Ann Coulter, Kris Kobach and others: Immigration is the number one issue. Lose on that, and all is lost. That's why I supported Trump, despite the defects of his personality. (OK, I'll admit I find the way he upsets Leftist race-baiters kinda funny--in fact the whole world of 4chan memes and stuff amused me in ways I never would have believed of myself a few years ago.) And this is why I hope and pray the Mueller investigation doesn't uncover some nitpicky Russian connection or business deal of the sort no other politician would ever be indicted on. So on similar grounds, I'm not happy that Bannon seems to be undercutting the only hope we seem to have on at least stopping the bleeding on immigration. (I feel the clock is ticking so fast, that we can't just wait another 4, 8 or 12 years for the "perfect" populist-Right candidate to come along.)

    But I do agree with others that Bannon is probably way more of a thinker than Trump or most of his inner circle. In an absolute sense, I'm tempted to think that Bannon is more of a genuine right-wing populist, but the fact is he is not president and so only has the power of Breitbart--which is meaningless power without politicians to enact policy.

    Also, to walk back a bit my first comment on Bannon messing things up: it's not like he's a lawyer. His opinion of it being treasonous doesn't make it so. Putting him under oath to say he was upset with Don Jr. won't make Don Jr's actions suddenly illegal. Yes, Trump's own kids and many in the WH staff seem to be neocons/neoliberals, and perhaps Bannon is genuinely upset at this. I'm not sure how this shakes out in any positive way, though. I think going after Trump's family is a sure way to fall out of grace with Trump permanently (unless this is indeed an orchestrated PR effort.)

    Bannon believes that the immigration issue is everything.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    What about Trump going Turbo-Jeb?

    Read More
    • Replies: @LondonBob
    https://twitter.com/jbro_1776/status/948267724207247362

    Is it a good trade? Don't see hownchain migration and the immigration lottery get changed otherwise.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. @Opinionator
    Why?

    Correction:

    Immigration control is the sine qua non of NATIONALISM.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @Allen
    I like Bannon, but I really don't understand why he would make comments like this. Even if he soured on Trump, why would you give quotes to a leftist like Michael Wolff?

    I'm still confused why, after being dismissed by Trump, Bannon gave an interview to the neocon Weekly Standard of all publications. Why give anything potentially useful to those who are you ideological enemies?

    Bannon's prior strategy of supporting populist candidates like Roy Moore made sense, even if he privately no longer liked what Trump was doing. Likewise Trump's present criticism of Bannon makes sense, even if he's just trying to protect himself from negative press. But what does Bannon gain by publicly turning against Trump and getting positive press from CNN?

    It doesn't help his nationalist movement, doesn't help the Breitbart brand, and only empowers the establishment GOP and leftists whom he claims to hate. There must be something else going on behind this or else Bannon really is as self-absorbed as his worst detractors claimed.

    I don’t know Steve Bannon, but from what I see and read I would guess he’s self aware rather than self absorbed. Regarding empowering the establishment GOP and leftists, who cares? The goal is not to win the heavily invested sanctimonious weaklings feeding on a stale dish of righteous pablum, but rather to persuade a popular majority that the heavily advertised moral high road is a con, and to show them that salvation requires that they abandon the path cheerfully lit by decades of false promises and television fantasy, instead choosing the flinty path of accountability and saying no.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dissident

    the heavily advertised moral high road is a con, and to show them that salvation requires that they abandon the path cheerfully lit by decades of false promises and television fantasy, instead choosing the flinty path of accountability and saying no.
     
    Great sentiment. Consistent with it, I believe, is rejecting Reagan worship.

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-right-was-reagan/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @utu

    Trump doesn’t seem to realize that it was his message that won the election, not him.
     
    This cuts to the core. Perfect insight.

    He needs to stop this shit.
     
    He probably is incapable. The "this shit" is him.

    This cuts to the core. Perfect insight.

    Well, the statement contains two propositions. I’d say it is true that his nationalist platform was an important factor in his popularity. However, reports and Trump’s own conduct suggest he realizes that immigration, trade, and less interventionism are important.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dissident

    However, reports and Trump’s own conduct suggest he realizes that immigration, trade, and less interventionism are important.
     
    That is not exactly the impression I've been getting from listening-to Radio Derb. At least not when it comes to immigration and interventionism. I find John Derbyshire's analysis compelling.
    (NOTE: As of this writing, I have yet to listen to the latest podcast.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @J.Ross
    Despair. Tricking you into feeding the archons with negative energy. There's only one pill, it doesn't make you despair, it actually makes despair impossible, and it's not black or blue.

    What is that pill?

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    The red pill, ie, phronesis under logos. If there is no hope, then that's still no reason to despair.
    , @oddsbodkins
    Xanax (alprazolam, 2mg tablet, Upjohn pharmaceuticals)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. neprof says:
    @whorefinder
    Seems bad (if true---Wolff has been accused of making up quotes before), but nothing major, just fallout from a once-close relationship. Ho-hum, someone who's not a judge or jury sitting in court thinks something Trump's guys did might have been "treason." Yawn. Wake me when we get the indictment, then we can talk about proof.

    Of course, it could be a ploy by Trump-Bannon. Mike Cernovich has correctly noted that, right now, he doesn't see how this could benefit Bannon or Trump. Bannon knows the media inside and out, and knew what this would do to them, but to what purpose? Bannon is a long-term thinker, he doesn't do things to pop off.

    Non-conspiratorial guess: Bannon is pissed at Trump, thinks what happened was bad, and doesn't see Trump accomplishing what Bannon wants. So he's publicly distancing himself from Trump and insulting him, trying to backbite out the door and distance himself from any stain. Donna Brazile-esque.

    Conspiratorial guess: Bannon is doing this to stir the media chum and distance himself from Trump to work behind the scenes, but with seemingly greater credibility to the corporates. Bannon can plausibly be an anti-Trump guy promoting Trump's agenda without being seen as just part of the extended administration. A la Roger Stone has done since being fired by Trump early on but still supporting him and doing Alex Jones regularly.

    In any event, Trump's a pragmatist, if Bannon turned back into loving him in 6 months he'd be forgiven, though Trump would likely take some fun out of embarrassing Bannon. Trump hates you intensely when you cross him but loves you intensely if you come back to him. You're either a worthless loser or else the greatest. Caesar-like.

    Bannon has denied making the statements:

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon?lang=en

    Claims Wolff took his comments “out of context”. Wolff probably interviewed Bannon after 7 pm knowing he had his daily fill of booze. Like a lot of Irish heavy drinkers, Bannon may have got the mean, self-absorbed side of him to talk too much.

    One reason I think Trump didn’t want Bannon around was his drinking. Which can make a smart, reasonable man (before noon) change into an intolerable alpha male by evening.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Is that an authentic account?
    , @G Pinfold

    Wolff probably interviewed Bannon after 7 pm knowing he had his daily fill of booze. Like a lot of Irish heavy drinkers, Bannon may have got the mean, self-absorbed side of him to talk too much.
     
    Too bad he didn’t go full Irish on Wolff.

    One reason I think Trump didn’t want Bannon around was his drinking.
     
    I usually don’t trust teetotallers. They are Caesar’s lean and hungry men. Then again, with Trump, it’s probably for the best that he stays clear of the sideboard. It’s like he fell in a barrel of absinthe as a small child and is forever half cut.
    , @Opinionator

    One reason I think Trump didn’t want Bannon around was his drinking.
     
    Where did you get the idea that Bannon drinks?
    , @Chrisnonymous

    One reason I think Trump didn’t want Bannon around was his drinking.
     
    I think you got it backwards. I think Bannon doesn't drink, and that's probably part of what made Trump attracted to him in the first place...
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5067749/Steve-Bannon-uses-Catholic-faith-stay-sober.html

    In the article Bannon notes how boring many of his interactions were after he became sober. So true.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Anonym says:
    @Anonymous

    Sad that Trump has all but confirmed he’s gone full neocon.
     
    Trump's nothing if not a survivor. He's recognized his best chances of making it past November is to play ball with the most-powerful right-wing contingent since the lefties will never have him. All the stuff he said and did to get elected? Ejected.

    @Dmitry


    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.
     
    Would much rather have had Bannon for president than Trump--at least he stood for something. But he's less electable than a ratcatcher. Same with Jeff Sessions.

    I continue to be amused with my fellow partisans who remain optimistic.

    Trump’s nothing if not a survivor. He’s recognized his best chances of making it past November is to play ball with the most-powerful right-wing contingent since the lefties will never have him. All the stuff he said and did to get elected? Ejected.

    If there is no wall Trump is going to get primaried. I think also with DACA but less sure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Talk about wishful thinking. Trump may face Republican challengers but none of them will be pro-wall.

    As for DACA, only the most fringe losers are butthurt about the idea of law-abiding and hard-working people, few of whom can be said to have meaningfully chosen to come here, getting work permits without any path to citizenship. DACA is the least of our problems.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. utu says:

    ‘Furious and disgusted’ Trump files cease and desist letter against Bannon while Don Jr labels the ex-White House strategist an ‘opportunist’ who created ‘nightmare of backstabbing, harassing, leaking, lying and undermining the President’

    ‘On behalf of our clients, legal notice was issued today to Stephen K. Bannon, that his actions of communicating with author Michael Wolff regarding an upcoming book give rise to numerous legal claims including defamation by libel and slander, and breach of his written confidentiality and non-disparagement agreement with our clients. Legal action is imminent.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5234007/Trump-personally-dictated-Bannon-denouncement.html#ixzz53BldHoLH

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Some of the things I’ve seen reported about this new book seem perplexing to me.

    For instance, apparently Ivanka and Jared agreed that she would run for President, seeking to become the first woman in the job, if they ever had the chance. How does this comport with the claim that the Trump camp never expected to win? If Trump hadn’t won, Hillary would have become President.

    Also, given that almost nobody initially expected Trump to win it all, it follows that somebody must have believed that this was possible, and must have been leading the hard work that would make it happen. If Trump did not think he was going to win, then this could not have been Trump himself. Who then? The accounts I’ve read of this book seem to suggest that Trump regarded his team as being a bunch of incompetents. And yet they somehow pulled off what the elites deemed unthinkable. This makes no sense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eD
    To answer Anonymous # 96, according to the article the "Ivanka for President" thing started after the election.

    No one seems to have thought Trump would win (actually Nate Silver wrote there was about a 20% chance, and this was higher than most people were willing to come out and say). I think the missing factor was just how terrible a candidate Hillary Clinton was. Among ordinary voters, many of them were anti-Hillary voters, as shown by Trump's unusually high unfavorable rating among people who said they voted for him (high compared to normal candidates among their own voters). I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.
    , @MEH 0910
    Steve Sailer --> Ann Coulter --> President Trump
    Trim tab --> Rudder --> Ship of State
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Opinionator
    What is that pill?

    The red pill, ie, phronesis under logos. If there is no hope, then that’s still no reason to despair.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.
     
    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?

    Commenter “Thomm” says a lot of things. He is a bloviating nitwit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    He's got a lot of company in this thread with Berty and utu.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Mr. Anon says:
    @Thomm

    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?
     
    Yes.

    Remember that they were Democrats, and that the subsequent KKK was (and still is) Democrat to this day.

    The economic benefits to both blacks and poorer whites once slavery gave way to sharecropping are well-documented.

    You are a bloviating nitwit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Mr. Anon says:
    @KM32
    What would you expect of a carnival barker reality TV show star? That he was serious about all of this?

    What would you expect of a carnival barker reality TV show star? That he was serious about all of this?

    At least as serious as a spendthrift “community organizer”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Thomm
    Bannon represented the Nationalist-Leftist agenda*, and hence was a better fit with Bernie Sanders than with Trump (who was never a Nationalist-Leftist).

    That fact that Bannon was not just fired, but is being openly slammed by Trump, is exactly how normal Americans feel about Nationalist-Leftists.

    *Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.

    Neither Trump nor Bannon are race nationalists; both have made appeals to black audiences (Bannon two months ago). Both Bannon and Trump are economic nationalists, though I’m not sure Trump has the confidence to stick to his guns against conventional wisdom economic experts surrounding him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomm

    Neither Trump nor Bannon are race nationalists; both have made appeals to black audiences (Bannon two months ago). Both Bannon and Trump are economic nationalists,
     
    I agree about Trump.

    Bannon, not sure. WNs certainly thought he was one of them.

    At any rate, Bannon is of no further importance.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Anonymous IV
    This topic tempts me to unload a lot of thoughts I've had on Trump, Bannon, populism, etc. but I'll try to be concise.

    For one, I agree with Ann Coulter, Kris Kobach and others: Immigration is the number one issue. Lose on that, and all is lost. That's why I supported Trump, despite the defects of his personality. (OK, I'll admit I find the way he upsets Leftist race-baiters kinda funny--in fact the whole world of 4chan memes and stuff amused me in ways I never would have believed of myself a few years ago.) And this is why I hope and pray the Mueller investigation doesn't uncover some nitpicky Russian connection or business deal of the sort no other politician would ever be indicted on. So on similar grounds, I'm not happy that Bannon seems to be undercutting the only hope we seem to have on at least stopping the bleeding on immigration. (I feel the clock is ticking so fast, that we can't just wait another 4, 8 or 12 years for the "perfect" populist-Right candidate to come along.)

    But I do agree with others that Bannon is probably way more of a thinker than Trump or most of his inner circle. In an absolute sense, I'm tempted to think that Bannon is more of a genuine right-wing populist, but the fact is he is not president and so only has the power of Breitbart--which is meaningless power without politicians to enact policy.

    Also, to walk back a bit my first comment on Bannon messing things up: it's not like he's a lawyer. His opinion of it being treasonous doesn't make it so. Putting him under oath to say he was upset with Don Jr. won't make Don Jr's actions suddenly illegal. Yes, Trump's own kids and many in the WH staff seem to be neocons/neoliberals, and perhaps Bannon is genuinely upset at this. I'm not sure how this shakes out in any positive way, though. I think going after Trump's family is a sure way to fall out of grace with Trump permanently (unless this is indeed an orchestrated PR effort.)

    It’s pretty bad. But Bannon is talented (if flawed) and we need to have EVERYBODY on board. Hopefully he can admit his characterization of the meeting was mistaken and apologize.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous IV
    Well, things looked really bad regarding Jeff Sessions last year for a while, and that seems to have blown over. The Bannon/Trump thing has the plus that they don't have to literally work in the same building anymore. I'm just worried that Bannon will turn Breitbart into an anti-Trump vehicle for the remainder of Trump's term. Then again, Breitbart has given Trump a hard time on occasion, only to pull back once Trump starts getting "on message" again. Maybe this won't be such a big deal a few weeks from now. The whole Trump thing, from campaign to administration, has been filled with incidents that seemed fatal but always manage to not be. (so far)
    , @Travis
    "This is total Fake News and taken out of context, don’t believe the liberal propaganda Machine! "- Steve Bannon

    no need for Bannon to apologize to Trump because of the lies written by Michael Wolff.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon/status/948847059368636416

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Mr. Anon says:
    @Bill Millan
    When Trump got in, I said that Trump's kids were going to be a problem. Today's attack on them by Bannon was retaliation for them winning with their Father over Bannon. Bannon wanted Trump to be "Trump." The kids wanted to pull him to the left. They won and Bannon was fired. So he hit back at them.

    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don't outshine your boss.

    When Trump got in, I said that Trump’s kids were going to be a problem. Today’s attack on them by Bannon was retaliation for them winning with their Father over Bannon. Bannon wanted Trump to be “Trump.” The kids wanted to pull him to the left. They won and Bannon was fired. So he hit back at them.

    Bannon has not exactly covered himself in glory since being appointed to the Trump administration, and certainly not since leaving it.

    I agree with you that it was a bad sign (and I thought so at the time) when Trump brought his children and in-laws into his administration. Ivanka and Jared Kushner probably are not and never were even Republicans, let alone Trump-Republicans. If Trump had not run, what are the chances that Ivanka and Jared would have voted for Hillary Clinton and donated to her campaign? Pretty high, I expect. Why should any conservative welcome such people holding positions of high council in the administration.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. The photographs of Trump with a yarmulke on his head at the kvetching wall say it all. What more do you need?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  105. @neprof
    Bannon has denied making the statements:

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon?lang=en

    Claims Wolff took his comments "out of context". Wolff probably interviewed Bannon after 7 pm knowing he had his daily fill of booze. Like a lot of Irish heavy drinkers, Bannon may have got the mean, self-absorbed side of him to talk too much.

    One reason I think Trump didn't want Bannon around was his drinking. Which can make a smart, reasonable man (before noon) change into an intolerable alpha male by evening.

    Is that an authentic account?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @utu
    I would like to know when and what circumstances did Wolff interview Bannon and go the quote about the "treason"? Was it after he was fired in August 2017 or before?

    We will see whether Mercer family will cut off money for Breitbart or demand Bannon resignation from Breitbart?

    The Hill says Rebekah Mercer isn’t happy with Bannon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @Intelligent Dasein
    I'm glad that Bannon has been exposed as the charlatan he's always been. That is the true Trumpian gift, that unique ability to shred the pretensions of others. Trump has a real genius for that; possibly it is his only genius. That is why Trump is not nearly as effective at dealing with people who are grounded in reality and who are also packing some guts and brains. Xi Jinping rolled up Trump like a cheap carpet when the met in Mar-a-Lago, and Putin simply brushes him off. Iran and North Korea have both made it clear that they won't be intimidated. There is a lesson in all of this. If you're capable of calling Trump's bluff then Trump doesn't have anything; but if all you're holding is a pair of deuces, Trump will make you regret that you ever even thought about messing with him.

    Bannon is a very sad man and it irritates me to no end that there were many who looked upon him like he was some sort of Alt-Right colossus, a paragon of wisdom and an architect of victory. He is a flaky, self-aggrandizing mountebank who should not be trusted, and the movement he co-opted deserves much better representation than him.

    Mr. Intelligent Being-in-the-world:

    When are you going to enlighten us with a succinct precis of of Martin Heidegger’s philosophy?

    That should be easy for you, since you’re so intelligent.

    ( “Dasein,” not “Das Sein,” was Heidegger’s neologism for a special state of being. )

    Read More
    • Replies: @vinteuil
    I don't think ID is especially into Heidegger. He comes across (to me, at least) as a bit of a neo-Thomist. His handle just seems jokey.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Maj. Kong says:
    @Opinionator
    Why?

    Russia is regarded as an enemy by probably at least 75% of Americans. We are the exception here, and Russia doesn’t have as much as it did a few years ago to spend on propaganda to bolster their image.

    The left has repeatedly called Sebastian Gorka a “Nazi” based on him visiting some Hungarian group years ago, even though Gorka is a strong Zionist.

    Don Jr. and Jared aren’t exactly geniuses, and both are frankly neophytes when it comes to power politics. Yes, it is minimal compared to Clinton standards, but there is no use complaining about it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. Mr. Anon says:
    @Bill B.
    I finally got around to reading the full 35-page Christopher Steele "dossier" on Trump that was paid for by the Democrats and supposedly supplied by the Russians.

    It is, as widely recognised, crap.

    But I have done work, for corporates, not dissimilar to this years ago. I recognise the style. Desperately inflating extremely thin material. Inventive repetition. Filled with usefully vague but just about plausible anecdotes designed to tickle a receptive audience.

    One killer anecdote - golden showers - designed to be excused by the Mandy Rice Davis response "Well he would say that wouldn't he."

    The report trips up with a deniable "fact" saying that Trump's lawyer went to Prague; easily denied by the lawyer who said he has never been to Prague.

    Has anyone ever thought they the whole thing was entirely made up? In other words it is entirely, or almost entirely, fiction? That in fact the Russians never had much to do with this report?

    I once knew a journalist who claimed to have terrific sources inside the Burmese military junta. In other words he was a charlatan...

    Has anyone ever thought they the whole thing was entirely made up? In other words it is entirely, or almost entirely, fiction? That in fact the Russians never had much to do with this report?

    It would certainly increase the profitibility of the job to simply make it all up.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Maj. Kong says:
    @J.Ross
    Yes, consider that Bannon's natural competition, the people he is being a "charlatan" by usurping, are the scum in "Our Brand Is Crisis," Karl Rove, Rick Wilson, and the brothers Podesta. How does Bannon not win that contest (and especially on authenticity) every single time?

    The previous 2 Republican campaign chairs (Schmidt and Stevens) are social liberal RINOs with an open disgust towards the party base. The party hasn’t had an authentic organizer since Lee Atwater.

    Bannon has embarrassed himself and his organization. At the least, he should take a leave of absence. At the most, he should consider exile in Argentina.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Maj. Kong says:
    @Anonymous IV
    This topic tempts me to unload a lot of thoughts I've had on Trump, Bannon, populism, etc. but I'll try to be concise.

    For one, I agree with Ann Coulter, Kris Kobach and others: Immigration is the number one issue. Lose on that, and all is lost. That's why I supported Trump, despite the defects of his personality. (OK, I'll admit I find the way he upsets Leftist race-baiters kinda funny--in fact the whole world of 4chan memes and stuff amused me in ways I never would have believed of myself a few years ago.) And this is why I hope and pray the Mueller investigation doesn't uncover some nitpicky Russian connection or business deal of the sort no other politician would ever be indicted on. So on similar grounds, I'm not happy that Bannon seems to be undercutting the only hope we seem to have on at least stopping the bleeding on immigration. (I feel the clock is ticking so fast, that we can't just wait another 4, 8 or 12 years for the "perfect" populist-Right candidate to come along.)

    But I do agree with others that Bannon is probably way more of a thinker than Trump or most of his inner circle. In an absolute sense, I'm tempted to think that Bannon is more of a genuine right-wing populist, but the fact is he is not president and so only has the power of Breitbart--which is meaningless power without politicians to enact policy.

    Also, to walk back a bit my first comment on Bannon messing things up: it's not like he's a lawyer. His opinion of it being treasonous doesn't make it so. Putting him under oath to say he was upset with Don Jr. won't make Don Jr's actions suddenly illegal. Yes, Trump's own kids and many in the WH staff seem to be neocons/neoliberals, and perhaps Bannon is genuinely upset at this. I'm not sure how this shakes out in any positive way, though. I think going after Trump's family is a sure way to fall out of grace with Trump permanently (unless this is indeed an orchestrated PR effort.)

    Don Jr. retweeted Kevin MacDonald during the campaign, but he doesn’t seem like someone that would actually read the books. He and Eric have a typical jock mindset and don’t seem to be self-reflective at all.

    Think of it this way, who would be better at running Breitbart, Bannon or Ron Unz? It could be worse, Ben Shapiro could be brought back.

    Bannon is a good example of “appearance is ideology”. You can’t be serious when you are a thrice-divorced overweight slob. I don’t have much regard for Richard Spencer, but you can’t call the man unkempt.

    http://www.rooshv.com/appearance-is-ideology

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dissident

    Don Jr. retweeted Kevin MacDonald during the campaign, but he doesn’t seem like someone that would actually read the books. He and Eric have a typical jock mindset and don’t seem to be self-reflective at all.
     
    Now, where could they have gotten such a mindset from? I cannot begin to imagine...

    You can’t be serious when you are a thrice-divorced overweight slob.
     
    That's for sure. Now, a twice-divorced, overweight carnival barker who, with children still at tender ages, publicly boasted about being a serial adulterer, on the other hand...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Bubba says:
    @Redman
    Very true. And I sided with Rudy on that as well. Bratton had too big of an ego and political ambition. Rudy wanted the spotlight and, frankly, deserved it in the early years of his mayoralty.

    But Bratton was always given too much credit for the lower crime rates. Time has shown that the improving NYC economy and increasing gentrification had a more significant impact.

    “Gentrification” in NYC (and everywhere else in the USA) means moving African Americans to section 8 housing in white suburbs so politically connected developers can make billions. It’s just moving the crime and welfare problems to those who moved away from it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @Opinionator
    What is that pill?

    Xanax (alprazolam, 2mg tablet, Upjohn pharmaceuticals)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil
    2 mg alprazolam would knock me out pretty good. 0.25 mg works nicely as an occasional chill pill, and 0.5-1 mg will put me to sleep.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. bartok says:
    @istevefan

    I commented when Bannon was on the cover of TIME that you don’t outshine your boss.
     
    Was that Bannon's fault that Time put him on the cover? I thought at the time it was a deliberate ploy by Time to sow discord. The media figured Trump had an ego and so they felt they could get under his skin by making it look like others were the real brains behind the campaign.

    I think Bannon was dumb to be interviewed, but I don't know if he knew he was going to be the cover boy.

    Bannon could have held a press conference denouncing the idea of ‘President Bannon’, ridiculing Time’s content-free journalism, etc.

    Why didn’t he?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Intelligent Dasein
    I'm glad that Bannon has been exposed as the charlatan he's always been. That is the true Trumpian gift, that unique ability to shred the pretensions of others. Trump has a real genius for that; possibly it is his only genius. That is why Trump is not nearly as effective at dealing with people who are grounded in reality and who are also packing some guts and brains. Xi Jinping rolled up Trump like a cheap carpet when the met in Mar-a-Lago, and Putin simply brushes him off. Iran and North Korea have both made it clear that they won't be intimidated. There is a lesson in all of this. If you're capable of calling Trump's bluff then Trump doesn't have anything; but if all you're holding is a pair of deuces, Trump will make you regret that you ever even thought about messing with him.

    Bannon is a very sad man and it irritates me to no end that there were many who looked upon him like he was some sort of Alt-Right colossus, a paragon of wisdom and an architect of victory. He is a flaky, self-aggrandizing mountebank who should not be trusted, and the movement he co-opted deserves much better representation than him.

    The reports of Bannon’s death have been greatly exaggerated.
    Stay tuned!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Whiskey says: • Website

    About what I expected. What got Trump the Presidency is what will get him impeached and convicted if not defeated for re-election; and its likely (a purely political move) that the former happens rather than the latter. Trump IS a prickly a-hole, just like Bannon, and the dispute has always been about Trumps biggest failing: depending on Daddy’s Princess Ivanka and Jared the son he never had.

    Both Kushners are a disaster — privileged insiders no different than Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama in outlook, hatred of the Deplorables, or globalist internationalism.

    Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal. But rather the influence the Kushners have on going along with the GOPe/Dem agenda of globalist sell out of the Deplorables. Seen any walls built lately? We all know Mass Amnesty is coming, again. We all know Open Borders is coming as well. We all know Trump will cave on any trade deal (not that it mattes with half the Third World moving here). We all know White men are at best fifth class peons in the new Globalist Open Border world. None of that will change with the Kushners in charge and will only get worse.

    Most average normal White dudes are fine with Trump calling the BS on the Iran Deal. We pretended not to notice while Khameni and the Guard built a mini-Persian empire and nuked up. Falling apart now that none of the money went to ordinary people getting hammered by inflation while the Guard and Mullahs live like kings. That young people are shouting for the return of the Shah is extra-ordinary. Trump can recognize a failing deal and bail out of it at least as he can recognize BS deals from long experience.

    Same with Israel and Jerusalem. It had long been Democratic-Republican policy, signed into law by Bill Clinton and waivered ever since by Clinton, Bush, Obama, that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel and that the US would at some point move its Embassy there. Trump just ended the idiotic charades of pretending we wouldn’t. Its open and honest. No one cares about it other than the Palestinians and the Arab world engaged with Iran trying to conquer it (again) has other issues at the moment.

    Same with North Korea. Clinton, Bush, Obama all kicked the can down the road, refusing to confront the Kims and China which has been using the Kims to kick the US in the balls while pretending its a “rogue state” (that they consistently supply, support and prop up). Those North Korean nukes are just Chinese nukes rebranded. Trump has at least recognized the futility of kicking the can down the road once more and has decided to end the game one way or another. I’m fine with half of Korea being flattened by artillery fire and nukes if it means no North Korean nukes hit LA since I work there most days.

    That’s Trump’s one big virtue — the art of seeing through the BS deals like Mass Third World immigration or pretending Iran is our new friend or that we didn’t really mean our embassy law. Its why the Elites and Pussy Hatters and Nasty Women and Oprah, all champions of the BS deals and pretending real hard for fantasy hate hate hate him. And his one big flaw is refusing to see his idiot daughter and son in law as they are — giant political/cultural boat anchors. Who pretend real hard in BS deals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal. But rather the influence the Kushners have on going along with the GOPe/Dem agenda of globalist sell out of the Deplorables.
     
    That was my feeling in the beginning, but to be fair to Trump, he's surrounded, boxed in, and with no political experience or real knowledge of how things work at that level of government. Even without the Kushners, I think he would be having a hard time resisting. He can't do everything by himself.
    , @Twodees Partain
    "We pretended not to notice while Khameni and the Guard built a mini-Persian empire and nuked up."

    Nobody "pretended not to notice" something that only happened in the imagination of people like Mad Dog Mattis.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    "Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal."

    His weakness is that he makes those issues a substitute for doing anything about implementing the policies which won him the election (and for which Bannon was a brilliant publicist).

    It's a great pity that Bannon and Trump are now sundered, on the word of a Guardian correspondent who looks like the villain in an Austin Powers movie.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Evil

    https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/4c5a32592ee22f7ffab377381f815c81ab9ade6e/0_259_3888_2333/master/3888.jpg?w=300&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=9960359280a093a7e2d6bdd9c577fd02
    , @istevefan

    Seen any walls built lately?
     
    Do you still have an animus against Pat Buchanan? You know the one guy in the public eye who has pushed for tough border controls and against the third world invasion of the US since 1992?
    , @utu

    Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal. But rather the influence the Kushners
     
    Perhaps Trump would agree with you:

    He [Trump] called Jared Kushner a 'suck-up' and said he should never have let Ivanka and her husband move to Washington
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5235169/Trumps-aides-say-hes-not-job-author-alleges.html#ixzz53ICdrIT6
     
    BTW, the Iran deal was the greatest Obama accomplishment and then not vetoing the UN resolution as his parting shot at Netanyahu was the cherry on the top.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Thomm says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Neither Trump nor Bannon are race nationalists; both have made appeals to black audiences (Bannon two months ago). Both Bannon and Trump are economic nationalists, though I'm not sure Trump has the confidence to stick to his guns against conventional wisdom economic experts surrounding him.

    Neither Trump nor Bannon are race nationalists; both have made appeals to black audiences (Bannon two months ago). Both Bannon and Trump are economic nationalists,

    I agree about Trump.

    Bannon, not sure. WNs certainly thought he was one of them.

    At any rate, Bannon is of no further importance.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @J.Ross
    Despair. Tricking you into feeding the archons with negative energy. There's only one pill, it doesn't make you despair, it actually makes despair impossible, and it's not black or blue.

    The White Pill? Do tell. I want some. Willing to pay premium.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. fish says:
    @Tiny Duck
    Conservatives are joke

    white men are pathetic

    Can you guys get it together?

    Ohs Tinys…..white mens cants gets its togethers…..only lensert and Tinys cans gets its togethers….. iffen yous gets mys meanings.

    Lensert “I bein likes to Drive” Pissed

    Read More
    • LOL: Jim Don Bob
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Old fogey says:

    I’m just wondering what is happening today that we are not supposed to notice?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  121. @Anonymous
    The thing that interested me about that Michael Wolff hype-excerpt was that certain names never came up (e.g. Stephen Miller)-- Reince was represented thinly & it seemed off. I'm guessing Kellyanne Conway (Mercer deputy from way back) gave him no usable dirt. I realize Wolff is more comfortable leaking gossip from Manhattanite media mouths like Rupert Murdoch but he obviously didn't try to talk to everyone in the West Wing despite his b.s. touting of journalistic bonafides. P.S. Justin Timberlake is flying to white: http://theoutline.com/post/2839/justin-timberlake-man-of-the-woods-pivot

    He’ll have to knock up Jessica Biel a few more times for me to even consider accepting him as a white man.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. @Opinionator
    Trump is a much stronger nationalist than Sanders. I don't know that Sanders is even deserving of the appellation. He is weak on immigration control, which is the sine qua non of immigration. He probably fears nationalist sentiment (except Zionism). On Israel, he is a Zionist who plays the role of damage control agent.

    (In any event, the Left-Right paradigm is obsolete.)

    Bannon chose the right horse. A shame he (Bannon) is so undisciplined. There can be no excuse for taking pot shots at the president with members of the opposition press. The stakes are too high.

    He is weak on immigration control, which is the sine qua non of immigration.

    Neither Trump or Bernie had stances on immigration which I could agree with.
    Bernie has said ‘ A nation state cannot exist without borders. ‘ Very true.

    And neither can a Democratic Socialist provide the American people with single payer health care and free higher education (community college) while opening the floodgates to uncontrolled immigration.
    The cost would be too great, not to mention the task of vetting and monitoring the immigrants after they arrive here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Here is Trump's stance on immigration. Where do you disagree?

    https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Immigration-Reform-Trump.pdf

    Bannon thinks immigration is central and was one of the few people who was outspoken about legal immigration being a problem. See also the coverage and hires at Breitbart.

    Sanders statement is just an abstract platitude, with no teeth (and intended that way). Safe and meaningless, because he'll never be called on implementing it. He's been a federal lawmaker for how many decades? What is his immigration control legislation?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Dissident says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    For Ivanka, it was all business — building the Trump brand, the presidential campaign, and now the White House. She treated her father with a degree of detachment, even irony, going so far as to make fun of his comb-over to others. She often described the mechanics behind it to friends: an absolutely clean pate — a contained island after scalp-reduction ­surgery — surrounded by a furry circle of hair around the sides and front, from which all ends are drawn up to meet in the center and then swept back and secured by a stiffening spray. The color, she would point out to comical effect, was from a product called Just for Men — the longer it was left on, the darker it got. Impatience resulted in Trump’s orange-blond hair color.
     
    Thank goodness Trump can't read.

    Might it not possibly prove better for the country, though, if The President were to have a falling-out with his daughter Ivanka?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. It’s like a very bad break up of a couple who were once passionately in love. Insults launched, rebuttals fired back, a book’s been written; …. all that’s missing is the bitter custody battle.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  125. @Dmitry
    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.

    It's inevitable that this kind of argument would occur. Generally an organization can only have one such person in it at a time - and that's usually the person at top.

    If you put two of these kind of personalities too closely together, they soon will have this kind of argument. A drama not of much interest though.

    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.

    Yeah, i don’t understand all these worms who leave the White House and then run off to gossip to reporters, or sell some gossipy b.s. themselves.

    Loyalty is a virtue. If you need to bitch to your wife or your friends fine. But you don’t bitch to any reporters. You don’t piss on the guy who hired you. And yes, even if you got fired. And even if the President isn’t singing your praises. If politics is actually about anything real–i.e. real ideas and principals–then your job is not to wreck the administration and policies you support. The only call for it would be if there’s some higher loyalty–to your nation or morality–that compels you to call out the behavior of you old boss. In which case you should be forthright and clear about it.

    Bannon seems to be a motormouth who is just–potentially–damaging Trump. Giving anti-Trump ammunition precisely to the pond scum with an anti-nationalist agenda. How this is respectible or honorable behavior is beyond me.

    Of course, this Michael Wolff guy is apparently such a lying POS of that–at least in this case–the stuff might be essentially made up and Bannon innocent.

    Read More
    • Agree: Opinionator
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Seems like nearly every time I read some serious horse sense on here it's under your name.

    Thanks
    , @Redman
    Well said.

    Is it me or does Michael Wolff closely resemble Dr. Evil?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. A bit off-topic, but I’ll throw it out. I hope Steve King (R-Iowa) runs against Trump for the Republican nomination in 2020. Steve is already 68 years old and not a career politician. He’s as close to a race-realist candidate as we can get in present-day America. He wouldn’t win, of course, but it would be an interesting way to retire from politics and could be the beginning of something resembling a third party or a way to transform the Republican Party into the White Party, just as te Democratic Party is transforming itself into the Black Party..

    Draft Steve (King) in 2020!

    Read More
    • LOL: IHTG
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  127. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    I continue to be amused with my fellow partisans who remain optimistic.
     
    Yes, because despair is always a winning strategy, right Spanky?

    Heh… you said ‘winning’…

    Here’s a clue. After despair (probably during your early teenage years, when you begin to figure things out) comes resignation, and then a few more phases before you get to amusement. You’ll come along, eventually.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    After despair (probably during your early teenage years, when you begin to figure things out) comes resignation, and then a few more phases before you get to amusement. You’ll come along, eventually.
     
    I was born in hope, but steeped in hopelessness. Despair was my companion, but never my friend. Resignation was my patrimony from time immemorial and amusement I save for humor, a good story and beauty.

    I won't come along, because I am working for victory.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @istevefan

    Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside,...
     
    First, I thought Bannon was for Mo Brooks. And since Mo got torpedoed by the GOPe in favor of Luther Strange. Bannon then supported Moore.

    Second, the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history, or at least in my lifetime. Five minutes after the so called scandal hit the news in early November, the GOPe led the calls for Moore to withdraw. They proceeded to starve his campaign of money and supply endless talking points in favor of the opposition right up to the last day of the campaign when Senator Shelby told the world he did not vote for Moore.

    The debacle of the Moore campaign was not Bannon's fault. It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don't get their way, they don't return the favor.

    BTW, I haven't heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it's "mission accomplished" and we will never hear of it again.

    I haven’t heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it’s “mission accomplished” and we will never hear of it again.

    Thank you for pointing this out. Yep, stories only last so long as they’re useful.

    Meanwhile, the correct use of “whom” in the statement attributed to President Trump indicates that he didn’t write it himself. Or that he has an alert, educated proofreader.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    We have many great Republican members of Congress and candidates who are very supportive of the Make America Great Again agenda.
     
    This statement seems to indicate that the writer is an RNC operative, but this could be a sophisticated false flag to hide the author's Deep State or DNC affiliations.

    BTW the writer of the anti-Bannon screed is almost certainly female judging by the tone and unrelenting pace of the invective.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @Bernardista

    He is weak on immigration control, which is the sine qua non of immigration.
     
    Neither Trump or Bernie had stances on immigration which I could agree with.
    Bernie has said ' A nation state cannot exist without borders. ' Very true.

    And neither can a Democratic Socialist provide the American people with single payer health care and free higher education (community college) while opening the floodgates to uncontrolled immigration.
    The cost would be too great, not to mention the task of vetting and monitoring the immigrants after they arrive here.

    Here is Trump’s stance on immigration. Where do you disagree?

    https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Immigration-Reform-Trump.pdf

    Bannon thinks immigration is central and was one of the few people who was outspoken about legal immigration being a problem. See also the coverage and hires at Breitbart.

    Sanders statement is just an abstract platitude, with no teeth (and intended that way). Safe and meaningless, because he’ll never be called on implementing it. He’s been a federal lawmaker for how many decades? What is his immigration control legislation?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bernardista

    Here is Trump’s stance on immigration. Where do you disagree?
     
    With very little, as it is written. It's the way it's being carried out that is frustrating. His emphasis on deportation is getting in the way of reform.

    To me, the holy grail of immigration reform is the wall. Bernie also devotes a great deal of support for it in his Fair and Humane Immigration Policy.
    Secondly, but still very important is getting rid of the disastrous H-1Bs.

    If Trump ever succeeds in getting the wall or any other of his immigration reforms , he will only be able to do it with a compromise regarding DACA that will make a lot of people angry. So be it. IMO I think it should really be enough to deport only dreamers with criminal records.

    I may of course be wrong, because I have no window into the Mr. Trump's psyche, but I'm pretty sure a lot of his DACA hate springs from his obsessive hatred of Obama. Either that, (or in addition to it) his hard line againt DACA is there to mollify his base, as much as Bernie's soft in the tooth responses were there in 2016 to mollify his.

    Bernie took some heat for his vote against Immigration Reform in 2007.

    Mr. Sanders was part of an effort by liberal Democrats to kill the bill that year. His language at the time often related not to the concerns of the workers receiving the visas, but to the bill’s impact on American wage-earners. And those words are at odds with how much of the Democratic Party currently discusses immigration overhaul, all but guaranteeing he will continue to be asked to clarify his views.

    https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/19/bernie-sanders-cant-escape-questions-about-2007-vote-on-immigration-overhaul/

    So...... in 2013, he voted in favor of Immigration Reform which passed 68-32 and as you know was all about pathways to citizenship (Dreamers, etc.) and increased security at the border.

    Bannon thinks immigration is central and was one of the few people who was outspoken about legal immigration being a problem.

     

    I know. I'm a fan.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. @J.Ross
    Admitted plagiarist Gerald Posner is more nauseating to look at, because he has this creepily inappropriate boy face and cut.

    http://images.gawker.com/18k3fa15v5tjajpg/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800.jpg

    He has that same sort of elflike,kind of eastern European look that Polanski has.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Not Raul
    Bannon is right, though: if the Trump campaign had to send anyone to see the Russians, it should have been lawyers, and they shouldn’t have met at the Trump Tower.

    Politicians don’t farm out the job of professional diplomacy to lawyers. Diplomatic negotiations are not a court case.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You've got to be kidding. The setup for the meeting was not to talk about bilateral relations. Don Jr thought the Russian government was going to supply some dirt on the Hilary campaign at the meeting. If you plan on taking the risk of doing something illegal like that yes you call in the lawyers to try to minimize exposure.
    , @Not Raul
    They weren’t “diplomatic negotiations”. Kushner wanted dirt on Hillary. Diplomatic negotiations by a private citizen (Trump wasn’t President yet) are illegal.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. G Pinfold says:
    @neprof
    Bannon has denied making the statements:

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon?lang=en

    Claims Wolff took his comments "out of context". Wolff probably interviewed Bannon after 7 pm knowing he had his daily fill of booze. Like a lot of Irish heavy drinkers, Bannon may have got the mean, self-absorbed side of him to talk too much.

    One reason I think Trump didn't want Bannon around was his drinking. Which can make a smart, reasonable man (before noon) change into an intolerable alpha male by evening.

    Wolff probably interviewed Bannon after 7 pm knowing he had his daily fill of booze. Like a lot of Irish heavy drinkers, Bannon may have got the mean, self-absorbed side of him to talk too much.

    Too bad he didn’t go full Irish on Wolff.

    One reason I think Trump didn’t want Bannon around was his drinking.

    I usually don’t trust teetotallers. They are Caesar’s lean and hungry men. Then again, with Trump, it’s probably for the best that he stays clear of the sideboard. It’s like he fell in a barrel of absinthe as a small child and is forever half cut.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Eagle Eye says:
    @EdwardM
    Is this more (a) in line with the caricature of Trump as thin-skinned, not wanting to share credit or accept criticism, etc. or (b) a calculation to mollify and build a bridge to the Establishment, make Bannon into a lightening rod from whom Trump can distance himself -- for which Bannon's attacks in the book provided the perfect invitation?

    Needless to say, I don't buy into the media caricature of Trump, but I can't imagine that it's fully calculated as in scenario (b).

    Even if everything he said in his statement about Bannon's role, access, leaks, and mental health is true, I don't really like the look of throwing Bannon under the bus. Even if Steve Bannon's strategizing was not instrumental in getting Trump elected (and I believe that it was), the constituency and ideas that Bannon represents were. Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside, I believe that Bannon's efforts to create a party-within-a-party of pro-Trumpism Republican members of Congress would serve benefit the president's agenda, and there doesn't appear to be anyone else capable of and inclined to spearhead such an effort.

    Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party.

    Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn’t as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country. Yet Steve had everything to do with the loss of a Senate seat in Alabama held for more than thirty years by Republicans. Steve doesn’t represent my base—he’s only in it for himself.

    Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.

    We have many great Republican members of Congress and candidates who are very supportive of the Make America Great Again agenda. Like me, they love the United States of America and are helping to finally take our country back and build it up, rather than simply seeking to burn it all down.
     

    When [Bannon] was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.

    Wow – wonder who wrote this?

    Most likely the author is some deep-cover operative in the entourage of Jared Kushner but actually reporting to the Democrats and/or Deep State. Trump himself has generally not tended to be gratuitously vicious about former staff and associates.

    As always, the question is cui bono. Throwing former allies under the bus is never admirable but sometimes happens in the rough-and-tumble of high-level politics.

    However, this statement goes far beyond disowning a former high-level adviser. It gratuitously twists the knife in a way that seems wholly unnecessary and counter-productive. The REAL EFFECT will most likely be an accelerating run of quiet defections by members of Trump’s entourage to the Deep State and Democratic/Clinton machines which can offer better long-term security, financially and politically.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Allen
    I like Bannon, but I really don't understand why he would make comments like this. Even if he soured on Trump, why would you give quotes to a leftist like Michael Wolff?

    I'm still confused why, after being dismissed by Trump, Bannon gave an interview to the neocon Weekly Standard of all publications. Why give anything potentially useful to those who are you ideological enemies?

    Bannon's prior strategy of supporting populist candidates like Roy Moore made sense, even if he privately no longer liked what Trump was doing. Likewise Trump's present criticism of Bannon makes sense, even if he's just trying to protect himself from negative press. But what does Bannon gain by publicly turning against Trump and getting positive press from CNN?

    It doesn't help his nationalist movement, doesn't help the Breitbart brand, and only empowers the establishment GOP and leftists whom he claims to hate. There must be something else going on behind this or else Bannon really is as self-absorbed as his worst detractors claimed.

    Bannon is too erratic and flaky to be the leader of a cause. It’s morally wrong to backstab your own side for money and silly attention-seeking. Bannon needs to be gone for good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Unlikely he did it for money. He's just kind of bombastic and prone to hyberbole by nature.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Infuriated Canadian
    OT: Netanyahu statement regarding deportations:

    http://www.pmo.gov.il/English/MediaCenter/Spokesman/Pages/spokeStart030118.aspx

    "Every country must guard its borders. Guarding the borders against illegal infiltration is both a right and a fundamental obligation of a sovereign state. To this end, we carried out two good actions..."

    "...I am pleased that we are getting underway; this problem will be solved. Israel is, in effect, one of the only countries in the world that has succeeded in taking control of this phenomenon, and this has become more vital, and not less, in the restless world in which we live."

    The phrase ‘cognitive dissonance’ never had such impact as it does when we consider the chosenites’ somewhat dissimilar stance regarding America. And Europe. (And Canada, and Australia, and NZ, I grant these things!) But only those–what could it be that they have (or had) in common?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Neoconned says:
    @Kaz
    Sad that Trump has all but confirmed he's gone full neocon.

    Exactly now bill Kristol and the mustache are on there on fox news talking about how “kinetic action is now unavoidable” and how regime change in Iran is the only option.

    Trump made a deal w the devil….he’d throw bannon under the bus and go all in for the wars…in return they’ll shut the f up about Russia gate

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @BEER/ we're all going to die
    Ebony capsule.

    -Trump is a one term President.

    -MAGA populist nationalist agenda is certainly not happening.

    How much Steve Bannon's inglorious fall affected the failure of the America first agenda isn't so clear but it doesn't need to be. The writing is on the wall.

    -Trump is a one term President.

    -MAGA populist nationalist agenda is certainly not happening.

    Am I missing something or are you all missing something? Come November of this year, the Dems take veto-proof majorities in both Houses of Congress and Trump is an afterthought at best. The MSM and the Forces of Reaction they represent aren’t going to make the same mistake twice. Trump should get out in front of this and replace ‘MAGA’ with “Après moi, le Déluge.”

    Hope you all enjoyed your little fantasy while it lasted. Demographic replacement is forever.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    What makes you think they will take majorities in the House and Senate?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Eagle Eye says:
    @Anonymous

    I haven’t heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it’s “mission accomplished” and we will never hear of it again.
     
    Thank you for pointing this out. Yep, stories only last so long as they're useful.

    Meanwhile, the correct use of "whom" in the statement attributed to President Trump indicates that he didn't write it himself. Or that he has an alert, educated proofreader.

    We have many great Republican members of Congress and candidates who are very supportive of the Make America Great Again agenda.

    This statement seems to indicate that the writer is an RNC operative, but this could be a sophisticated false flag to hide the author’s Deep State or DNC affiliations.

    BTW the writer of the anti-Bannon screed is almost certainly female judging by the tone and unrelenting pace of the invective.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @oddsbodkins
    Xanax (alprazolam, 2mg tablet, Upjohn pharmaceuticals)

    2 mg alprazolam would knock me out pretty good. 0.25 mg works nicely as an occasional chill pill, and 0.5-1 mg will put me to sleep.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @neprof
    Bannon has denied making the statements:

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon?lang=en

    Claims Wolff took his comments "out of context". Wolff probably interviewed Bannon after 7 pm knowing he had his daily fill of booze. Like a lot of Irish heavy drinkers, Bannon may have got the mean, self-absorbed side of him to talk too much.

    One reason I think Trump didn't want Bannon around was his drinking. Which can make a smart, reasonable man (before noon) change into an intolerable alpha male by evening.

    One reason I think Trump didn’t want Bannon around was his drinking.

    Where did you get the idea that Bannon drinks?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Berty says:
    @Anonymous IV
    This topic tempts me to unload a lot of thoughts I've had on Trump, Bannon, populism, etc. but I'll try to be concise.

    For one, I agree with Ann Coulter, Kris Kobach and others: Immigration is the number one issue. Lose on that, and all is lost. That's why I supported Trump, despite the defects of his personality. (OK, I'll admit I find the way he upsets Leftist race-baiters kinda funny--in fact the whole world of 4chan memes and stuff amused me in ways I never would have believed of myself a few years ago.) And this is why I hope and pray the Mueller investigation doesn't uncover some nitpicky Russian connection or business deal of the sort no other politician would ever be indicted on. So on similar grounds, I'm not happy that Bannon seems to be undercutting the only hope we seem to have on at least stopping the bleeding on immigration. (I feel the clock is ticking so fast, that we can't just wait another 4, 8 or 12 years for the "perfect" populist-Right candidate to come along.)

    But I do agree with others that Bannon is probably way more of a thinker than Trump or most of his inner circle. In an absolute sense, I'm tempted to think that Bannon is more of a genuine right-wing populist, but the fact is he is not president and so only has the power of Breitbart--which is meaningless power without politicians to enact policy.

    Also, to walk back a bit my first comment on Bannon messing things up: it's not like he's a lawyer. His opinion of it being treasonous doesn't make it so. Putting him under oath to say he was upset with Don Jr. won't make Don Jr's actions suddenly illegal. Yes, Trump's own kids and many in the WH staff seem to be neocons/neoliberals, and perhaps Bannon is genuinely upset at this. I'm not sure how this shakes out in any positive way, though. I think going after Trump's family is a sure way to fall out of grace with Trump permanently (unless this is indeed an orchestrated PR effort.)

    I’m coming around to the idea that Trump doesn’t think about anything, he just reacts. He’s addicted to television and listening to people talk about him. When people aren’t talking about him, as they haven’t been since the tax bill passed, he has to do something to make them talk. So he tweets. Or he releasing some statement announcing some policy change. Of course he never follows that up with anything concrete or has his advisers do it for him, so ultimately nothing changes as the machines of government continue on. This has the effect of making him look completely impotent, but he doesn’t care because he gets to hear himself being talked about. His poll numbers are awful and get worse every time he pulls some stunt like the NK tweet, but he doesn’t care because he thinks they’re all fake. Jared and Ivanka have apparently free range to do as they like despite nobody ever voting for them and Trump apparently won’t even consider sending them away for a moment.

    I’m not a huge Bannon fan but considering all of this I can’t blame him for deciding to simply lay his cards on the table and let the people decide which story is true. This entire administration is turning into a dumpster fire.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous IV
    One problem that seems built-in is: where do you get people to staff up the government? Everyone with experience is going to have been part of the Obama/Bush/Clinton/Bush eras. And most right-leaning think tanks are neocon or libertarian (and thus open borders, pro Wall Street, free trader.) So it's no surprise Trump is surrounded by establishment types.

    I was naive enough to have thought much of Trump's thing was an act during the campaign, and that he would dial it down once in office. Ha! That most people in this country don't follow politics is a mixed blessing. (Those of us who participate places like this blog can overestimate how many political junkies there are in this country.) I'm sure lots of people aren't really following the ups and downs, but the general flavor of the administration is seeping out via media portrayals, jokes, etc. I can see a lot of moderate Trump voters in the heartland losing enthusiasm for the midterms, or thinking that we need a Democratic congress to "contain" Trump.

    What can be salvaged? Hope Trump hangs on long enough to replace one more Supreme Court justice (two would be great!) I'm old enough at least I could probably live the rest of my life out without SCOTUS taking away 1st and 2nd Amendment rights so long as he gets a couple of 50ish conservatives on the bench. Otherwise: can the GOP get the Raise Act through the same way they did the Tax Cut? That would be OK with me. Can they get some funding for some kind of permanent barriers on the border? I don't need a 2000 mile, 50-foot wall to be happy. I'll take some multi-layer fencing in areas the Border Patrol say are high priority. And they'd better hurry. If they lose the House this year, nothin' is getting done except executive orders and judicial appointments from that point on.
    , @Redman
    What planet have you been living on? The media hasn’t shut up about Trump for more than 5 seconds in the last 2 1/2 years.

    What did Bannon say that you believe is “true”? That Trump and son commited treason?

    The Mueller investigation is on its heels and this is bad timing for Bannon. It’s found nothing on Trump and appears to have nothing but bs in the hopper, which is why it’s now desperately leaking to the NYT about “coffee boy” Papadopoulos.

    Bannon shot himself in the foot with this one. Disloyalty is a major no-no in populist politicians. Trump had every right to come down on him like a ton of bricks. And his base will love him for it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @Anonymous

    -Trump is a one term President.

    -MAGA populist nationalist agenda is certainly not happening.
     
    Am I missing something or are you all missing something? Come November of this year, the Dems take veto-proof majorities in both Houses of Congress and Trump is an afterthought at best. The MSM and the Forces of Reaction they represent aren't going to make the same mistake twice. Trump should get out in front of this and replace 'MAGA' with "Après moi, le Déluge."

    Hope you all enjoyed your little fantasy while it lasted. Demographic replacement is forever.

    What makes you think they will take majorities in the House and Senate?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Alabama, and the onslaught of MSM propaganda put into force for that race. It's 24/7/365 attacking Trump every which way now, and though many of us (myself included) do not indulge, the vast, vast majority of Americans get their 'news' spoon-fed to them by the Establishment. Young people think they're being edgy because they get their 'news' from people like Mark Oliver, Trevor Noah, and Stephen Colbert. It's the same crap, just with more foul language.

    Trump hasn't done much to cement his own brand lately. He's only lost support, and made a number of unforced errors, and definitely lost sight of the ball. Either he doesn't know or doesn't care why he was elected. All of this will play out in November. OTOH November isn't next week.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. @Anon
    Bannon is too erratic and flaky to be the leader of a cause. It's morally wrong to backstab your own side for money and silly attention-seeking. Bannon needs to be gone for good.

    Unlikely he did it for money. He’s just kind of bombastic and prone to hyberbole by nature.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. eD says:
    @Anonymous
    Some of the things I've seen reported about this new book seem perplexing to me.

    For instance, apparently Ivanka and Jared agreed that she would run for President, seeking to become the first woman in the job, if they ever had the chance. How does this comport with the claim that the Trump camp never expected to win? If Trump hadn't won, Hillary would have become President.

    Also, given that almost nobody initially expected Trump to win it all, it follows that somebody must have believed that this was possible, and must have been leading the hard work that would make it happen. If Trump did not think he was going to win, then this could not have been Trump himself. Who then? The accounts I've read of this book seem to suggest that Trump regarded his team as being a bunch of incompetents. And yet they somehow pulled off what the elites deemed unthinkable. This makes no sense.

    To answer Anonymous # 96, according to the article the “Ivanka for President” thing started after the election.

    No one seems to have thought Trump would win (actually Nate Silver wrote there was about a 20% chance, and this was higher than most people were willing to come out and say). I think the missing factor was just how terrible a candidate Hillary Clinton was. Among ordinary voters, many of them were anti-Hillary voters, as shown by Trump’s unusually high unfavorable rating among people who said they voted for him (high compared to normal candidates among their own voters). I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.
     
    Very astute thought. This would explain Comey's flip-flop.

    Perhaps Hillary's updated kill list found its way into the hands of one of the intended victims - perhaps Comey himself?

    On a related point - to what extent are election results still real in the face of massive election fraud in many states? "Disappearing" or neutralizing 5% of votes cast either way in critical elections through various stratagems and devices seems to be a pretty common operation in many counties.

    , @utu

    I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.
     
    I have entertained a similar idea already few weeks before election when I saw some indicators of the shift in Trumps favor. I do not know the mechanism how the election stealing is done but I think it is possible. Trump may not be too interested in disclosing the mechanism:

    Trump Disbands Commission on Voter Fraud
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/us/politics/trump-voter-fraud-commission.html
    President Trump on Wednesday abruptly shut down a White House commission he had charged with investigating voter fraud, ending a brief quest for evidence of election theft that generated lawsuits, outrage and some scholarly testimony, but no real evidence that American elections are corrupt.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @neprof
    Bannon has denied making the statements:

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon?lang=en

    Claims Wolff took his comments "out of context". Wolff probably interviewed Bannon after 7 pm knowing he had his daily fill of booze. Like a lot of Irish heavy drinkers, Bannon may have got the mean, self-absorbed side of him to talk too much.

    One reason I think Trump didn't want Bannon around was his drinking. Which can make a smart, reasonable man (before noon) change into an intolerable alpha male by evening.

    One reason I think Trump didn’t want Bannon around was his drinking.

    I think you got it backwards. I think Bannon doesn’t drink, and that’s probably part of what made Trump attracted to him in the first place…

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5067749/Steve-Bannon-uses-Catholic-faith-stay-sober.html

    In the article Bannon notes how boring many of his interactions were after he became sober. So true.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.
     
    Yeah, i don't understand all these worms who leave the White House and then run off to gossip to reporters, or sell some gossipy b.s. themselves.

    Loyalty is a virtue. If you need to bitch to your wife or your friends fine. But you don't bitch to any reporters. You don't piss on the guy who hired you. And yes, even if you got fired. And even if the President isn't singing your praises. If politics is actually about anything real--i.e. real ideas and principals--then your job is not to wreck the administration and policies you support. The only call for it would be if there's some higher loyalty--to your nation or morality--that compels you to call out the behavior of you old boss. In which case you should be forthright and clear about it.

    Bannon seems to be a motormouth who is just--potentially--damaging Trump. Giving anti-Trump ammunition precisely to the pond scum with an anti-nationalist agenda. How this is respectible or honorable behavior is beyond me.

    Of course, this Michael Wolff guy is apparently such a lying POS of that--at least in this case--the stuff might be essentially made up and Bannon innocent.

    Seems like nearly every time I read some serious horse sense on here it’s under your name.

    Thanks

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. @Whiskey
    About what I expected. What got Trump the Presidency is what will get him impeached and convicted if not defeated for re-election; and its likely (a purely political move) that the former happens rather than the latter. Trump IS a prickly a-hole, just like Bannon, and the dispute has always been about Trumps biggest failing: depending on Daddy's Princess Ivanka and Jared the son he never had.

    Both Kushners are a disaster -- privileged insiders no different than Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama in outlook, hatred of the Deplorables, or globalist internationalism.

    Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal. But rather the influence the Kushners have on going along with the GOPe/Dem agenda of globalist sell out of the Deplorables. Seen any walls built lately? We all know Mass Amnesty is coming, again. We all know Open Borders is coming as well. We all know Trump will cave on any trade deal (not that it mattes with half the Third World moving here). We all know White men are at best fifth class peons in the new Globalist Open Border world. None of that will change with the Kushners in charge and will only get worse.

    Most average normal White dudes are fine with Trump calling the BS on the Iran Deal. We pretended not to notice while Khameni and the Guard built a mini-Persian empire and nuked up. Falling apart now that none of the money went to ordinary people getting hammered by inflation while the Guard and Mullahs live like kings. That young people are shouting for the return of the Shah is extra-ordinary. Trump can recognize a failing deal and bail out of it at least as he can recognize BS deals from long experience.

    Same with Israel and Jerusalem. It had long been Democratic-Republican policy, signed into law by Bill Clinton and waivered ever since by Clinton, Bush, Obama, that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel and that the US would at some point move its Embassy there. Trump just ended the idiotic charades of pretending we wouldn't. Its open and honest. No one cares about it other than the Palestinians and the Arab world engaged with Iran trying to conquer it (again) has other issues at the moment.

    Same with North Korea. Clinton, Bush, Obama all kicked the can down the road, refusing to confront the Kims and China which has been using the Kims to kick the US in the balls while pretending its a "rogue state" (that they consistently supply, support and prop up). Those North Korean nukes are just Chinese nukes rebranded. Trump has at least recognized the futility of kicking the can down the road once more and has decided to end the game one way or another. I'm fine with half of Korea being flattened by artillery fire and nukes if it means no North Korean nukes hit LA since I work there most days.

    That's Trump's one big virtue -- the art of seeing through the BS deals like Mass Third World immigration or pretending Iran is our new friend or that we didn't really mean our embassy law. Its why the Elites and Pussy Hatters and Nasty Women and Oprah, all champions of the BS deals and pretending real hard for fantasy hate hate hate him. And his one big flaw is refusing to see his idiot daughter and son in law as they are -- giant political/cultural boat anchors. Who pretend real hard in BS deals.

    Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal. But rather the influence the Kushners have on going along with the GOPe/Dem agenda of globalist sell out of the Deplorables.

    That was my feeling in the beginning, but to be fair to Trump, he’s surrounded, boxed in, and with no political experience or real knowledge of how things work at that level of government. Even without the Kushners, I think he would be having a hard time resisting. He can’t do everything by himself.

    Read More
    • Agree: Opinionator
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    This was always going to be a problem. Someone as potentially disruptive as Trump could count on the entire apparatus of Big Government to be opposed to his every move. Even if he were all about integrity, how many like-minded thinkers could he bring along? How many of them would have significant experience in public administration? Sadly, the only real disruption we're likely to get will be violent revolution. And that's not going to happen, since the vast majority believe the real threat comes from 'nazis' who 'need punching'.


    Ahh...now I see that Anonymous IV says just about the same thing in Comment #148 as I just did. As you were, troops.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @Opinionator
    It's pretty bad. But Bannon is talented (if flawed) and we need to have EVERYBODY on board. Hopefully he can admit his characterization of the meeting was mistaken and apologize.

    Well, things looked really bad regarding Jeff Sessions last year for a while, and that seems to have blown over. The Bannon/Trump thing has the plus that they don’t have to literally work in the same building anymore. I’m just worried that Bannon will turn Breitbart into an anti-Trump vehicle for the remainder of Trump’s term. Then again, Breitbart has given Trump a hard time on occasion, only to pull back once Trump starts getting “on message” again. Maybe this won’t be such a big deal a few weeks from now. The whole Trump thing, from campaign to administration, has been filled with incidents that seemed fatal but always manage to not be. (so far)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. @Berty
    I'm coming around to the idea that Trump doesn't think about anything, he just reacts. He's addicted to television and listening to people talk about him. When people aren't talking about him, as they haven't been since the tax bill passed, he has to do something to make them talk. So he tweets. Or he releasing some statement announcing some policy change. Of course he never follows that up with anything concrete or has his advisers do it for him, so ultimately nothing changes as the machines of government continue on. This has the effect of making him look completely impotent, but he doesn't care because he gets to hear himself being talked about. His poll numbers are awful and get worse every time he pulls some stunt like the NK tweet, but he doesn't care because he thinks they're all fake. Jared and Ivanka have apparently free range to do as they like despite nobody ever voting for them and Trump apparently won't even consider sending them away for a moment.

    I'm not a huge Bannon fan but considering all of this I can't blame him for deciding to simply lay his cards on the table and let the people decide which story is true. This entire administration is turning into a dumpster fire.

    One problem that seems built-in is: where do you get people to staff up the government? Everyone with experience is going to have been part of the Obama/Bush/Clinton/Bush eras. And most right-leaning think tanks are neocon or libertarian (and thus open borders, pro Wall Street, free trader.) So it’s no surprise Trump is surrounded by establishment types.

    I was naive enough to have thought much of Trump’s thing was an act during the campaign, and that he would dial it down once in office. Ha! That most people in this country don’t follow politics is a mixed blessing. (Those of us who participate places like this blog can overestimate how many political junkies there are in this country.) I’m sure lots of people aren’t really following the ups and downs, but the general flavor of the administration is seeping out via media portrayals, jokes, etc. I can see a lot of moderate Trump voters in the heartland losing enthusiasm for the midterms, or thinking that we need a Democratic congress to “contain” Trump.

    What can be salvaged? Hope Trump hangs on long enough to replace one more Supreme Court justice (two would be great!) I’m old enough at least I could probably live the rest of my life out without SCOTUS taking away 1st and 2nd Amendment rights so long as he gets a couple of 50ish conservatives on the bench. Otherwise: can the GOP get the Raise Act through the same way they did the Tax Cut? That would be OK with me. Can they get some funding for some kind of permanent barriers on the border? I don’t need a 2000 mile, 50-foot wall to be happy. I’ll take some multi-layer fencing in areas the Border Patrol say are high priority. And they’d better hurry. If they lose the House this year, nothin’ is getting done except executive orders and judicial appointments from that point on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Berty
    There are plenty of people in Washington who share Trump's views that would be willing to staff the administration. The problem being that Trump has such a horrible reputation as a boss and turnover has been so high already that nobody is willing to go near. And who can blame them? Again Trump is at fault here and his lack of a Karl Rove-type to guide the administration along is really becoming a problem.
    , @candid_observer
    My anxiety about Trump as President was that he just didn't understand what was at stake in various issues -- especially as regards immigration -- and would be led down the garden path by advisers with a compromised agenda.

    But it's clear by now that Trump gets what's up with immigration, understands how such things as the lottery rule and chain migration work, knows they are important to stop, and has staked his ground on opposition to them. Likewise, his support of the Wall remains vocal.

    And I don't see him giving up on those issues, although the compliance of Congress with them is in doubt. But I see his move with DACA to be rather brilliant strategically, because it forces the issue. He has something that the Democrats (and NeverTrumper Republicans) claim to be very important -- the DACA people -- and he won't allow them to be legitimized without the other things necessary for border security. I don't see him backing down on this, though he may not get everything he might want, of course.

    My read on Trump in general is that, perhaps for the first time I can think of, we have a major politician who will stick by his promises, to the extent that it's within his power to make them happen. I just don't see Trump, being Trump, finding any reason not to stick to his promises. Ordinarily, a politician worries about his electability. I see in Trump somebody who has never considered electability in any of his actions. Remarkably, he has never backed down from any of his many very controversial statements and actions. Perhaps out of arrogance or naivete, he has convinced himself that he will come out smelling like roses electorally in the end. This belief has only been encouraged by his stupendous upset victory in 2016. Trump's belief in himself is more than a little grandiose and narcissistic, but it serves a very useful purpose for those supporting his agenda.

    I see in Trump a man who thinks that there's no downside in sticking to his promises, and great downside in failing to do so.

    He is working against a system that is stacked against much of what he wants to make happen. And God knows he can get in his own way like nobody else. So the exact outcome of all this is hard to predict.

    But I think it pretty unlikely that Trump is just going to cave on any of the issues he's staked out. He's the last man who wants to be embarrassed by his own lack of nerve.

    , @Zach
    Yes, where do you get the right people? Nixon told Reagan that the problem was that the smart guys aren’t loyal, and the loyal guys aren’t smart. Tough to balance the Kissinger's with the Gordon Liddy’s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. Berty says:
    @Anonymous IV
    One problem that seems built-in is: where do you get people to staff up the government? Everyone with experience is going to have been part of the Obama/Bush/Clinton/Bush eras. And most right-leaning think tanks are neocon or libertarian (and thus open borders, pro Wall Street, free trader.) So it's no surprise Trump is surrounded by establishment types.

    I was naive enough to have thought much of Trump's thing was an act during the campaign, and that he would dial it down once in office. Ha! That most people in this country don't follow politics is a mixed blessing. (Those of us who participate places like this blog can overestimate how many political junkies there are in this country.) I'm sure lots of people aren't really following the ups and downs, but the general flavor of the administration is seeping out via media portrayals, jokes, etc. I can see a lot of moderate Trump voters in the heartland losing enthusiasm for the midterms, or thinking that we need a Democratic congress to "contain" Trump.

    What can be salvaged? Hope Trump hangs on long enough to replace one more Supreme Court justice (two would be great!) I'm old enough at least I could probably live the rest of my life out without SCOTUS taking away 1st and 2nd Amendment rights so long as he gets a couple of 50ish conservatives on the bench. Otherwise: can the GOP get the Raise Act through the same way they did the Tax Cut? That would be OK with me. Can they get some funding for some kind of permanent barriers on the border? I don't need a 2000 mile, 50-foot wall to be happy. I'll take some multi-layer fencing in areas the Border Patrol say are high priority. And they'd better hurry. If they lose the House this year, nothin' is getting done except executive orders and judicial appointments from that point on.

    There are plenty of people in Washington who share Trump’s views that would be willing to staff the administration. The problem being that Trump has such a horrible reputation as a boss and turnover has been so high already that nobody is willing to go near. And who can blame them? Again Trump is at fault here and his lack of a Karl Rove-type to guide the administration along is really becoming a problem.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Eagle Eye says:
    @eD
    To answer Anonymous # 96, according to the article the "Ivanka for President" thing started after the election.

    No one seems to have thought Trump would win (actually Nate Silver wrote there was about a 20% chance, and this was higher than most people were willing to come out and say). I think the missing factor was just how terrible a candidate Hillary Clinton was. Among ordinary voters, many of them were anti-Hillary voters, as shown by Trump's unusually high unfavorable rating among people who said they voted for him (high compared to normal candidates among their own voters). I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.

    I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.

    Very astute thought. This would explain Comey’s flip-flop.

    Perhaps Hillary’s updated kill list found its way into the hands of one of the intended victims – perhaps Comey himself?

    On a related point – to what extent are election results still real in the face of massive election fraud in many states? “Disappearing” or neutralizing 5% of votes cast either way in critical elections through various stratagems and devices seems to be a pretty common operation in many counties.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eD
    "to what extent are election results still real in the face of massive election fraud in many states?"

    You are correct to raise this. In the United States, elections are run by commissions which are almost always staffed by hacks from the Democratic and Republican Parties themselves. This makes it harder to fix an election to make the Democrats win over the Republicans, or vice versa, except in circumstances where the losing party agrees. But it makes it really easy to keep candidates not from these parties from winning, along with the more publicized ballot access difficulties.

    In addition to party hacks running the elections, in the United States the ballots are never counted in public, or in the presence of observers sent from all the candidates. That would be hard to do anyway because usually paper ballots are not used.

    In other countries, elections are generally run by non-partisan bureaucrats, using paper ballots counted in public and/ or in the presence of observers. Elections in the USA are one of those things that are regarded as a joke elsewhere.

    I find most commentators even here to be clueless about this, so I encourage people to find Jorge Castaneda's book "Perpetuating Power". Most of the book is about Mexican presidential succession, but in the appendix he discusses how the PRI did it. Its very informative.

    Castaneda points out that while the PRI did use ballot tampering, and implies they did this in 1988, this was very much a last resort. The preference was to make sure their candidates were favorably covered by the Mexican news media, which were dependent on advertising from the PRI or front companies, and opposing candidates received no or unfavorable coverage. That, and making sure opposition candidates were heavily outspent. That way there would be no need for actual ballot tampering,.

    In 2016 the fix was arranged by making sure that Hilary Clinton got much more favorable media coverage than Trump and also heavily outspent Trump. There is evidence the Clinton campaign used another trick and tipped the scales in the other party's nomination process to make sure they nominated the worst candidate conceivable, someone who apparently didn't even want to become President. This was enough, as it always is, to make sure she won the popular vote. At the last moment someone behind the scenes figured out, for whatever reason, that Hilary Clinton could not become President. The ballot counting itself may even have been fixed for Trump at the last minute to undo the campaign being fixed for Hillary Clinton.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. rogue-one says:
    @Patrick Harris
    Brannon is not and never was a white nationalist, though he has been happy to adopt a certain winking posture toward the alt-right from time to time.

    White nationalism is a dead end. No sane person would go that route. Civic nationalism seems to be the most promising and acceptable option today.

    America First can win. Whites First cannot.

    Read More
    • Agree: Opinionator, Luke Lea
    • Replies: @Davosbane
    Its going to take a lot of convincing to get non-whites to embrace civic nationalism.i see no evidence that they are willing to convert to that ideology.
    , @Realist
    "White nationalism is a dead end."

    More whites are seeing the writing on the wall. White nationalism will grow.
    , @Pericles
    Perhaps civic nationalism is more acceptable, but there is a strong sense of Kubler-Ross Bargaining about it. It might mildly set back the process, but will it reverse it? Or even stop it?

    The USA could reasonably peacefully return to Whitopia by reversing a long series of very bad decisions by the judiciary. I hope it does, but ultimately it's not up to me.

    I grew up in an almost-white country not that long ago and in retrospect it seems very sane indeed to want to return to that. It doesn't seem so impossible either. What seems utterly crazy is to knowingly invite ever more trouble into your home. So WN it is.
    , @Thea
    True
    But we aren't even likely to get that.
    , @Patrick Harris
    No argument here. Good luck looking for a savvy and competent populism anytime soon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. LondonBob says:
    @Altai
    Trumps gone full Kushner. The current madness with naming (All of) Jerusalem capital of Israel and potentially stoking the protests in Iran does not portent good times. It does, however have a silver lining of potentially being a disaster for Netanyahu's brand of aggression without consequences if it leads to finally toppling the whole mess ontop of him. Israel has overreached and payed a heavy price before, perhaps such a potentially violent, intense correction is better than years of meddling and civil wars. It also lays bare the Israel lobby front and centre of a man the media has been telling everyone to hate. But in the meantime there is the possibility of Lebanon being turned into the next sectarian battlefield by Israel and Saudi after having spent decades recovering from the last civil war. The Iran situation could good really wrong too.

    By tying meddling and wars in the middle east directly to Israel Trump removes the essential motivation-laundering of the 'patriotic' neo-con agenda that carefully removes mention of Israel at all times.

    Though I have to say when they're doing the whole nuclear brinkmanship with North Korea/CCP, why the hell would they open this second can of worms now? Were they afraid Trump would be weakened by the midterms? Or is the stand-off with North Korea a benefit by being more important and thus allowing them to get away with things they wouldn't otherwise?

    Trumps has been led down a dark alley by his son in law.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    What did Kissinger mean by that though? Does he intend to suggest that one group's being Jewish and the other's not somehow explains their differences? What about that would be causative of the differences? Is he accusing one group of anti-Semitism?

    Perhaps more intriguingly, is he suggesting that one group's (or both's) policy positions are better and worse for the respective ethnic groups? What about the policy positions exactly would make them better or worse for one of the groups?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. LondonBob says:
    @Anonymous
    What about Trump going Turbo-Jeb?

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948211438472089600
    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    Giving up the right to send infiltrators back where they belong in the hope of future reforms is always a bad deal. Nothing would cut illegal infiltration and authorized racial replacement more than the sight of boxcars full of DACA invaders being dumped at the border.

    Even if ended in 2018, chain migration can be reinstituted in 2021 by the Kamela Harris Administration and a Democratic House and Senate but once given amnesty, the DACA invaders are here to stay. Trouble is,they may already be here to stay.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Davosbane says:
    @rogue-one
    White nationalism is a dead end. No sane person would go that route. Civic nationalism seems to be the most promising and acceptable option today.

    America First can win. Whites First cannot.

    Its going to take a lot of convincing to get non-whites to embrace civic nationalism.i see no evidence that they are willing to convert to that ideology.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. fnn says:
    @Kaz
    Sad that Trump has all but confirmed he's gone full neocon.

    Borrowing from Derb, this is what happens when you import a foreign overclass.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Hawktower says:

    If the division between Trump and Bannon is in fact real, then it will be easy to see who is the genuine leader of the America first movement. If Trump grants amnesty to DACA recipients then it’s clear that he is, at heart, an establishment neocon. On the other hand, l if he doesn’t grant amnesty then he is genuinely invested in America and it’s workers and maybe Bannon really is ‘in it for himself.’ We’ll find out soon enough. If there is a cave on DACA though, it’s over for Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Travis
    Trump has already caved on DACA....he could have ended DACA with an executive order 12 months ago , instead he extended it until 2018 and is asking congress to legalize the dreamers in return for building a wall...and maybe ending the diversity lottery.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. MEH 0910 says:
    @Anonymous
    Some of the things I've seen reported about this new book seem perplexing to me.

    For instance, apparently Ivanka and Jared agreed that she would run for President, seeking to become the first woman in the job, if they ever had the chance. How does this comport with the claim that the Trump camp never expected to win? If Trump hadn't won, Hillary would have become President.

    Also, given that almost nobody initially expected Trump to win it all, it follows that somebody must have believed that this was possible, and must have been leading the hard work that would make it happen. If Trump did not think he was going to win, then this could not have been Trump himself. Who then? The accounts I've read of this book seem to suggest that Trump regarded his team as being a bunch of incompetents. And yet they somehow pulled off what the elites deemed unthinkable. This makes no sense.

    Steve Sailer –> Ann Coulter –> President Trump
    Trim tab –> Rudder –> Ship of State

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. Realist says:
    @rogue-one
    White nationalism is a dead end. No sane person would go that route. Civic nationalism seems to be the most promising and acceptable option today.

    America First can win. Whites First cannot.

    “White nationalism is a dead end.”

    More whites are seeing the writing on the wall. White nationalism will grow.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Realist says:
    @Davosbane
    It seems Bannon's racial nationalism is reserved for Israel. He's much more of a civic nationalist, at least in rhetoric.

    “It seems Bannon’s racial nationalism is reserved for Israel.”

    As is Trump’s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. IHTG says:

    Ivanka and Jared are overrated. It’s well-known that their power has diminished since COS Kelly took over.

    The current White House is a coalition of GOPe types and less hot-headed populists like Stephen Miller, Kelly and indeed the president himself (who is hot-headed, but he’s allowed to be).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  162. Pericles says:
    @istevefan

    Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside,...
     
    First, I thought Bannon was for Mo Brooks. And since Mo got torpedoed by the GOPe in favor of Luther Strange. Bannon then supported Moore.

    Second, the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history, or at least in my lifetime. Five minutes after the so called scandal hit the news in early November, the GOPe led the calls for Moore to withdraw. They proceeded to starve his campaign of money and supply endless talking points in favor of the opposition right up to the last day of the campaign when Senator Shelby told the world he did not vote for Moore.

    The debacle of the Moore campaign was not Bannon's fault. It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don't get their way, they don't return the favor.

    BTW, I haven't heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it's "mission accomplished" and we will never hear of it again.

    Also the mysteriously massive Democrat turnout. I, for one, am curious about how that came about. Then the judges for some reason quickly ordered the voting evidence destroyed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. Sam says:

    Can we tip our hats to Michael Wolff who played this brilliantly?

    During the campaign and after when the media was going crazy Wolff was advocating for journalists to get off their high horse and do regular reporting. Wolff played the old school long game and now it is paying off. Shut up and get access to the inside scoops, as served by your sources’. In the meantime he took some hits from journalists practising the hysterical and activist role. Likely, he benefited from his colleagues taking such an oppositional stance since it made him stand out.

    Who wouldn’t trust this guy?:

    Michael Brendan Dougherty on what is being revealed:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455094/steve-bannon-donald-trump-feud-resistance

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  164. Pericles says:
    @rogue-one
    White nationalism is a dead end. No sane person would go that route. Civic nationalism seems to be the most promising and acceptable option today.

    America First can win. Whites First cannot.

    Perhaps civic nationalism is more acceptable, but there is a strong sense of Kubler-Ross Bargaining about it. It might mildly set back the process, but will it reverse it? Or even stop it?

    The USA could reasonably peacefully return to Whitopia by reversing a long series of very bad decisions by the judiciary. I hope it does, but ultimately it’s not up to me.

    I grew up in an almost-white country not that long ago and in retrospect it seems very sane indeed to want to return to that. It doesn’t seem so impossible either. What seems utterly crazy is to knowingly invite ever more trouble into your home. So WN it is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. Having delivered the tax cut, Trump has little leverage to deliver his immigration or trade agendas (assuming he ever wanted to deliver – let’s give him the benefit of the doubt). In foreign policy he has already caved.

    At this point, if Bannon endorses (say) Rand Paul for 2020, or runs himself, could Trump lose the GOP primary?

    Could another non-globalist GOP candidate win using the Sailer electoral map?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  166. Hunsdon says:

    Let’s see what people are saying in two or three weeks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Around here? Black pilled eeyores, no matter what.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. Pericles says:
    @peterike
    Here's a correction of a minor point made in this "devastating" new book. But it suggests the fact vetting was not exactly diligent.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/01/if-its-too-good-to-check-it-probably-isnt-true.php

    Strong and increasing smell of a fake news hit job about that book, if you ask me.

    Bannon appears to have affirmed his loyalty on Twitter btw. (I assume it’s his account.)

    Read More
    • LOL: IHTG
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    No blue checkmark?
    , @candid_observer
    Yeah, Bannon is going to describe Trump as the "great white hope."

    Right.
    , @Pericles
    Might be the genuine Bannon after all.

    Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump heralded Steve Bannon's praise for him on Thursday in his first public comments since he released a fiery statement slamming his former White House chief strategist.

    "I don't know, he called me a great man last night, so he obviously changed his tune pretty quick," Trump said Thursday, referring to Bannon's comments Wednesday night on his Sirius XM radio show in the wake of the firestorm ignited by a new book on the White House.

     

    http://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/04/politics/donald-trump-steve-bannon-praise/index.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. vinteuil says:
    @David Davenport
    Mr. Intelligent Being-in-the-world:

    When are you going to enlighten us with a succinct precis of of Martin Heidegger's philosophy?

    That should be easy for you, since you're so intelligent.


    ( "Dasein," not "Das Sein," was Heidegger's neologism for a special state of being. )

    I don’t think ID is especially into Heidegger. He comes across (to me, at least) as a bit of a neo-Thomist. His handle just seems jokey.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Never knew anyone who specifically called himself 'intelligent' online who actually was.


    Now he says "You guys are idiots, do you know that? You’re a bunch of freaking idiots."

    , @Old Palo Altan
    Maybe he is a plain old Thomist?

    How would you describe yourself, if at all in these terms?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @istevefan

    Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside,...
     
    First, I thought Bannon was for Mo Brooks. And since Mo got torpedoed by the GOPe in favor of Luther Strange. Bannon then supported Moore.

    Second, the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history, or at least in my lifetime. Five minutes after the so called scandal hit the news in early November, the GOPe led the calls for Moore to withdraw. They proceeded to starve his campaign of money and supply endless talking points in favor of the opposition right up to the last day of the campaign when Senator Shelby told the world he did not vote for Moore.

    The debacle of the Moore campaign was not Bannon's fault. It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don't get their way, they don't return the favor.

    BTW, I haven't heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it's "mission accomplished" and we will never hear of it again.

    BTW, I haven’t heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it’s “mission accomplished” and we will never hear of it again.

    I think we will eventually find out that large sums were given to them by democrat operators, but nobody will care.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Neoconned says:
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    I continue to be amused with my fellow partisans who remain optimistic.
     
    Yes, because despair is always a winning strategy, right Spanky?

    I don’t know Charles. We Americans tend to have this perverse optimism about us. Where we care about attitude more than results.

    I’m w the poster anonymous here.

    I’m a natural pessimist and shrewd. I see the worst in ppl and plan accordingly. Those Midwest voters who elected Trump will not sit around forever.

    Many I recall reading voted for him “just to try something new”…thus far he’s been long rhetoric and funny one liners and not much in actual results.

    A lot of those Midwest union types, if hasn’t produced TANGIBLE results by next yr will start looking for a new choice out of desperation and cynicism….or simply do what they’ve done for decades and resign themselves to the fact Trump is Dubya term 3 and they need to stay home in 3 years….

    The thing about “the alt right” is it doesn’t even exist. It’s something Hillary’s advisors pulled from their ass and lumped a bunch of random and non connected ppl together who have no real connection. The media took a buzzword and stupidly ran w it thinking it’s an actual movement when we predate Hillary’s failed campaign and definitions

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    The thing about “the alt right” is it doesn’t even exist.
     
    Shhh!!! We're not supposed to say that out loud!

    Fact is, the MSM defines the terms for the masses (neat how that works!) and 'alt-right' has been conveniently conflated with 'evil nazis' --so what name shall we choose next? Same thing will happen.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    I am afraid you are missing the big picture. Trump has called the Left on its dishonesty. Both the Republican Establishment, and the Democrat Overlords, have had to own their positions outright. No more pretending to be patriots. Trump has shifted the window and the debate on immigration.

    Is Trump batting .1000? No. But even if he just won, and did nothing more, his election is a tectonic shift.

    Cheer up. We have a chance to win. And no pessimist thought Trump could win the 2016 Presidential. And no pessimist thinks we can avoid a despotic tyranny. Look at Venezuela, and realize those desperate circumstances are what our 'betters' hope to visit upon us. At the same time our betters expect to live like Louis XIV.

    We may have to drag a host of Eeyore wannabes over the finish line. But the alternative is to sign up for slavery.

    We will win.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. Bill says:
    @istevefan

    Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside,...
     
    First, I thought Bannon was for Mo Brooks. And since Mo got torpedoed by the GOPe in favor of Luther Strange. Bannon then supported Moore.

    Second, the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history, or at least in my lifetime. Five minutes after the so called scandal hit the news in early November, the GOPe led the calls for Moore to withdraw. They proceeded to starve his campaign of money and supply endless talking points in favor of the opposition right up to the last day of the campaign when Senator Shelby told the world he did not vote for Moore.

    The debacle of the Moore campaign was not Bannon's fault. It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don't get their way, they don't return the favor.

    BTW, I haven't heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it's "mission accomplished" and we will never hear of it again.

    It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don’t get their way, they don’t return the favor.

    Yes, that’s how the GOP always treats its voters. If its voters want to be treated better, they must speak the language the GOP understands. For loyalty, you get the shaft. So, try something else.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Well, this thread has effectively taken the temperature of the iSteve commentariat, and it seems to be coming down about 97-3 in favor of Bannon.

    In the words of Basil Fawlty, “This….Is….Typical.”

    You guys are idiots, do you know that? You’re a bunch of freaking idiots. Steve Bannon is a serial failure of a human being who has gone from one Deep State directorate to another his entire life, making a mess of things and leaving under a cloud, only to turn on his erstwhile companions in fits of childish vindictiveness. The fact that he turned on Trump is entirely in keeping with his MO. He’s been doing this his entire life!

    Why on earth would you support a man like this? Is it because he makes some appropriate noises about immigration and economic nationalism? Don’t you see what’s going on here? The only reason Bannon holds these positions is because he is now reflexively opposed to the Deep State because he failed at being a part of it. His “populism” was just an attempt to stick it to The Powers That Be in the same way that he subsequently tried to stick it to Trump. It’s not as if he actually believes any of this stuff. A Goldman-Sachs-er, a Hollywood film producer, a freaking Biosphere nut? This is your Alt-Right hero? This is the man you’re defending, this pathetic groveler and sell-out, the man who loudly declaims White Nationalists and “Anti-Semites,” who calls you a bunch of kooks and losers? This is where you want to hitch your wagon?

    So be it then! Do whatever the hell you want. If you will not listen to reason, you will just have to let the fine-grinding mills of fate teach it to you the hard way. I would have hoped for more perspicacity from the soi-disant “thought-leaders” of the Dissident Right, but experience is a good teacher who may yet stir a few of you out of your self-imposed imbecility.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Redman
    Trudat on Bannon. Guy seems to exhibit classic bipolar symptoms.

    Recent additional excerpts from Wolff’s book have him describing Breitbart as not a “legitimate” news source. Freudian slip?
    , @vinteuil
    Wow, what a trashy song.

    Couldn't you have come up with something a little classier for your parting shot? Im Abendrot, perhaps, or Brünnhilde's Immolation?

    See you when you get back.
    , @Anonymous
    Plato and Aristotle notwithstanding, I'm throwing in a late reply to thank you for reminding of this Asia tune. Being-in-the-World, Yo!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. Bill says:
    @map
    Everything about the Trump campaign and the Trump administration is unusual. The typical attacks against Trump, attacks that would have crushed a normal Republican candidate and administration, never panned out.

    There is a reason for that.

    There is a deeper game that is being played. The Trump agenda is being implemented indirectly and, because of indirection, it is much more difficult to defend against, albeit it is slow.

    That’s pretty cryptic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.
     
    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?

    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?

    Actually, yes, you could say that. The chief southern apologists and theorizers like George Fitzhugh in the 1850s quite literally said that the slave economy was the most “practical” form of socialism.
    Second, the slave economy was the inevitable expression of the Lockean liberalism that many at thbe time thought was the inspiring spirit of the American Revolution. Anti-Lockeans like Orestes Brownson (who hated the CSA) argued it was classical republicanism, not liberalism.
    Third, you can’t have it both ways and argue (ridiculously) that the tariff caused the war, without conceding that the pro-tariff Northerners were the economic nationalists as opposed to the free trade South.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pincher Martin

    Actually, yes, you could say that. The chief southern apologists and theorizers like George Fitzhugh in the 1850s quite literally said that the slave economy was the most “practical” form of socialism.
     
    Fitzhugh was his own peculiar thinker. He did not represent the southern tradition on economic thinking dating back to Jefferson, but was more of an extreme version of what happens when one seeks to use any reason to defend slavery. He was, after all, for extending slavery to free whites.

    Third, you can’t have it both ways and argue (ridiculously) that the tariff caused the war, without conceding that the pro-tariff Northerners were the economic nationalists as opposed to the free trade South.
     
    Ms Errican wasn't having it both ways. She was addressing a gentleman who argued that the Democrats of the nineteenth century were just as opposed to free commerce and low taxation in that century as they are in this century.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    The chief southern apologists and theorizers …
     
    Right. So if a contemporary apologist calls Islam a “religion of peace,” then the Man From K Street sez, hey look, it’s established, Islam is a Religion of Peace.

    Second, [… blah blah …]
     
    None of that explains how the slave states were economically left wing.

    Third, you can’t have it both ways and argue (ridiculously) that the tariff caused the war ...
     
    I didn’t say anything about tariffs.
    , @utu
    pro-tariff Northerners were the economic nationalists

    Wasn't Hamilton economic nationalist? Hamilton influenced Friedrich List whose economic policies were largely responsible for Germany overtaking Great Britain economically in the 19 century.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Travis says:
    @Opinionator
    It's pretty bad. But Bannon is talented (if flawed) and we need to have EVERYBODY on board. Hopefully he can admit his characterization of the meeting was mistaken and apologize.

    “This is total Fake News and taken out of context, don’t believe the liberal propaganda Machine! “- Steve Bannon

    no need for Bannon to apologize to Trump because of the lies written by Michael Wolff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    That isn't Bannon's Twitter account.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. AndrewR says:
    @Not Raul
    And the man Giuliani replaced him with was a disaster.

    What is it with people born in the mid-40s to early 50s? As a group, they seem overpopulated with narcissists.

    Luckiest generation in history besides the Vietnam war, which many of them got out of having to fight.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. AndrewR says:
    @Anonym
    Trump’s nothing if not a survivor. He’s recognized his best chances of making it past November is to play ball with the most-powerful right-wing contingent since the lefties will never have him. All the stuff he said and did to get elected? Ejected.

    If there is no wall Trump is going to get primaried. I think also with DACA but less sure.

    Talk about wishful thinking. Trump may face Republican challengers but none of them will be pro-wall.

    As for DACA, only the most fringe losers are butthurt about the idea of law-abiding and hard-working people, few of whom can be said to have meaningfully chosen to come here, getting work permits without any path to citizenship. DACA is the least of our problems.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    Hard facts make bad law.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. @LondonBob
    https://twitter.com/jbro_1776/status/948267724207247362

    Is it a good trade? Don't see hownchain migration and the immigration lottery get changed otherwise.

    Giving up the right to send infiltrators back where they belong in the hope of future reforms is always a bad deal. Nothing would cut illegal infiltration and authorized racial replacement more than the sight of boxcars full of DACA invaders being dumped at the border.

    Even if ended in 2018, chain migration can be reinstituted in 2021 by the Kamela Harris Administration and a Democratic House and Senate but once given amnesty, the DACA invaders are here to stay. Trouble is,they may already be here to stay.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Dissident

    Nothing would cut illegal infiltration and authorized racial replacement more than the sight of boxcars full of DACA invaders being dumped at the border.
     
    Not even getting serious about prosecuting those who employ and otherwise enable said invaders?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Moses says:
    @map
    This is all staged.

    Trump and Bannon are just trolling the media with this act.

    Bannon is the editor of Breitbart. It is well within his power to pen an op-ed criticizing Trump. Why hasn't he? Why do we have to hear about these feuds from third-party, leftist sources?

    Why do any of this? Three reasons:

    First, the leftist media is just therapy for leftists. It exists to assuage their feelings of fear and dread. Put something in the media that the left likes, and they will get a nice dopamine rush from the effect.

    Second, following from the first, Trump and Bannon can run the news cycle more effectively. First, Trump sends a tweet about his finger on the big nuclear button, and leftists start fainting all over the place. Then, send "news" about a Trump/Bannon feud and the dopamine rush assuages their fear. The entire process crowds out anything else from the news cycle so that stuff can happen in the background.

    Third, a Trump/Bannon feud drives traffic to Breitbart. Why is this important? Breitbart is a back-channel to the Trump base. The comments that appear are a snapshot of what the base is thinking about various topics. This gives Trump another way of taking the temperature of the population when he does something that is polarizing.

    This is why Bannon left the White House...to run this kind of media campaign for Trump. It's very similar to how tv shows will have you download apps, go to a website or enter a sweepstakes as a measure of who is actually watching to check their Nielsen ratings.

    If there was a real dispute between Trump and Bannon, then what is keeping Bannon afloat? Who is running Breitbart? How is Breitbart getting all of its traffic? Trust me. The Mercers are still there and Trump is still there.

    This is all staged.

    I had the same thought. Too much voltage here for it to be real. Trump is not hurt by the exchange at all. In fact, he gets more street cred with the cucks (and lefties, somewhat) by distancing himself from Bannon. Bannon gets higher profile and clicks. Everyone wins.

    But hell, who can tell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. Tex says:
    @map
    This is all staged.

    Trump and Bannon are just trolling the media with this act.

    Bannon is the editor of Breitbart. It is well within his power to pen an op-ed criticizing Trump. Why hasn't he? Why do we have to hear about these feuds from third-party, leftist sources?

    Why do any of this? Three reasons:

    First, the leftist media is just therapy for leftists. It exists to assuage their feelings of fear and dread. Put something in the media that the left likes, and they will get a nice dopamine rush from the effect.

    Second, following from the first, Trump and Bannon can run the news cycle more effectively. First, Trump sends a tweet about his finger on the big nuclear button, and leftists start fainting all over the place. Then, send "news" about a Trump/Bannon feud and the dopamine rush assuages their fear. The entire process crowds out anything else from the news cycle so that stuff can happen in the background.

    Third, a Trump/Bannon feud drives traffic to Breitbart. Why is this important? Breitbart is a back-channel to the Trump base. The comments that appear are a snapshot of what the base is thinking about various topics. This gives Trump another way of taking the temperature of the population when he does something that is polarizing.

    This is why Bannon left the White House...to run this kind of media campaign for Trump. It's very similar to how tv shows will have you download apps, go to a website or enter a sweepstakes as a measure of who is actually watching to check their Nielsen ratings.

    If there was a real dispute between Trump and Bannon, then what is keeping Bannon afloat? Who is running Breitbart? How is Breitbart getting all of its traffic? Trust me. The Mercers are still there and Trump is still there.

    This is all staged.

    Trump and Bannon are just trolling the media with this act.

    Bingo.

    While I get a little tired of the “it’s all 12-d underwater chess”, I think you are closer to the mark than many others. Trump is a veteran of wrestling and reality TV. That’s to say a master of kayfabe and not breaking character. He certainly knows that the media are 115% bullshit. Misdirection is Trump’s forte.

    He might be irritated with Bannon, but the likelihood that it’s all ramped up for effect is pretty high.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. @Opinionator
    Breitbart has been screaming about being stabbed in the back (like Ann, like Krikorian) since Jan 22nd, much like the people here.

    Stabbed in the back by whom? Over what?

    Claiming that Trump is going to 100% fold over immigration uh huh uh huh totally.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Lurker says:
    @utu
    Looks like you are imagining too many dimensions in this game.

    But why not? After all that is often how mainstream politics/MSM operate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @Mr. Anon
    Commenter "Thomm" says a lot of things. He is a bloviating nitwit.

    He’s got a lot of company in this thread with Berty and utu.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    Politicians don't farm out the job of professional diplomacy to lawyers. Diplomatic negotiations are not a court case.

    You’ve got to be kidding. The setup for the meeting was not to talk about bilateral relations. Don Jr thought the Russian government was going to supply some dirt on the Hilary campaign at the meeting. If you plan on taking the risk of doing something illegal like that yes you call in the lawyers to try to minimize exposure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Is it illegal to listen to someone who alleges wrongdoing by your political opponent?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. eD says:
    @Eagle Eye

    I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.
     
    Very astute thought. This would explain Comey's flip-flop.

    Perhaps Hillary's updated kill list found its way into the hands of one of the intended victims - perhaps Comey himself?

    On a related point - to what extent are election results still real in the face of massive election fraud in many states? "Disappearing" or neutralizing 5% of votes cast either way in critical elections through various stratagems and devices seems to be a pretty common operation in many counties.

    “to what extent are election results still real in the face of massive election fraud in many states?”

    You are correct to raise this. In the United States, elections are run by commissions which are almost always staffed by hacks from the Democratic and Republican Parties themselves. This makes it harder to fix an election to make the Democrats win over the Republicans, or vice versa, except in circumstances where the losing party agrees. But it makes it really easy to keep candidates not from these parties from winning, along with the more publicized ballot access difficulties.

    In addition to party hacks running the elections, in the United States the ballots are never counted in public, or in the presence of observers sent from all the candidates. That would be hard to do anyway because usually paper ballots are not used.

    In other countries, elections are generally run by non-partisan bureaucrats, using paper ballots counted in public and/ or in the presence of observers. Elections in the USA are one of those things that are regarded as a joke elsewhere.

    I find most commentators even here to be clueless about this, so I encourage people to find Jorge Castaneda’s book “Perpetuating Power”. Most of the book is about Mexican presidential succession, but in the appendix he discusses how the PRI did it. Its very informative.

    Castaneda points out that while the PRI did use ballot tampering, and implies they did this in 1988, this was very much a last resort. The preference was to make sure their candidates were favorably covered by the Mexican news media, which were dependent on advertising from the PRI or front companies, and opposing candidates received no or unfavorable coverage. That, and making sure opposition candidates were heavily outspent. That way there would be no need for actual ballot tampering,.

    In 2016 the fix was arranged by making sure that Hilary Clinton got much more favorable media coverage than Trump and also heavily outspent Trump. There is evidence the Clinton campaign used another trick and tipped the scales in the other party’s nomination process to make sure they nominated the worst candidate conceivable, someone who apparently didn’t even want to become President. This was enough, as it always is, to make sure she won the popular vote. At the last moment someone behind the scenes figured out, for whatever reason, that Hilary Clinton could not become President. The ballot counting itself may even have been fixed for Trump at the last minute to undo the campaign being fixed for Hillary Clinton.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    In addition to party hacks running the elections, in the United States the ballots are never counted in public, or in the presence of observers sent from all the candidates. That would be hard to do anyway because usually paper ballots are not used.

    In other countries, elections are generally run by non-partisan bureaucrats, using paper ballots counted in public and/ or in the presence of observers. Elections in the USA are one of those things that are regarded as a joke elsewhere.</blockquote

    Sad that we are now having to take lessons from PRI-infested Mexico, but the example is actually highly instructive, particularly as regards the bought and paid for MSM machines in both countries.

    In California, many counties have gone back to using paper ballots, and registrar of voters offices are staffed by regular SEIU members.

    CRUCIALLY, as you point out, ballots are not counted in public, and are allowed to be "transported" from polling ballot stations by SEIU members without public scrutiny. Ballot boxes are not transparent. This compares unfavorably to countries like GHANA (from memory) where ballot boxes are made of plexiglass to ensure that they do not come pre-loaded, and ballots are counted under public scrutiny at the polling station.

    With a little organization, a back-of-the-envelope calculation confirms that it is quite feasible to count U.S. ballots by hand (despite the larger number of votes per ballot, up to around 20 at a general election in CA), and collect the totals from each polling station by email or even old-fashioned telephone calls. Of course, this should always be backed up by contemporaneous results prepared in multiple copies signed by vote supervisors and multiple independent observers.

    BTW to reduce collusion, it might be useful to prescribe minimum gender ratios for polling station workers, e.g. at least 25% men/women, and no fewer than 2 each. There should also be an option for last-minute walk-ins to become official election observers so as to prevent prior fixing of the observers.
     


     
    , @Opinionator
    There is evidence the Clinton campaign used another trick and tipped the scales in the other party’s nomination process to make sure they nominated the worst candidate conceivable, someone who apparently didn’t even want to become President.

    What did it do, allegedly?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. GW says:
    @J.Ross
    By the way, while digging up the actual quote and context that puts paid to all this bluster, I stumbled across this:

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2018/01/03/vice-media-collapse-president-chief-digital-officer-bring-number-staffers-accused-misconduct-7/

    The left-wing news site Vice has suspended its own president, Andrew Creighton, and chief digital officer, Mike Germano, over claims of sexual misconduct, the New York Times reports.

    As of now, seven Vice staffers have faced allegations of this kind. In November, Vice suspended Jason Mojica, who ran the documentary division. A few weeks later, three unnamed Vice staffers were fired for sexual misconduct. Vice producer Rhys James was suspended in November.
     
    Can you imagine this happening under -- er, excuse me, with -- Vice co-founder Gavin McInnes still in charge?
    The same Vice witchfinders who threw Gavin out are now in serious legal and career trouble. Balance that with Bannon cursing under his breath six months ago. One of these is a consequential story and one is not.

    So Bannon appears not to have directly said the meeting constituted treason as was first reported, but rather that it was a bad idea regardless of the legality.

    But this just further highlights Bannon’s indiscretion, namely talking to a sh*tlib reporter and expecting to have his intentions accurately perceived. You’d think he’d be smarter than that.

    Alas he’s not. Today Breitbart had an article up quoting Bannon praising Trump, right next to a separate one of Don Jr. roasting Bannon…all on the very website he runs! He has the means to completely pour cold water on the whole thing, and instead plays up the soap opera of which he is a central piece.

    As Trump put it, not everyone knows how to win. Why Bannon can’t stick to bashing illegal aliens, the Democrat Party, and the well-hated antifags? He’s unfocused and full of himself. Time for Breitbart to make a change.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Travis
    well stated. Bannon was a fool for talking to these media hack while calling the media the opposition party


    all the evidence points to Bannon being a drunk who uses adderrall to maintain the appearance of sobriety while out of his mind snorting ritalin to stay awake...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. eD says:

    The Wolff article itself states, and other commentators such as Yves Smith have picked up on this, that the whole campaign seemed like a real life version of “The Producers”. I thought during the campaign itself that the whole thing could have been a Hollywood produced comedy. As usual the sequel, though it has its moments, is not as funny.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Be aware that that's an established pat narrative that has been pushed by almost every mainstream media comedian and columnist for a year -- "Trump is in over his head because he never thought he would win, he's a con artist who was trying to make money." Trump sacrificed his reputation and his media-image, which to him is everything, and it was all just to make money?
    There was a guy who made money from the election and his name is Bernie Sanders.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. wiseguy says:

    Trump’s fake news awards should be known as the Duranty’s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  189. @Not Raul
    And the man Giuliani replaced him with was a disaster.

    What is it with people born in the mid-40s to early 50s? As a group, they seem overpopulated with narcissists.

    “What is it with people born in the mid-40s to early 50s? As a group, they seem overpopulated with narcissists.”

    They seem to confuse themselves with the so-called Greatest Generation without having to actually stare down the muzzle of the bad guys’ guns.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. @map
    This is all staged.

    Trump and Bannon are just trolling the media with this act.

    Bannon is the editor of Breitbart. It is well within his power to pen an op-ed criticizing Trump. Why hasn't he? Why do we have to hear about these feuds from third-party, leftist sources?

    Why do any of this? Three reasons:

    First, the leftist media is just therapy for leftists. It exists to assuage their feelings of fear and dread. Put something in the media that the left likes, and they will get a nice dopamine rush from the effect.

    Second, following from the first, Trump and Bannon can run the news cycle more effectively. First, Trump sends a tweet about his finger on the big nuclear button, and leftists start fainting all over the place. Then, send "news" about a Trump/Bannon feud and the dopamine rush assuages their fear. The entire process crowds out anything else from the news cycle so that stuff can happen in the background.

    Third, a Trump/Bannon feud drives traffic to Breitbart. Why is this important? Breitbart is a back-channel to the Trump base. The comments that appear are a snapshot of what the base is thinking about various topics. This gives Trump another way of taking the temperature of the population when he does something that is polarizing.

    This is why Bannon left the White House...to run this kind of media campaign for Trump. It's very similar to how tv shows will have you download apps, go to a website or enter a sweepstakes as a measure of who is actually watching to check their Nielsen ratings.

    If there was a real dispute between Trump and Bannon, then what is keeping Bannon afloat? Who is running Breitbart? How is Breitbart getting all of its traffic? Trust me. The Mercers are still there and Trump is still there.

    “Breitbart is a back-channel to the Trump base. The comments that appear are a snapshot of what the base is thinking about various topics. This gives Trump another way of taking the temperature of the population when he does something that is polarizing.”

    That gave me an unpleasant mental image of Trump wielding a rectal thermometer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. Travis says:
    @GW
    So Bannon appears not to have directly said the meeting constituted treason as was first reported, but rather that it was a bad idea regardless of the legality.

    But this just further highlights Bannon’s indiscretion, namely talking to a sh*tlib reporter and expecting to have his intentions accurately perceived. You’d think he’d be smarter than that.

    Alas he’s not. Today Breitbart had an article up quoting Bannon praising Trump, right next to a separate one of Don Jr. roasting Bannon...all on the very website he runs! He has the means to completely pour cold water on the whole thing, and instead plays up the soap opera of which he is a central piece.

    As Trump put it, not everyone knows how to win. Why Bannon can’t stick to bashing illegal aliens, the Democrat Party, and the well-hated antifags? He’s unfocused and full of himself. Time for Breitbart to make a change.

    well stated. Bannon was a fool for talking to these media hack while calling the media the opposition party

    all the evidence points to Bannon being a drunk who uses adderrall to maintain the appearance of sobriety while out of his mind snorting ritalin to stay awake…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Bannon does look like a drinker, and fond of disordered living. Why is that not mentioned in the comments? Would that not be relevant to his Wolf interview?

    Trump speaks all the time of his friends, but I don't think those have ever worked for him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. Thea says:

    Here is what is means: us stupid voters aren’t getting our effing wall, deportation of illegal infiltrators or reasonable immigration vetting from now on.

    It’s bread and circuses to distract us from america becoming the ship of Theseus.

    This Mexicans and Somalis are the real Americans. A big fat middle finger to the white working & middle class.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  193. @istevefan

    Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside,...
     
    First, I thought Bannon was for Mo Brooks. And since Mo got torpedoed by the GOPe in favor of Luther Strange. Bannon then supported Moore.

    Second, the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history, or at least in my lifetime. Five minutes after the so called scandal hit the news in early November, the GOPe led the calls for Moore to withdraw. They proceeded to starve his campaign of money and supply endless talking points in favor of the opposition right up to the last day of the campaign when Senator Shelby told the world he did not vote for Moore.

    The debacle of the Moore campaign was not Bannon's fault. It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don't get their way, they don't return the favor.

    BTW, I haven't heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it's "mission accomplished" and we will never hear of it again.

    “the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history”

    Yes, there’s that, but let’s not rule out massive fraud in tallying the votes. Deletion of the count records makes the case for fraud, IMO.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. Thea says:
    @rogue-one
    White nationalism is a dead end. No sane person would go that route. Civic nationalism seems to be the most promising and acceptable option today.

    America First can win. Whites First cannot.

    True
    But we aren’t even likely to get that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @Pincher Martin
    You have no clue what you're talking about.

    The slaveholders of that era were against a tariff and for free trade, the opposite of what free northerners of the time generally supported. The tariff was the most important economic issue of the nineteenth century.

    The slaveholders of the nineteenth century also widely supported Jeffersonian and Jacksonian principles in their economic views. Those include limited government, a small and weak central state, and strong local and state governments. They were widely supportive of Laissez faire economics, as opposed to the strong support the Whigs of the time show for spending federal and state monies on infrastructure.

    Democrats in the 19th century were not like Democrats today in their economic views. Stop projecting your own views into the past.


    "The economic benefits to both blacks and poorer whites once slavery gave way to sharecropping are well-documented."
     
    You'll have to explain to everyone what those economic benefits were. Slavery was undoubtedly a very bad thing, but that's not because the antebellum south was retarded economically. If it had been a separate nation in 1860, the antebellum south would've been one of the wealthiest states in the world, lagging only the northern United States, Great Britain, and one other country whose name I've forgotten. By some estimates, the southern white population was wealthier than whites in the Northeast on a per capita basis.

    Pincher, this ridiculous talking point of the democrats being the founders of the KKK, etc. is only used by historically illiterate imbeciles who still somehow think that the GOP is the virtuous (though stupid) party. If Thomm even reads your response, he won’t understand it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pincher Martin

    If Thomm even reads your response, he won’t understand it.
     
    You're probably right. But only because he's as dumb as you are.

    I never said the Democrats were the founders of the KKK, so I don't know what's triggered your non sequitur. You'll have to explain it to someone who is more interested in combing through that rat's maze you call a brain.

    But now that you mention it, if you were going to assign either of the two main political parties with being aligned with the KKK, it would've definitely been the late-19th-century Democrats (and, later, the early-20th-century Democrats) and not the Republican counterparts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. @Whiskey
    About what I expected. What got Trump the Presidency is what will get him impeached and convicted if not defeated for re-election; and its likely (a purely political move) that the former happens rather than the latter. Trump IS a prickly a-hole, just like Bannon, and the dispute has always been about Trumps biggest failing: depending on Daddy's Princess Ivanka and Jared the son he never had.

    Both Kushners are a disaster -- privileged insiders no different than Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama in outlook, hatred of the Deplorables, or globalist internationalism.

    Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal. But rather the influence the Kushners have on going along with the GOPe/Dem agenda of globalist sell out of the Deplorables. Seen any walls built lately? We all know Mass Amnesty is coming, again. We all know Open Borders is coming as well. We all know Trump will cave on any trade deal (not that it mattes with half the Third World moving here). We all know White men are at best fifth class peons in the new Globalist Open Border world. None of that will change with the Kushners in charge and will only get worse.

    Most average normal White dudes are fine with Trump calling the BS on the Iran Deal. We pretended not to notice while Khameni and the Guard built a mini-Persian empire and nuked up. Falling apart now that none of the money went to ordinary people getting hammered by inflation while the Guard and Mullahs live like kings. That young people are shouting for the return of the Shah is extra-ordinary. Trump can recognize a failing deal and bail out of it at least as he can recognize BS deals from long experience.

    Same with Israel and Jerusalem. It had long been Democratic-Republican policy, signed into law by Bill Clinton and waivered ever since by Clinton, Bush, Obama, that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel and that the US would at some point move its Embassy there. Trump just ended the idiotic charades of pretending we wouldn't. Its open and honest. No one cares about it other than the Palestinians and the Arab world engaged with Iran trying to conquer it (again) has other issues at the moment.

    Same with North Korea. Clinton, Bush, Obama all kicked the can down the road, refusing to confront the Kims and China which has been using the Kims to kick the US in the balls while pretending its a "rogue state" (that they consistently supply, support and prop up). Those North Korean nukes are just Chinese nukes rebranded. Trump has at least recognized the futility of kicking the can down the road once more and has decided to end the game one way or another. I'm fine with half of Korea being flattened by artillery fire and nukes if it means no North Korean nukes hit LA since I work there most days.

    That's Trump's one big virtue -- the art of seeing through the BS deals like Mass Third World immigration or pretending Iran is our new friend or that we didn't really mean our embassy law. Its why the Elites and Pussy Hatters and Nasty Women and Oprah, all champions of the BS deals and pretending real hard for fantasy hate hate hate him. And his one big flaw is refusing to see his idiot daughter and son in law as they are -- giant political/cultural boat anchors. Who pretend real hard in BS deals.

    “We pretended not to notice while Khameni and the Guard built a mini-Persian empire and nuked up.”

    Nobody “pretended not to notice” something that only happened in the imagination of people like Mad Dog Mattis.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. HawkTower says:

    If this division is actually real then there will be an easy way to find out who is right in this dispute. If Trump caves on DACA and starts to get support from McConnell and the rest of the neocon trash, then it’s obvious that the critiques of Trump’s family members and their interest in globalism and the economy over America are justified. If Trump stands his ground on DACA, gets all the immigration reform that he promised (plus the wall), then maybe it is Bannon that is the one who is not being as faithful to the America first agenda as many of us assumed he was. Perhaps Bannon is really more interested in fame.
    If Trump caves on DACA then he was never the genuine MAGA candidate we thought he was. In other words, if Trump caves it’s over for him, and Bannon’s attacks of Trump’s family members are completely justified.
    I hope I’m wrong, but I sense the neocons on the ascendancy in Trump’s world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  198. In California, an employer that voluntarily consents to a fed immigration inspection is subject to a civil fine. Also, employers are required to notify employees ahead of time if fed immigration agents are coming to check employees’ employment eligibility. https://t.co/5Pnz4weWLS

    This is straight out of the South Carolina 1860 playbook. I expect all the neo-confederates here on unz to now stay consistent and applaud California’s brave defiance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corn
    It’s time to put Jerry Brown and some California legislators behind bars.
    , @Anonymous
    Not a neo-confederate here but I most definitely support the right to self-determination of all peoples, and that includes the right of California (or any other state) to secede from the Union. As with Brexit, Ukraine, Ireland, Catalan, and any number of other examples. Note I didn't say there would be no costs associated.

    The Smaller the Political Unit, the Greater the Freedom.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Symptom of the disease of electing a new people.

    Multiculturalism guarantees fights of all kinds, everywhere. Bannon-Trump is just one manifestation that happens to be easy to see on the public stage.

    Get ready for more. In your offices, in your churches, in your kid’s school, everywhere -multiculturalism will wreak havoc.

    The whole situation lays bare the state of things in D.C. after 28 years of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama/Clinton uniparty-globalist depredations of our former checks and balances system of government. Problems fed by electing a new people via the 1965 immigration law.

    Problems given a steroid boost by mass-immigration of tens of millions of socialists who are indifferent to historic America. And which will cement our tomb shut unless immigration is stopped.

    By now Trump should realize the Constitution became a dead letter during Bush I’s “new world order” invade the world/invite the world/in hock with the world program. That was gleefully followed through by his successors in both parties. Always more immigrants feeding the dependency culture and killing self-government.

    Hence Trump needs to apply the Alexandrian solution to the Gordian Knot. Slash the mass-migration culture that divides and destroys our way of life. Just shut it down and damn the leftist torpedoes.

    Nothing else matters. Fail at that one issue, and everything else is destroyed. Multi-culture is a guaranteed division and resulting fights of all kinds, everywhere.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  200. Parsifal says:

    There are no words in any human language that can express the disgust I feel towards Bannon(spit!). So much the batter, because if there were words they would be unprintable here.

    At times like these it’s my regret that this isn’t the Game Of Thrones world, because right now I want to go full Ramsay Bolton on that fat bearded bastard whose name I never want to mention again.

    And the same applies to idiots who spread lies about Trump’s family and their malignant influence on Trump which doesn’t exist outside your guillible minds. I have more respect for Romneys andsKristols of the world and even for Reisitance types because at least I know they are the enemy. You on the other hand are fairweather fellow travelers with mental and emotional stability of 5-year olds who throw tantrums whenever they don’t get 1000% of what they want and want to burn everything down leaving everyone with nothing.

    Go ahead, think that I’m unhinged, I don’t care! It won’t change the fact that your supposed, slef-professed high-mindedness and dedication to the cause is just a manifestation of your extremely inflated egos!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  201. @Anonymous IV
    One problem that seems built-in is: where do you get people to staff up the government? Everyone with experience is going to have been part of the Obama/Bush/Clinton/Bush eras. And most right-leaning think tanks are neocon or libertarian (and thus open borders, pro Wall Street, free trader.) So it's no surprise Trump is surrounded by establishment types.

    I was naive enough to have thought much of Trump's thing was an act during the campaign, and that he would dial it down once in office. Ha! That most people in this country don't follow politics is a mixed blessing. (Those of us who participate places like this blog can overestimate how many political junkies there are in this country.) I'm sure lots of people aren't really following the ups and downs, but the general flavor of the administration is seeping out via media portrayals, jokes, etc. I can see a lot of moderate Trump voters in the heartland losing enthusiasm for the midterms, or thinking that we need a Democratic congress to "contain" Trump.

    What can be salvaged? Hope Trump hangs on long enough to replace one more Supreme Court justice (two would be great!) I'm old enough at least I could probably live the rest of my life out without SCOTUS taking away 1st and 2nd Amendment rights so long as he gets a couple of 50ish conservatives on the bench. Otherwise: can the GOP get the Raise Act through the same way they did the Tax Cut? That would be OK with me. Can they get some funding for some kind of permanent barriers on the border? I don't need a 2000 mile, 50-foot wall to be happy. I'll take some multi-layer fencing in areas the Border Patrol say are high priority. And they'd better hurry. If they lose the House this year, nothin' is getting done except executive orders and judicial appointments from that point on.

    My anxiety about Trump as President was that he just didn’t understand what was at stake in various issues — especially as regards immigration — and would be led down the garden path by advisers with a compromised agenda.

    But it’s clear by now that Trump gets what’s up with immigration, understands how such things as the lottery rule and chain migration work, knows they are important to stop, and has staked his ground on opposition to them. Likewise, his support of the Wall remains vocal.

    And I don’t see him giving up on those issues, although the compliance of Congress with them is in doubt. But I see his move with DACA to be rather brilliant strategically, because it forces the issue. He has something that the Democrats (and NeverTrumper Republicans) claim to be very important — the DACA people — and he won’t allow them to be legitimized without the other things necessary for border security. I don’t see him backing down on this, though he may not get everything he might want, of course.

    My read on Trump in general is that, perhaps for the first time I can think of, we have a major politician who will stick by his promises, to the extent that it’s within his power to make them happen. I just don’t see Trump, being Trump, finding any reason not to stick to his promises. Ordinarily, a politician worries about his electability. I see in Trump somebody who has never considered electability in any of his actions. Remarkably, he has never backed down from any of his many very controversial statements and actions. Perhaps out of arrogance or naivete, he has convinced himself that he will come out smelling like roses electorally in the end. This belief has only been encouraged by his stupendous upset victory in 2016. Trump’s belief in himself is more than a little grandiose and narcissistic, but it serves a very useful purpose for those supporting his agenda.

    I see in Trump a man who thinks that there’s no downside in sticking to his promises, and great downside in failing to do so.

    He is working against a system that is stacked against much of what he wants to make happen. And God knows he can get in his own way like nobody else. So the exact outcome of all this is hard to predict.

    But I think it pretty unlikely that Trump is just going to cave on any of the issues he’s staked out. He’s the last man who wants to be embarrassed by his own lack of nerve.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. Here’s something interesting from The Unz Review…

    Trump Bannon, I call total bullshit on it being a feud. It’s WWE and it’s fucking brilliant. I have many, I think, salient and rational points to make my case but I’ve devolved into a modern day Luddite; I don’t email, don’t text, hate typing(when did we all turn into 1950s secretaries! I’m not a typist!) But you can call anytime for a more in depth explanation.

    Stephen Lake
    XXX
    XXX
    XXX

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Mr Sailer, did you really approve the posting of someone's personal information in this thread? Did you really confirm that it is a legitimate use by the person named himself? If so, no problem. But I find it really hard to believe.
    , @Bernardista
    'TrumpBannon' would be a great name for a detective show set in the 50's with Sgt. Bannon's secretary played by Annie Potts pounding away at the typewriter in the background.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. EdwardM says:
    @istevefan

    Moreover, the Roy Moore debacle aside,...
     
    First, I thought Bannon was for Mo Brooks. And since Mo got torpedoed by the GOPe in favor of Luther Strange. Bannon then supported Moore.

    Second, the Moore debacle was the result of one of the biggest political hit jobs in US history, or at least in my lifetime. Five minutes after the so called scandal hit the news in early November, the GOPe led the calls for Moore to withdraw. They proceeded to starve his campaign of money and supply endless talking points in favor of the opposition right up to the last day of the campaign when Senator Shelby told the world he did not vote for Moore.

    The debacle of the Moore campaign was not Bannon's fault. It was the total abandonment of a party candidate by his party by the same people who tell us we must support the cold body, e.g. Bob Dole, of whomever they enter. But apparently when they don't get their way, they don't return the favor.

    BTW, I haven't heard any more news about the Moore accusers. I suppose it's "mission accomplished" and we will never hear of it again.

    Agree, although I think Bannon was for Moore in the primary (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/roy-moore-tests-the-limits-of-bannon/545948/).

    That doesn’t mean that Bannon is to blame for the left’s successful hit job on him, but, at the end of the day, his influence will be measured by successful elections — from finding candidates to winning primaries to overcoming the institutional opposition and getting them over the finish line.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. Not Raul says:
    @Anon
    Politicians don't farm out the job of professional diplomacy to lawyers. Diplomatic negotiations are not a court case.

    They weren’t “diplomatic negotiations”. Kushner wanted dirt on Hillary. Diplomatic negotiations by a private citizen (Trump wasn’t President yet) are illegal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Travis says:

    well stated. Hopefully Trump has enough supporters in congress to use DACA as a wedge to divide the democrats and expose their agenda. He knows the wall needs to be constructed to retain his base, and many democrats have supported building a barrier along our southern border. He should use the dreamers to fund the wall, by imposing a fine of $7,500 on each dreamer when they apply for a residence card. this would effectively raise $8 Billion from Mexican and latin Americans to fund the cost of the wall.

    in addition Trump needs to cap legal immigration to 900,000 per year….including those dreamers, which would effectively close our borders for the next 2 years if the “dreamers” were given green cards.

    we need to get congress to set maximum number of green cards at 900,000 per year and end the diversity lottery and build the wall…this requires the people get behind this agenda. The politicians need to feel the pressure, and face losing their seats if they maintain the status quo.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  206. @LondonBob
    https://twitter.com/TOOEdit/status/948626235705274368

    Trumps has been led down a dark alley by his son in law.

    What did Kissinger mean by that though? Does he intend to suggest that one group’s being Jewish and the other’s not somehow explains their differences? What about that would be causative of the differences? Is he accusing one group of anti-Semitism?

    Perhaps more intriguingly, is he suggesting that one group’s (or both’s) policy positions are better and worse for the respective ethnic groups? What about the policy positions exactly would make them better or worse for one of the groups?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
    All too many people, here and elsewhere, entirely misunderstand Kissinger.
    He is an historian first of all, and he observes the passing scene with an historian's eye. He rarely makes moral judgements.
    He is merely noticing here that one group, Jewish, is fighting another, which is not. It would not occur to him to take the Jewish side, merely because of his origins, from which, by the way, he has always been quite drily detached.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. Eagle Eye says:
    @eD
    "to what extent are election results still real in the face of massive election fraud in many states?"

    You are correct to raise this. In the United States, elections are run by commissions which are almost always staffed by hacks from the Democratic and Republican Parties themselves. This makes it harder to fix an election to make the Democrats win over the Republicans, or vice versa, except in circumstances where the losing party agrees. But it makes it really easy to keep candidates not from these parties from winning, along with the more publicized ballot access difficulties.

    In addition to party hacks running the elections, in the United States the ballots are never counted in public, or in the presence of observers sent from all the candidates. That would be hard to do anyway because usually paper ballots are not used.

    In other countries, elections are generally run by non-partisan bureaucrats, using paper ballots counted in public and/ or in the presence of observers. Elections in the USA are one of those things that are regarded as a joke elsewhere.

    I find most commentators even here to be clueless about this, so I encourage people to find Jorge Castaneda's book "Perpetuating Power". Most of the book is about Mexican presidential succession, but in the appendix he discusses how the PRI did it. Its very informative.

    Castaneda points out that while the PRI did use ballot tampering, and implies they did this in 1988, this was very much a last resort. The preference was to make sure their candidates were favorably covered by the Mexican news media, which were dependent on advertising from the PRI or front companies, and opposing candidates received no or unfavorable coverage. That, and making sure opposition candidates were heavily outspent. That way there would be no need for actual ballot tampering,.

    In 2016 the fix was arranged by making sure that Hilary Clinton got much more favorable media coverage than Trump and also heavily outspent Trump. There is evidence the Clinton campaign used another trick and tipped the scales in the other party's nomination process to make sure they nominated the worst candidate conceivable, someone who apparently didn't even want to become President. This was enough, as it always is, to make sure she won the popular vote. At the last moment someone behind the scenes figured out, for whatever reason, that Hilary Clinton could not become President. The ballot counting itself may even have been fixed for Trump at the last minute to undo the campaign being fixed for Hillary Clinton.

    In addition to party hacks running the elections, in the United States the ballots are never counted in public, or in the presence of observers sent from all the candidates. That would be hard to do anyway because usually paper ballots are not used.

    In other countries, elections are generally run by non-partisan bureaucrats, using paper ballots counted in public and/ or in the presence of observers. Elections in the USA are one of those things that are regarded as a joke elsewhere.</blockquote

    Sad that we are now having to take lessons from PRI-infested Mexico, but the example is actually highly instructive, particularly as regards the bought and paid for MSM machines in both countries.

    In California, many counties have gone back to using paper ballots, and registrar of voters offices are staffed by regular SEIU members.

    CRUCIALLY, as you point out, ballots are not counted in public, and are allowed to be "transported" from polling ballot stations by SEIU members without public scrutiny. Ballot boxes are not transparent. This compares unfavorably to countries like GHANA (from memory) where ballot boxes are made of plexiglass to ensure that they do not come pre-loaded, and ballots are counted under public scrutiny at the polling station.

    With a little organization, a back-of-the-envelope calculation confirms that it is quite feasible to count U.S. ballots by hand (despite the larger number of votes per ballot, up to around 20 at a general election in CA), and collect the totals from each polling station by email or even old-fashioned telephone calls. Of course, this should always be backed up by contemporaneous results prepared in multiple copies signed by vote supervisors and multiple independent observers.

    BTW to reduce collusion, it might be useful to prescribe minimum gender ratios for polling station workers, e.g. at least 25% men/women, and no fewer than 2 each. There should also be an option for last-minute walk-ins to become official election observers so as to prevent prior fixing of the observers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    My precinct is about 99% white and just two elections ago, the Little Old White Ladies who had staffed the polling place since time immemorial were summarily replaced by ghetto thugs and dey ladeez from God knows where. I just hope the LOWLs weren't trucked into the ghetto.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. @eD
    "to what extent are election results still real in the face of massive election fraud in many states?"

    You are correct to raise this. In the United States, elections are run by commissions which are almost always staffed by hacks from the Democratic and Republican Parties themselves. This makes it harder to fix an election to make the Democrats win over the Republicans, or vice versa, except in circumstances where the losing party agrees. But it makes it really easy to keep candidates not from these parties from winning, along with the more publicized ballot access difficulties.

    In addition to party hacks running the elections, in the United States the ballots are never counted in public, or in the presence of observers sent from all the candidates. That would be hard to do anyway because usually paper ballots are not used.

    In other countries, elections are generally run by non-partisan bureaucrats, using paper ballots counted in public and/ or in the presence of observers. Elections in the USA are one of those things that are regarded as a joke elsewhere.

    I find most commentators even here to be clueless about this, so I encourage people to find Jorge Castaneda's book "Perpetuating Power". Most of the book is about Mexican presidential succession, but in the appendix he discusses how the PRI did it. Its very informative.

    Castaneda points out that while the PRI did use ballot tampering, and implies they did this in 1988, this was very much a last resort. The preference was to make sure their candidates were favorably covered by the Mexican news media, which were dependent on advertising from the PRI or front companies, and opposing candidates received no or unfavorable coverage. That, and making sure opposition candidates were heavily outspent. That way there would be no need for actual ballot tampering,.

    In 2016 the fix was arranged by making sure that Hilary Clinton got much more favorable media coverage than Trump and also heavily outspent Trump. There is evidence the Clinton campaign used another trick and tipped the scales in the other party's nomination process to make sure they nominated the worst candidate conceivable, someone who apparently didn't even want to become President. This was enough, as it always is, to make sure she won the popular vote. At the last moment someone behind the scenes figured out, for whatever reason, that Hilary Clinton could not become President. The ballot counting itself may even have been fixed for Trump at the last minute to undo the campaign being fixed for Hillary Clinton.

    There is evidence the Clinton campaign used another trick and tipped the scales in the other party’s nomination process to make sure they nominated the worst candidate conceivable, someone who apparently didn’t even want to become President.

    What did it do, allegedly?

    Read More
    • Replies: @eD
    Its been reported -I just saw another article about this today-, that Bill Clinton encouraged Donald Trump to run for President.

    This doesn't mean that Trump ran in order to hand Hillary Clinton the election. However, it has happened in American elections that the likely nominee of one party has a unelectable ringer run in the other party's primary. This creates havoc in the other party's primary, and if it really goes well, the ringer will be nominated than go down to defeat in November. Bill Clinton had to be thinking this. Gray Davis did this in his re-election campaign in 2002, it was a key reason for the recall election.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. EdwardM says:
    @Opinionator
    Even if everything he said in his statement about Bannon’s role, access, leaks, and mental health is true, I don’t really like the look of throwing Bannon under the bus.

    Throw Bannon under the bus?? Are you out of your mind? Bannon--reportedly-- has accused the Trump campaign of treason. This, in the middle of a criminal investigation into the campaign and the administration that has treason within its scope, whether as a criminal matter or as a pretext for impeachment. Bannon deserves no quarter.

    Assuming the statements were accurately reported.

    Bannon said, according to the book, that Trump Jr.’s meeting with that Russian lawyer claiming to have dirt on Hillary Clinton was “treasonous” and “unpatriotic.” I don’t endorse those comments, but it does seem (if we believe the leaked communications from the Trump team and other media reports) ham-handed in how they approached it. He added that, if they thought that the information might have been useful, they should have sent lawyers or other surrogates to meet the Russians in New Hampshire, not Trump Jr. in Trump Tower. And if the information amounted to Russian interference in our election, they should have called the FBI. These are fair points.

    This is just rhetoric from a book. Again, even if Trump takes legitimate exception to it, it does not follow that Bannon was not helpful in crafting the Trump agenda and getting him elected. Why turn it into that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    I think this is what Trump might be the most upset about:

    “This is all about money laundering. Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr and Jared Kushner … It’s as plain as a hair on your face.”
     

    “It goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They’re going to go right through that. They’re going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me.
     
    because it is about the future not the past.

    And this is interesting:

    The rancour between Bannon and “Javanka” – Kushner and his wife Ivanka Trump – is a recurring theme of the book. Kushner and Ivanka are Jewish. Henry Kissinger, the former secretary of state, is quoted as saying: “It is a war between the Jews and the non-Jews.”
     
    , @Opinionator
    Bannon's most egregious comments were the suggestion that the meeting was "treasonous" and "unpatriotic." That he may have made other comments that were less egregious doesn't exculpate him from that sin.

    Having said that, what is so "ham-handed" about listening to someone who claims to have evidence of a political candidate's wrongdoing?

    And please educate us as to what kind of information "amounts to Russian interference in our election." For that matter, what acts constitute "interference" in an election?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. Not Raul says:
    @Sunbeam
    Well whatever Trump wants to do.

    My support is 100% behind Bannon for what it's worth.

    Have to wonder if Trump thinks he won because of his persona and charisma, as opposed to the message he ran on.

    I agree.

    Trump would not have won without Bannon.

    He talks too much sometimes; but he was never anywhere near being the biggest leaker in the White House. Kellyanne Conway and some others are much worse. It’s a shame Conway hasn’t been fired yet. She was on team Cruz, and was bashing Trump right up until she jumped from a sinking ship on to the Trump bandwagon.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    You know who is leaking and who isn't how?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. @rogue-one
    White nationalism is a dead end. No sane person would go that route. Civic nationalism seems to be the most promising and acceptable option today.

    America First can win. Whites First cannot.

    No argument here. Good luck looking for a savvy and competent populism anytime soon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. I find Wolff credible. Of course if you are writing a book and want to make it readable and entertaining you are not going to quote everything exactly word for word with every um and er, and of course people who have said things indiscreetly that they regret will deny them after the fact. They would, wouldn’t they?

    However you cannot deny certain things have happened, like the botched rollout of the visa cancellation program, Bannon, Spicer, and Priebus being fired, the Scaramucci episode, the war of words with North Korea, and the things Wolff has written about certainly provide a plausible underpinning and explanation.

    It is also clear that Wolff has had conversations with Bannon, Priebus, and so on, and that White House logs will show that he was in the White House, where he must have been seeing someone or doing something.

    And why are people who know Trump not speaking out to deny that his memory is shot, with examples?

    Read More
    • Replies: @neprof
    If half of what Wolff says is true in this recent article, then maybe the 25th amendment option is not too far-fetched.

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-wolff-my-insane-year-inside-trumps-white-house-1071504
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. @Whiskey
    About what I expected. What got Trump the Presidency is what will get him impeached and convicted if not defeated for re-election; and its likely (a purely political move) that the former happens rather than the latter. Trump IS a prickly a-hole, just like Bannon, and the dispute has always been about Trumps biggest failing: depending on Daddy's Princess Ivanka and Jared the son he never had.

    Both Kushners are a disaster -- privileged insiders no different than Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama in outlook, hatred of the Deplorables, or globalist internationalism.

    Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal. But rather the influence the Kushners have on going along with the GOPe/Dem agenda of globalist sell out of the Deplorables. Seen any walls built lately? We all know Mass Amnesty is coming, again. We all know Open Borders is coming as well. We all know Trump will cave on any trade deal (not that it mattes with half the Third World moving here). We all know White men are at best fifth class peons in the new Globalist Open Border world. None of that will change with the Kushners in charge and will only get worse.

    Most average normal White dudes are fine with Trump calling the BS on the Iran Deal. We pretended not to notice while Khameni and the Guard built a mini-Persian empire and nuked up. Falling apart now that none of the money went to ordinary people getting hammered by inflation while the Guard and Mullahs live like kings. That young people are shouting for the return of the Shah is extra-ordinary. Trump can recognize a failing deal and bail out of it at least as he can recognize BS deals from long experience.

    Same with Israel and Jerusalem. It had long been Democratic-Republican policy, signed into law by Bill Clinton and waivered ever since by Clinton, Bush, Obama, that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel and that the US would at some point move its Embassy there. Trump just ended the idiotic charades of pretending we wouldn't. Its open and honest. No one cares about it other than the Palestinians and the Arab world engaged with Iran trying to conquer it (again) has other issues at the moment.

    Same with North Korea. Clinton, Bush, Obama all kicked the can down the road, refusing to confront the Kims and China which has been using the Kims to kick the US in the balls while pretending its a "rogue state" (that they consistently supply, support and prop up). Those North Korean nukes are just Chinese nukes rebranded. Trump has at least recognized the futility of kicking the can down the road once more and has decided to end the game one way or another. I'm fine with half of Korea being flattened by artillery fire and nukes if it means no North Korean nukes hit LA since I work there most days.

    That's Trump's one big virtue -- the art of seeing through the BS deals like Mass Third World immigration or pretending Iran is our new friend or that we didn't really mean our embassy law. Its why the Elites and Pussy Hatters and Nasty Women and Oprah, all champions of the BS deals and pretending real hard for fantasy hate hate hate him. And his one big flaw is refusing to see his idiot daughter and son in law as they are -- giant political/cultural boat anchors. Who pretend real hard in BS deals.

    “Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal.”

    His weakness is that he makes those issues a substitute for doing anything about implementing the policies which won him the election (and for which Bannon was a brilliant publicist).

    It’s a great pity that Bannon and Trump are now sundered, on the word of a Guardian correspondent who looks like the villain in an Austin Powers movie.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Evil

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. istevefan says:
    @Whiskey
    About what I expected. What got Trump the Presidency is what will get him impeached and convicted if not defeated for re-election; and its likely (a purely political move) that the former happens rather than the latter. Trump IS a prickly a-hole, just like Bannon, and the dispute has always been about Trumps biggest failing: depending on Daddy's Princess Ivanka and Jared the son he never had.

    Both Kushners are a disaster -- privileged insiders no different than Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama in outlook, hatred of the Deplorables, or globalist internationalism.

    Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal. But rather the influence the Kushners have on going along with the GOPe/Dem agenda of globalist sell out of the Deplorables. Seen any walls built lately? We all know Mass Amnesty is coming, again. We all know Open Borders is coming as well. We all know Trump will cave on any trade deal (not that it mattes with half the Third World moving here). We all know White men are at best fifth class peons in the new Globalist Open Border world. None of that will change with the Kushners in charge and will only get worse.

    Most average normal White dudes are fine with Trump calling the BS on the Iran Deal. We pretended not to notice while Khameni and the Guard built a mini-Persian empire and nuked up. Falling apart now that none of the money went to ordinary people getting hammered by inflation while the Guard and Mullahs live like kings. That young people are shouting for the return of the Shah is extra-ordinary. Trump can recognize a failing deal and bail out of it at least as he can recognize BS deals from long experience.

    Same with Israel and Jerusalem. It had long been Democratic-Republican policy, signed into law by Bill Clinton and waivered ever since by Clinton, Bush, Obama, that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel and that the US would at some point move its Embassy there. Trump just ended the idiotic charades of pretending we wouldn't. Its open and honest. No one cares about it other than the Palestinians and the Arab world engaged with Iran trying to conquer it (again) has other issues at the moment.

    Same with North Korea. Clinton, Bush, Obama all kicked the can down the road, refusing to confront the Kims and China which has been using the Kims to kick the US in the balls while pretending its a "rogue state" (that they consistently supply, support and prop up). Those North Korean nukes are just Chinese nukes rebranded. Trump has at least recognized the futility of kicking the can down the road once more and has decided to end the game one way or another. I'm fine with half of Korea being flattened by artillery fire and nukes if it means no North Korean nukes hit LA since I work there most days.

    That's Trump's one big virtue -- the art of seeing through the BS deals like Mass Third World immigration or pretending Iran is our new friend or that we didn't really mean our embassy law. Its why the Elites and Pussy Hatters and Nasty Women and Oprah, all champions of the BS deals and pretending real hard for fantasy hate hate hate him. And his one big flaw is refusing to see his idiot daughter and son in law as they are -- giant political/cultural boat anchors. Who pretend real hard in BS deals.

    Seen any walls built lately?

    Do you still have an animus against Pat Buchanan? You know the one guy in the public eye who has pushed for tough border controls and against the third world invasion of the US since 1992?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Patrick Buchanan is just about the only Patriot Left Standing at this point.

    Fortunately, one Ann Coulter seems to have taken up the mantle lately.

    And her way with words is as good as his, which is saying something.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. Chazz says:

    I have this image of Donald smiling and waving at the crowd as he repeatedly steps in the dog poop. At some point, people are going to start noticing the shoes and begin laughing rather than cheering. Bannon became frustrated when Donald ignored his instructions on where to walk.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  216. Deckin says:
    @utu
    Looks like you are imagining too many dimensions in this game.

    I don’t think anyone here ought to have much confidence in the reality of this latest dust-up. If this feud is real, why is Breitbart not screaming about it on the site and why is Bannon now defending Trump publicly? How many times have these things been screamed from the top of the MSM’s lungs only to either blow back in their face or fizzle out? This has all the markers of past MSM failures: lots of leaks; lots of reports based on excerpts. We’ll see.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. It’s too bad Bannon and Trump can’t work together. They both work for Israel but I much prefer them to the standard issue Zionist scum in Imperial Washington. Bannon will now retire to the bottom of the page. A footnote.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  218. Dutch Boy says:
    @Berty
    Bannon didn't win Trump the election, but he helped focus the campaign's message into one that could resonate with all the right voters. For that he deserves recognition. Trump doesn't seem to realize that it was his message that won the election, not him. Polls consistently showed that large numbers of his voters disliked him as a person and didn't really trust him but voted for him anyway. Now he's at 60% disapproval in Iowa and 52% approval in Mississippi. Not really a good place to be.

    He needs to stop this shit. Focus on trade and immigration this year and forget about pointless tweet fights that the people hate and Paul Ryan's retarded plan to cut Medicaid. Because otherwise you're looking at a bloodbath in November and frankly I'm finding less and less reason to defend him as this garbage continues with no end in sight.

    Quite correct. I voted for Trump because I considered him the best of a very bad lot of candidates and I thought HRC would be a national disaster (that Trump is not HRC continues to be his major virtue, IMO). As for Trump personally – yuck!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. Zach says:
    @Anonymous IV
    One problem that seems built-in is: where do you get people to staff up the government? Everyone with experience is going to have been part of the Obama/Bush/Clinton/Bush eras. And most right-leaning think tanks are neocon or libertarian (and thus open borders, pro Wall Street, free trader.) So it's no surprise Trump is surrounded by establishment types.

    I was naive enough to have thought much of Trump's thing was an act during the campaign, and that he would dial it down once in office. Ha! That most people in this country don't follow politics is a mixed blessing. (Those of us who participate places like this blog can overestimate how many political junkies there are in this country.) I'm sure lots of people aren't really following the ups and downs, but the general flavor of the administration is seeping out via media portrayals, jokes, etc. I can see a lot of moderate Trump voters in the heartland losing enthusiasm for the midterms, or thinking that we need a Democratic congress to "contain" Trump.

    What can be salvaged? Hope Trump hangs on long enough to replace one more Supreme Court justice (two would be great!) I'm old enough at least I could probably live the rest of my life out without SCOTUS taking away 1st and 2nd Amendment rights so long as he gets a couple of 50ish conservatives on the bench. Otherwise: can the GOP get the Raise Act through the same way they did the Tax Cut? That would be OK with me. Can they get some funding for some kind of permanent barriers on the border? I don't need a 2000 mile, 50-foot wall to be happy. I'll take some multi-layer fencing in areas the Border Patrol say are high priority. And they'd better hurry. If they lose the House this year, nothin' is getting done except executive orders and judicial appointments from that point on.

    Yes, where do you get the right people? Nixon told Reagan that the problem was that the smart guys aren’t loyal, and the loyal guys aren’t smart. Tough to balance the Kissinger’s with the Gordon Liddy’s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. J.Ross says: • Website
    @eD
    The Wolff article itself states, and other commentators such as Yves Smith have picked up on this, that the whole campaign seemed like a real life version of "The Producers". I thought during the campaign itself that the whole thing could have been a Hollywood produced comedy. As usual the sequel, though it has its moments, is not as funny.

    Be aware that that’s an established pat narrative that has been pushed by almost every mainstream media comedian and columnist for a year — “Trump is in over his head because he never thought he would win, he’s a con artist who was trying to make money.” Trump sacrificed his reputation and his media-image, which to him is everything, and it was all just to make money?
    There was a guy who made money from the election and his name is Bernie Sanders.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. MEH 0910 says:
    @eD
    Michael Wolff is coming out with a new book on the Trump White House. Apparently he got unprecedented access. New York Magazine published an extended article on the subject:

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html

    Its fair to warn people here that its pretty ugly.

    He ­reprimanded the housekeeping staff for picking up his shirt from the floor: “If my shirt is on the floor, it’s because I want it on the floor.”

    I like that. I hope Wolff didn’t make that up.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Bannon is a Iago, and a lot of people haven’t realized this yet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  223. @Thomm
    Bannon represented the Nationalist-Leftist agenda*, and hence was a better fit with Bernie Sanders than with Trump (who was never a Nationalist-Leftist).

    That fact that Bannon was not just fired, but is being openly slammed by Trump, is exactly how normal Americans feel about Nationalist-Leftists.

    *Race-Nationalism is a left-wing ideology in economic terms, and always has been.

    Nationalist-leftist sounds an awful lot like National Socialist.

    And yes, my Uncle Adolf was a liberal about everything besides open boarders.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. Corn says:
    @The Man From K Street
    In California, an employer that voluntarily consents to a fed immigration inspection is subject to a civil fine. Also, employers are required to notify employees ahead of time if fed immigration agents are coming to check employees' employment eligibility. https://t.co/5Pnz4weWLS

    This is straight out of the South Carolina 1860 playbook. I expect all the neo-confederates here on unz to now stay consistent and applaud California's brave defiance.

    It’s time to put Jerry Brown and some California legislators behind bars.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The core issue here is/was Trump’s insane nepotism.

    The nepotism is like cancer in his administration…

    KUSHNERISM IS VICTORIOUS

    MAGA is dead & buried but few can see it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond

    The core issue here is/was Trump’s insane nepotism.
     
    But it kind of comes with the package. Nepotism is the behavioral outcome of high clannishness, which also enables his nationalism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. lavoisier says: • Website

    Bannon is what made possible Trump’s victory.

    Trump is essentially a high functioning moron–good at business, but ignorant of history, literature, philosophy, science–essentially any subject that allows one to think about complex subjects in depth.

    And like many high functioning morons, he thinks that his success as businessman makes him far more intelligent and thoughtful than he actually is. Furthermore, it makes him, like George Bush before him, easily manipulated by the usual suspects.

    When Bannon was fired, Trump was finished.

    The usual suspects are in total control of the United States government.

    Meet the New Boss, the Same as the Old Boss.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Bernardista
    I for one welcome our New Old overlords.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. Hunsdon says:
    @AndrewR
    Talk about wishful thinking. Trump may face Republican challengers but none of them will be pro-wall.

    As for DACA, only the most fringe losers are butthurt about the idea of law-abiding and hard-working people, few of whom can be said to have meaningfully chosen to come here, getting work permits without any path to citizenship. DACA is the least of our problems.

    Hard facts make bad law.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. Berty says:

    Lol I got insulted passive aggressively by Jack Hanson the Civil War deadender who can’t overcome his hatred of then there durned Yankees. I consider it a badge of honor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Look at this dork nervously laughing while being too scared to address me directly.

    Tell me again what an idiot Trump is after making millions on NYC real estate and torpedoing the two leading US dynasties in the same race, Mr. Posting on a Niche Blog.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. Berty says:

    I also think it’s adorable how so many of you are willing to believe that all this is staged. You’ll do anything for an excuse not to think.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    "Heh I am so very wise" said Berty while inhaling his own farts and smacking his lips together.
    , @Opinionator
    Thinking would lead to what understanding specifically?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. utu says:
    @EdwardM
    Bannon said, according to the book, that Trump Jr.'s meeting with that Russian lawyer claiming to have dirt on Hillary Clinton was "treasonous" and "unpatriotic." I don't endorse those comments, but it does seem (if we believe the leaked communications from the Trump team and other media reports) ham-handed in how they approached it. He added that, if they thought that the information might have been useful, they should have sent lawyers or other surrogates to meet the Russians in New Hampshire, not Trump Jr. in Trump Tower. And if the information amounted to Russian interference in our election, they should have called the FBI. These are fair points.

    This is just rhetoric from a book. Again, even if Trump takes legitimate exception to it, it does not follow that Bannon was not helpful in crafting the Trump agenda and getting him elected. Why turn it into that?

    I think this is what Trump might be the most upset about:

    “This is all about money laundering. Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr and Jared Kushner … It’s as plain as a hair on your face.”

    “It goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They’re going to go right through that. They’re going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me.

    because it is about the future not the past.

    And this is interesting:

    The rancour between Bannon and “Javanka” – Kushner and his wife Ivanka Trump – is a recurring theme of the book. Kushner and Ivanka are Jewish. Henry Kissinger, the former secretary of state, is quoted as saying: “It is a war between the Jews and the non-Jews.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Henry Kissinger, the former secretary of state, is quoted as saying: “It is a war between the Jews and the non-Jews.”
     
    Nearly everything is, it seems, only the 'non-jews' don't know it.

    It's Job One to make sure they never, ever know it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. utu says:
    @eD
    To answer Anonymous # 96, according to the article the "Ivanka for President" thing started after the election.

    No one seems to have thought Trump would win (actually Nate Silver wrote there was about a 20% chance, and this was higher than most people were willing to come out and say). I think the missing factor was just how terrible a candidate Hillary Clinton was. Among ordinary voters, many of them were anti-Hillary voters, as shown by Trump's unusually high unfavorable rating among people who said they voted for him (high compared to normal candidates among their own voters). I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.

    I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.

    I have entertained a similar idea already few weeks before election when I saw some indicators of the shift in Trumps favor. I do not know the mechanism how the election stealing is done but I think it is possible. Trump may not be too interested in disclosing the mechanism:

    Trump Disbands Commission on Voter Fraud

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/us/politics/trump-voter-fraud-commission.html

    President Trump on Wednesday abruptly shut down a White House commission he had charged with investigating voter fraud, ending a brief quest for evidence of election theft that generated lawsuits, outrage and some scholarly testimony, but no real evidence that American elections are corrupt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Their pattern (as seen in Alabama) is to let the election play out properly at first, then finally "find" just enough votes in their urban precincts to win. That's what they were trying to do in November and you could see the shock in real time when the rural turnout just shot past the cities to the point where two points weren't going to cut it. There have been several elections where the Democrats win by a hair at the last minute.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. MarcB. says:
    @map
    Everything about the Trump campaign and the Trump administration is unusual. The typical attacks against Trump, attacks that would have crushed a normal Republican candidate and administration, never panned out.

    There is a reason for that.

    There is a deeper game that is being played. The Trump agenda is being implemented indirectly and, because of indirection, it is much more difficult to defend against, albeit it is slow.

    There is a deeper game that is being played. The Trump agenda is being implemented indirectly and, because of indirection, it is much more difficult to defend against, albeit it is slow.

    That’s been my perception as well. During the first three months of his presidency, President Trump came across as a hostage of the Establishment, telegraphing his circumstances through blinks, facial expressions and odd turns of phrase that were often at odds with the MAGA agenda. As his first year in office has progressed, it’s clear to me that he is taking a more gradual approach to pushing though his agenda while figuring out the tricks from the inside. This has got to be a difficult operating style for someone so adept at the frontal attack.

    Whatever is going on between Bannon and Trump doesn’t add up. There were a lot of ways they could have aired their creative differences without going scorched earth through Leftist media intermediaries. This fight is straight out of the Vince McMahon playbook.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Hope dies last because of denial of reality.
    , @Archimedes
    To all commenters and MarcB. :

    Why is it that Matt Drudge has always seemed to be out to get Bannon?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. Coemgen says:

    iSteve “open thread”: the raison d’etre of concern trolls and underminers.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jack Hanson
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  234. @Travis
    "This is total Fake News and taken out of context, don’t believe the liberal propaganda Machine! "- Steve Bannon

    no need for Bannon to apologize to Trump because of the lies written by Michael Wolff.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon/status/948847059368636416

    That isn’t Bannon’s Twitter account.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. @Anonymous
    You've got to be kidding. The setup for the meeting was not to talk about bilateral relations. Don Jr thought the Russian government was going to supply some dirt on the Hilary campaign at the meeting. If you plan on taking the risk of doing something illegal like that yes you call in the lawyers to try to minimize exposure.

    Is it illegal to listen to someone who alleges wrongdoing by your political opponent?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Not Raul
    Not just someone. A representative of a foreign power who wanted to influence the election.

    Bannon was right about firing Comey, too: a disaster for the administration.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  236. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Opinionator
    What makes you think they will take majorities in the House and Senate?

    Alabama, and the onslaught of MSM propaganda put into force for that race. It’s 24/7/365 attacking Trump every which way now, and though many of us (myself included) do not indulge, the vast, vast majority of Americans get their ‘news’ spoon-fed to them by the Establishment. Young people think they’re being edgy because they get their ‘news’ from people like Mark Oliver, Trevor Noah, and Stephen Colbert. It’s the same crap, just with more foul language.

    Trump hasn’t done much to cement his own brand lately. He’s only lost support, and made a number of unforced errors, and definitely lost sight of the ball. Either he doesn’t know or doesn’t care why he was elected. All of this will play out in November. OTOH November isn’t next week.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Chrisnonymous

    Trumps weakness is not foreign policy, nor Israel, nor Jerusalem, nor repudiation of that awful Iran deal. But rather the influence the Kushners have on going along with the GOPe/Dem agenda of globalist sell out of the Deplorables.
     
    That was my feeling in the beginning, but to be fair to Trump, he's surrounded, boxed in, and with no political experience or real knowledge of how things work at that level of government. Even without the Kushners, I think he would be having a hard time resisting. He can't do everything by himself.

    This was always going to be a problem. Someone as potentially disruptive as Trump could count on the entire apparatus of Big Government to be opposed to his every move. Even if he were all about integrity, how many like-minded thinkers could he bring along? How many of them would have significant experience in public administration? Sadly, the only real disruption we’re likely to get will be violent revolution. And that’s not going to happen, since the vast majority believe the real threat comes from ‘nazis’ who ‘need punching’.

    Ahh…now I see that Anonymous IV says just about the same thing in Comment #148 as I just did. As you were, troops.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. @EdwardM
    Bannon said, according to the book, that Trump Jr.'s meeting with that Russian lawyer claiming to have dirt on Hillary Clinton was "treasonous" and "unpatriotic." I don't endorse those comments, but it does seem (if we believe the leaked communications from the Trump team and other media reports) ham-handed in how they approached it. He added that, if they thought that the information might have been useful, they should have sent lawyers or other surrogates to meet the Russians in New Hampshire, not Trump Jr. in Trump Tower. And if the information amounted to Russian interference in our election, they should have called the FBI. These are fair points.

    This is just rhetoric from a book. Again, even if Trump takes legitimate exception to it, it does not follow that Bannon was not helpful in crafting the Trump agenda and getting him elected. Why turn it into that?

    Bannon’s most egregious comments were the suggestion that the meeting was “treasonous” and “unpatriotic.” That he may have made other comments that were less egregious doesn’t exculpate him from that sin.

    Having said that, what is so “ham-handed” about listening to someone who claims to have evidence of a political candidate’s wrongdoing?

    And please educate us as to what kind of information “amounts to Russian interference in our election.” For that matter, what acts constitute “interference” in an election?

    Read More
    • Replies: @EdwardM

    Having said that, what is so “ham-handed” about listening to someone who claims to have evidence of a political candidate’s wrongdoing?
     
    What is ham-handed is (1) having Donald Trump Jr. (as well as other top campaign officials) in the initial meeting before the source had even been vetted, (2) having the meeting in Trump Tower, which we know now was bugged by the Obama administration but was pretty hard to get into anonymously anyway, and (3) sending around e-mails about it afterward that would eventually be turned over to the government, which Trump Jr. did.

    As Bannon said, of course take every opportunity for opposition research, but do it via surrogates in anonymous places to preserve deniability, and beware the agenda of anyone who comes bearing gifts.

    And please educate us as to what kind of information “amounts to Russian interference in our election.” For that matter, what acts constitute “interference” in an election?
     
    Foreign intelligence services planting dirt on a candidate could qualify. Even if it's solicited by one campaign or our corrupt government and put into the mainstream by a credulous, or biased, media, I still think that Americans should not welcome a foreign government attempting a disinformation campaign intended to influence opinion here. I am not saying that happened in 2016, but if the Trump campaign would have become aware of such an effort, it would be nice if they would have handled it patriotically. That seems to be Bannon's point.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. @Not Raul
    I agree.

    Trump would not have won without Bannon.

    He talks too much sometimes; but he was never anywhere near being the biggest leaker in the White House. Kellyanne Conway and some others are much worse. It’s a shame Conway hasn’t been fired yet. She was on team Cruz, and was bashing Trump right up until she jumped from a sinking ship on to the Trump bandwagon.

    You know who is leaking and who isn’t how?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Not Raul
    Conway has been caught leaking http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4593158/Kellyanne-Conway-caught-leaking-Twitter-account.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  240. utu says:
    @MarcB.

    There is a deeper game that is being played. The Trump agenda is being implemented indirectly and, because of indirection, it is much more difficult to defend against, albeit it is slow.
     
    That's been my perception as well. During the first three months of his presidency, President Trump came across as a hostage of the Establishment, telegraphing his circumstances through blinks, facial expressions and odd turns of phrase that were often at odds with the MAGA agenda. As his first year in office has progressed, it's clear to me that he is taking a more gradual approach to pushing though his agenda while figuring out the tricks from the inside. This has got to be a difficult operating style for someone so adept at the frontal attack.

    Whatever is going on between Bannon and Trump doesn't add up. There were a lot of ways they could have aired their creative differences without going scorched earth through Leftist media intermediaries. This fight is straight out of the Vince McMahon playbook.

    Hope dies last because of denial of reality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  241. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @vinteuil
    I don't think ID is especially into Heidegger. He comes across (to me, at least) as a bit of a neo-Thomist. His handle just seems jokey.

    Never knew anyone who specifically called himself ‘intelligent’ online who actually was.

    Now he says “You guys are idiots, do you know that? You’re a bunch of freaking idiots.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Never knew anyone who specifically called himself ‘intelligent’ online who actually was.

    Intelligence is not the only criterion that is used to categorize including complete dismissal of somebody. ID's comments are not infrequently quite intelligent but his intelligence seems to be just a thin varnish on top of a serious personality disorder. Art Deco who is on the opposite end of the political spectrum to ID is another example of deficient personality with an impressive superstructure of knowledge and operational intelligence. In terms of Turing test Art Deco is closer to a machine while ID to an animal who was given a human power of speech.
    , @MEH 0910

    Never knew anyone who specifically called himself ‘intelligent’ online who actually was.
     
    President Trump is the exception that proves the rule.

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/949616329463615489?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/949618475877765120?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/949619270631256064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  242. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Neoconned
    I don't know Charles. We Americans tend to have this perverse optimism about us. Where we care about attitude more than results.

    I'm w the poster anonymous here.

    I'm a natural pessimist and shrewd. I see the worst in ppl and plan accordingly. Those Midwest voters who elected Trump will not sit around forever.

    Many I recall reading voted for him "just to try something new"...thus far he's been long rhetoric and funny one liners and not much in actual results.

    A lot of those Midwest union types, if hasn't produced TANGIBLE results by next yr will start looking for a new choice out of desperation and cynicism....or simply do what they've done for decades and resign themselves to the fact Trump is Dubya term 3 and they need to stay home in 3 years....

    The thing about "the alt right" is it doesn't even exist. It's something Hillary's advisors pulled from their ass and lumped a bunch of random and non connected ppl together who have no real connection. The media took a buzzword and stupidly ran w it thinking it's an actual movement when we predate Hillary's failed campaign and definitions

    The thing about “the alt right” is it doesn’t even exist.

    Shhh!!! We’re not supposed to say that out loud!

    Fact is, the MSM defines the terms for the masses (neat how that works!) and ‘alt-right’ has been conveniently conflated with ‘evil nazis’ –so what name shall we choose next? Same thing will happen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  243. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @The Man From K Street
    In California, an employer that voluntarily consents to a fed immigration inspection is subject to a civil fine. Also, employers are required to notify employees ahead of time if fed immigration agents are coming to check employees' employment eligibility. https://t.co/5Pnz4weWLS

    This is straight out of the South Carolina 1860 playbook. I expect all the neo-confederates here on unz to now stay consistent and applaud California's brave defiance.

    Not a neo-confederate here but I most definitely support the right to self-determination of all peoples, and that includes the right of California (or any other state) to secede from the Union. As with Brexit, Ukraine, Ireland, Catalan, and any number of other examples. Note I didn’t say there would be no costs associated.

    The Smaller the Political Unit, the Greater the Freedom.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pincher Martin

    The Smaller the Political Unit, the Greater the Freedom.
     
    Yeah, just ask the North Koreans and Cubans. And among developed countries, ask the Singaporeans.
    , @englishmike

    I most definitely support the right to self-determination of all peoples, and that includes the right of California (or any other state) to secede from the Union.
     
    What is a "people" and how might a people differ from a state? California is a state, but how is/are its "people" distinct from those of other states of the Union? If some of those people want to secede from one of the states of the US they have the option of setting up as a "people" in some other territory outside the USA. There is no wall to stop them leaving.

    At what point does the right to self-determination conflict with the right of Americans to live in the United States of America? Or the right of Britons to live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain?

    Take the Scottish Independence referendum of 2014 as an example. David Cameron made the decision to offer the Scots a referendum on the right to break up the United Kingdom, which is what Scottish independence would mean.

    Few people seemed to understand that it was not a decision he was entitled to make. He was not an elected president but the monarch's appointed Prime (or first) Minister. He and his ministerial colleagues govern the nation on her behalf. It is for the monarch to decide whether her nation should be carved up for political reasons. And if she wants that decision to be delegated to the people of her nation, it is undemocratic to deny a vote to the majority of the British electorate.

    The position of Catalonia in the greater nation of Spain is ethnically and historically complicated, but in essence it resembles the position of Scotland in Britain. The "right to self-determination" of the smaller region in the greater nation is only a right if the Spanish government recognises it as such. Neither the EU, the UN, nor the New World Order can compel Spain to dis-integrate its identity as an independent, self-governing state (insofar as such a state is possible in the EU).

    The Smaller the Political Unit, the Greater the Freedom.

     

    Tell that to Belarus. Stop me if you've heard this Belarussian joke before:

    "Good news, Mr President. You won the election."
    "Do you mean there is some bad news?"
    "Yes. Nobody voted for you."
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  244. @Pericles
    Strong and increasing smell of a fake news hit job about that book, if you ask me.

    Bannon appears to have affirmed his loyalty on Twitter btw. (I assume it's his account.)

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon/status/948847059368636416

    No blue checkmark?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    No checkmark, hence the parentheses ... On the other hand, many legit accounts on the right appear to have been deprived of their checkmarks, so I'm not sure about its significance anymore.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  245. neprof says:
    @Jonathan Mason
    I find Wolff credible. Of course if you are writing a book and want to make it readable and entertaining you are not going to quote everything exactly word for word with every um and er, and of course people who have said things indiscreetly that they regret will deny them after the fact. They would, wouldn't they?

    However you cannot deny certain things have happened, like the botched rollout of the visa cancellation program, Bannon, Spicer, and Priebus being fired, the Scaramucci episode, the war of words with North Korea, and the things Wolff has written about certainly provide a plausible underpinning and explanation.

    It is also clear that Wolff has had conversations with Bannon, Priebus, and so on, and that White House logs will show that he was in the White House, where he must have been seeing someone or doing something.

    And why are people who know Trump not speaking out to deny that his memory is shot, with examples?

    If half of what Wolff says is true in this recent article, then maybe the 25th amendment option is not too far-fetched.

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-wolff-my-insane-year-inside-trumps-white-house-1071504

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    If half of what Wolff says is true in this recent article, then maybe the 25th amendment option is not too far-fetched.
     
    I was thinking along the same lines. Supposedly it takes 14 members of Trump's Cabinet. I am sure the establishment and particularly Republicans would rather have Pence. They just do not know whether it would be better to do it before 2018 election or after.

    Roger Stone (self-promoting mythomaniac?, provocateur?, shady operator? ) talked about it recently:

    Dec. 26, 2017
    Roger Stone, former Trump adviser, claims Cabinet members are plotting to remove the president
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/dec/26/roger-stone-former-trump-adviser-claims-cabinet-me/
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  246. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Stephen Lake
    Here's something interesting from The Unz Review...

    Trump Bannon, I call total bullshit on it being a feud. It's WWE and it's fucking brilliant. I have many, I think, salient and rational points to make my case but I've devolved into a modern day Luddite; I don't email, don't text, hate typing(when did we all turn into 1950s secretaries! I'm not a typist!) But you can call anytime for a more in depth explanation.

    Stephen Lake
    XXX
    XXX
    XXX

    Mr Sailer, did you really approve the posting of someone’s personal information in this thread? Did you really confirm that it is a legitimate use by the person named himself? If so, no problem. But I find it really hard to believe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  247. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Eagle Eye

    In addition to party hacks running the elections, in the United States the ballots are never counted in public, or in the presence of observers sent from all the candidates. That would be hard to do anyway because usually paper ballots are not used.

    In other countries, elections are generally run by non-partisan bureaucrats, using paper ballots counted in public and/ or in the presence of observers. Elections in the USA are one of those things that are regarded as a joke elsewhere.</blockquote

    Sad that we are now having to take lessons from PRI-infested Mexico, but the example is actually highly instructive, particularly as regards the bought and paid for MSM machines in both countries.

    In California, many counties have gone back to using paper ballots, and registrar of voters offices are staffed by regular SEIU members.

    CRUCIALLY, as you point out, ballots are not counted in public, and are allowed to be "transported" from polling ballot stations by SEIU members without public scrutiny. Ballot boxes are not transparent. This compares unfavorably to countries like GHANA (from memory) where ballot boxes are made of plexiglass to ensure that they do not come pre-loaded, and ballots are counted under public scrutiny at the polling station.

    With a little organization, a back-of-the-envelope calculation confirms that it is quite feasible to count U.S. ballots by hand (despite the larger number of votes per ballot, up to around 20 at a general election in CA), and collect the totals from each polling station by email or even old-fashioned telephone calls. Of course, this should always be backed up by contemporaneous results prepared in multiple copies signed by vote supervisors and multiple independent observers.

    BTW to reduce collusion, it might be useful to prescribe minimum gender ratios for polling station workers, e.g. at least 25% men/women, and no fewer than 2 each. There should also be an option for last-minute walk-ins to become official election observers so as to prevent prior fixing of the observers.
     


     

    My precinct is about 99% white and just two elections ago, the Little Old White Ladies who had staffed the polling place since time immemorial were summarily replaced by ghetto thugs and dey ladeez from God knows where. I just hope the LOWLs weren’t trucked into the ghetto.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  248. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @istevefan

    Seen any walls built lately?
     
    Do you still have an animus against Pat Buchanan? You know the one guy in the public eye who has pushed for tough border controls and against the third world invasion of the US since 1992?

    Patrick Buchanan is just about the only Patriot Left Standing at this point.

    Fortunately, one Ann Coulter seems to have taken up the mantle lately.

    And her way with words is as good as his, which is saying something.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  249. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    I think this is what Trump might be the most upset about:

    “This is all about money laundering. Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr and Jared Kushner … It’s as plain as a hair on your face.”
     

    “It goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They’re going to go right through that. They’re going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me.
     
    because it is about the future not the past.

    And this is interesting:

    The rancour between Bannon and “Javanka” – Kushner and his wife Ivanka Trump – is a recurring theme of the book. Kushner and Ivanka are Jewish. Henry Kissinger, the former secretary of state, is quoted as saying: “It is a war between the Jews and the non-Jews.”
     

    Henry Kissinger, the former secretary of state, is quoted as saying: “It is a war between the Jews and the non-Jews.”

    Nearly everything is, it seems, only the ‘non-jews’ don’t know it.

    It’s Job One to make sure they never, ever know it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  250. It’s too early to tell what’s going on with Bannon, but over the last year, the media have pushed multiple fake Team Trump infighting stories in an effort to set off some real infighting.

    I literally just made up the following “conflicts”:

    Tillerson vs. Trump
    Trump vs. Sessions
    Mattis vs. Trump

    and found “news” backing all of them, yet all of these people are still in the Cabinet.

    It’s as if the media were run by 14-year-old girls.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  251. Redman says:
    @AnotherDad

    Bannon has a difficult, narcissistic personality of some kind. As does Trump.
     
    Yeah, i don't understand all these worms who leave the White House and then run off to gossip to reporters, or sell some gossipy b.s. themselves.

    Loyalty is a virtue. If you need to bitch to your wife or your friends fine. But you don't bitch to any reporters. You don't piss on the guy who hired you. And yes, even if you got fired. And even if the President isn't singing your praises. If politics is actually about anything real--i.e. real ideas and principals--then your job is not to wreck the administration and policies you support. The only call for it would be if there's some higher loyalty--to your nation or morality--that compels you to call out the behavior of you old boss. In which case you should be forthright and clear about it.

    Bannon seems to be a motormouth who is just--potentially--damaging Trump. Giving anti-Trump ammunition precisely to the pond scum with an anti-nationalist agenda. How this is respectible or honorable behavior is beyond me.

    Of course, this Michael Wolff guy is apparently such a lying POS of that--at least in this case--the stuff might be essentially made up and Bannon innocent.

    Well said.

    Is it me or does Michael Wolff closely resemble Dr. Evil?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  252. utu says:
    @neprof
    If half of what Wolff says is true in this recent article, then maybe the 25th amendment option is not too far-fetched.

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-wolff-my-insane-year-inside-trumps-white-house-1071504

    If half of what Wolff says is true in this recent article, then maybe the 25th amendment option is not too far-fetched.

    I was thinking along the same lines. Supposedly it takes 14 members of Trump’s Cabinet. I am sure the establishment and particularly Republicans would rather have Pence. They just do not know whether it would be better to do it before 2018 election or after.

    Roger Stone (self-promoting mythomaniac?, provocateur?, shady operator? ) talked about it recently:

    Dec. 26, 2017
    Roger Stone, former Trump adviser, claims Cabinet members are plotting to remove the president

    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/dec/26/roger-stone-former-trump-adviser-claims-cabinet-me/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Wow, eternal handwringer/underminer "utu", might want to fix his "Hello my fellow alt right!" mask.

    Talking seriously about the 25th AMD. My sides are to the moon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  253. eD says:
    @Opinionator
    There is evidence the Clinton campaign used another trick and tipped the scales in the other party’s nomination process to make sure they nominated the worst candidate conceivable, someone who apparently didn’t even want to become President.

    What did it do, allegedly?

    Its been reported -I just saw another article about this today-, that Bill Clinton encouraged Donald Trump to run for President.

    This doesn’t mean that Trump ran in order to hand Hillary Clinton the election. However, it has happened in American elections that the likely nominee of one party has a unelectable ringer run in the other party’s primary. This creates havoc in the other party’s primary, and if it really goes well, the ringer will be nominated than go down to defeat in November. Bill Clinton had to be thinking this. Gray Davis did this in his re-election campaign in 2002, it was a key reason for the recall election.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    If true then meaningless.
    And while Trump was an acquaintance of necessity of the Clintons since their presidency, I remember significantly different tones coming from the Clintonite camp leading up to the election.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  254. @Pericles
    Strong and increasing smell of a fake news hit job about that book, if you ask me.

    Bannon appears to have affirmed his loyalty on Twitter btw. (I assume it's his account.)

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon/status/948847059368636416

    Yeah, Bannon is going to describe Trump as the “great white hope.”

    Right.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    Heh, good point. Though just a couple of days ago, I would have said Bannon basically calling Trump a traitor seemed far less likely than that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  255. utu says:
    @Anonymous
    Never knew anyone who specifically called himself 'intelligent' online who actually was.


    Now he says "You guys are idiots, do you know that? You’re a bunch of freaking idiots."

    Never knew anyone who specifically called himself ‘intelligent’ online who actually was.

    Intelligence is not the only criterion that is used to categorize including complete dismissal of somebody. ID’s comments are not infrequently quite intelligent but his intelligence seems to be just a thin varnish on top of a serious personality disorder. Art Deco who is on the opposite end of the political spectrum to ID is another example of deficient personality with an impressive superstructure of knowledge and operational intelligence. In terms of Turing test Art Deco is closer to a machine while ID to an animal who was given a human power of speech.

    Read More
    • Replies: @L Woods
    He’s a pompous autistic blowhard. Why so many commenters around here fluff his ego in such a fawningly homoerotic fashion is completely beyond me.
    , @MEH 0910

    while ID to an animal who was given a human power of speech.
     

    “Not to go on all-fours; that is the Law. Are we not Men? “Not to suck up Drink; that is the Law. Are we not Men? “Not to eat Fish or Flesh; that is the Law. Are we not Men? “Not to claw the Bark of Trees; that is the Law. Are we not Men? “Not to chase other Men; that is the Law. Are we not Men?”
     
    No Darwinian genetic change is necessary, monumental phenotypic change by vivisection will suffice. /sarcasm

    “His is the House of Pain. “His is the Hand that makes. “His is the Hand that wounds. “His is the Hand that heals.”
     
    , @Anonymous
    Okay, this settles it: We need a members-only subforum dedicated to trashing one another. Financial contributions will be required for entry and those who choose to post as Anonymous will not be allowed to participate. Oh snap.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  256. Redman says:
    @Berty
    I'm coming around to the idea that Trump doesn't think about anything, he just reacts. He's addicted to television and listening to people talk about him. When people aren't talking about him, as they haven't been since the tax bill passed, he has to do something to make them talk. So he tweets. Or he releasing some statement announcing some policy change. Of course he never follows that up with anything concrete or has his advisers do it for him, so ultimately nothing changes as the machines of government continue on. This has the effect of making him look completely impotent, but he doesn't care because he gets to hear himself being talked about. His poll numbers are awful and get worse every time he pulls some stunt like the NK tweet, but he doesn't care because he thinks they're all fake. Jared and Ivanka have apparently free range to do as they like despite nobody ever voting for them and Trump apparently won't even consider sending them away for a moment.

    I'm not a huge Bannon fan but considering all of this I can't blame him for deciding to simply lay his cards on the table and let the people decide which story is true. This entire administration is turning into a dumpster fire.

    What planet have you been living on? The media hasn’t shut up about Trump for more than 5 seconds in the last 2 1/2 years.

    What did Bannon say that you believe is “true”? That Trump and son commited treason?

    The Mueller investigation is on its heels and this is bad timing for Bannon. It’s found nothing on Trump and appears to have nothing but bs in the hopper, which is why it’s now desperately leaking to the NYT about “coffee boy” Papadopoulos.

    Bannon shot himself in the foot with this one. Disloyalty is a major no-no in populist politicians. Trump had every right to come down on him like a ton of bricks. And his base will love him for it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  257. @Stephen Lake
    Here's something interesting from The Unz Review...

    Trump Bannon, I call total bullshit on it being a feud. It's WWE and it's fucking brilliant. I have many, I think, salient and rational points to make my case but I've devolved into a modern day Luddite; I don't email, don't text, hate typing(when did we all turn into 1950s secretaries! I'm not a typist!) But you can call anytime for a more in depth explanation.

    Stephen Lake
    XXX
    XXX
    XXX

    ‘TrumpBannon’ would be a great name for a detective show set in the 50′s with Sgt. Bannon’s secretary played by Annie Potts pounding away at the typewriter in the background.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  258. @lavoisier
    Bannon is what made possible Trump's victory.

    Trump is essentially a high functioning moron--good at business, but ignorant of history, literature, philosophy, science--essentially any subject that allows one to think about complex subjects in depth.

    And like many high functioning morons, he thinks that his success as businessman makes him far more intelligent and thoughtful than he actually is. Furthermore, it makes him, like George Bush before him, easily manipulated by the usual suspects.

    When Bannon was fired, Trump was finished.

    The usual suspects are in total control of the United States government.


    Meet the New Boss, the Same as the Old Boss.


     

    I for one welcome our New Old overlords.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  259. Travis says:
    @Hawktower
    If the division between Trump and Bannon is in fact real, then it will be easy to see who is the genuine leader of the America first movement. If Trump grants amnesty to DACA recipients then it’s clear that he is, at heart, an establishment neocon. On the other hand, l if he doesn’t grant amnesty then he is genuinely invested in America and it’s workers and maybe Bannon really is ‘in it for himself.’ We’ll find out soon enough. If there is a cave on DACA though, it’s over for Trump.

    Trump has already caved on DACA….he could have ended DACA with an executive order 12 months ago , instead he extended it until 2018 and is asking congress to legalize the dreamers in return for building a wall…and maybe ending the diversity lottery.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  260. Melendwyr says: • Website
    @Not Raul
    And the man Giuliani replaced him with was a disaster.

    What is it with people born in the mid-40s to early 50s? As a group, they seem overpopulated with narcissists.

    You are jesting, right? Baby Boomer theory would seem to require no explanation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Not Raul
    So it isn’t just all in my head.

    Frank Zappa (definitely not a baby boomer) has a few interesting comments about them https://youtu.be/KZazEM8cgt0

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  261. @The Man From K Street

    Would you say that slave-holding states prior to and during the American Civil War practiced “left-wing ideology in economic terms”?
     
    Actually, yes, you could say that. The chief southern apologists and theorizers like George Fitzhugh in the 1850s quite literally said that the slave economy was the most "practical" form of socialism.
    Second, the slave economy was the inevitable expression of the Lockean liberalism that many at thbe time thought was the inspiring spirit of the American Revolution. Anti-Lockeans like Orestes Brownson (who hated the CSA) argued it was classical republicanism, not liberalism.
    Third, you can't have it both ways and argue (ridiculously) that the tariff caused the war, without conceding that the pro-tariff Northerners were the economic nationalists as opposed to the free trade South.

    Actually, yes, you could say that. The chief southern apologists and theorizers like George Fitzhugh in the 1850s quite literally said that the slave economy was the most “practical” form of socialism.

    Fitzhugh was his own peculiar thinker. He did not represent the southern tradition on economic thinking dating back to Jefferson, but was more of an extreme version of what happens when one seeks to use any reason to defend slavery. He was, after all, for extending slavery to free whites.

    Third, you can’t have it both ways and argue (ridiculously) that the tariff caused the war, without conceding that the pro-tariff Northerners were the economic nationalists as opposed to the free trade South.

    Ms Errican wasn’t having it both ways. She was addressing a gentleman who argued that the Democrats of the nineteenth century were just as opposed to free commerce and low taxation in that century as they are in this century.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    I’m no lady, my handle is basically a taxonomic pun I shoehorned into looking like a ‘real’ name. I made it up long before the Bruce/Caitlyn thing became a thing. :)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  262. J.Ross says: • Website
    @eD
    Its been reported -I just saw another article about this today-, that Bill Clinton encouraged Donald Trump to run for President.

    This doesn't mean that Trump ran in order to hand Hillary Clinton the election. However, it has happened in American elections that the likely nominee of one party has a unelectable ringer run in the other party's primary. This creates havoc in the other party's primary, and if it really goes well, the ringer will be nominated than go down to defeat in November. Bill Clinton had to be thinking this. Gray Davis did this in his re-election campaign in 2002, it was a key reason for the recall election.

    If true then meaningless.
    And while Trump was an acquaintance of necessity of the Clintons since their presidency, I remember significantly different tones coming from the Clintonite camp leading up to the election.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  263. @Twodees Partain
    Pincher, this ridiculous talking point of the democrats being the founders of the KKK, etc. is only used by historically illiterate imbeciles who still somehow think that the GOP is the virtuous (though stupid) party. If Thomm even reads your response, he won't understand it.

    If Thomm even reads your response, he won’t understand it.

    You’re probably right. But only because he’s as dumb as you are.

    I never said the Democrats were the founders of the KKK, so I don’t know what’s triggered your non sequitur. You’ll have to explain it to someone who is more interested in combing through that rat’s maze you call a brain.

    But now that you mention it, if you were going to assign either of the two main political parties with being aligned with the KKK, it would’ve definitely been the late-19th-century Democrats (and, later, the early-20th-century Democrats) and not the Republican counterparts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  264. @Anonymous
    Not a neo-confederate here but I most definitely support the right to self-determination of all peoples, and that includes the right of California (or any other state) to secede from the Union. As with Brexit, Ukraine, Ireland, Catalan, and any number of other examples. Note I didn't say there would be no costs associated.

    The Smaller the Political Unit, the Greater the Freedom.

    The Smaller the Political Unit, the Greater the Freedom.

    Yeah, just ask the North Koreans and Cubans. And among developed countries, ask the Singaporeans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  265. Pericles says:
    @Steve Sailer
    No blue checkmark?

    No checkmark, hence the parentheses … On the other hand, many legit accounts on the right appear to have been deprived of their checkmarks, so I’m not sure about its significance anymore.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  266. Pericles says:
    @candid_observer
    Yeah, Bannon is going to describe Trump as the "great white hope."

    Right.

    Heh, good point. Though just a couple of days ago, I would have said Bannon basically calling Trump a traitor seemed far less likely than that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  267. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Travis
    well stated. Bannon was a fool for talking to these media hack while calling the media the opposition party


    all the evidence points to Bannon being a drunk who uses adderrall to maintain the appearance of sobriety while out of his mind snorting ritalin to stay awake...

    Bannon does look like a drinker, and fond of disordered living. Why is that not mentioned in the comments? Would that not be relevant to his Wolf interview?

    Trump speaks all the time of his friends, but I don’t think those have ever worked for him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  268. @Hunsdon
    Let's see what people are saying in two or three weeks.

    Around here? Black pilled eeyores, no matter what.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  269. @Anonymous
    Not a neo-confederate here but I most definitely support the right to self-determination of all peoples, and that includes the right of California (or any other state) to secede from the Union. As with Brexit, Ukraine, Ireland, Catalan, and any number of other examples. Note I didn't say there would be no costs associated.

    The Smaller the Political Unit, the Greater the Freedom.

    I most definitely support the right to self-determination of all peoples, and that includes the right of California (or any other state) to secede from the Union.

    What is a “people” and how might a people differ from a state? California is a state, but how is/are its “people” distinct from those of other states of the Union? If some of those people want to secede from one of the states of the US they have the option of setting up as a “people” in some other territory outside the USA. There is no wall to stop them leaving.

    At what point does the right to self-determination conflict with the right of Americans to live in the United States of America? Or the right of Britons to live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain?

    Take the Scottish Independence referendum of 2014 as an example. David Cameron made the decision to offer the Scots a referendum on the right to break up the United Kingdom, which is what Scottish independence would mean.

    Few people seemed to understand that it was not a decision he was entitled to make. He was not an elected president but the monarch’s appointed Prime (or first) Minister. He and his ministerial colleagues govern the nation on her behalf. It is for the monarch to decide whether her nation should be carved up for political reasons. And if she wants that decision to be delegated to the people of her nation, it is undemocratic to deny a vote to the majority of the British electorate.

    The position of Catalonia in the greater nation of Spain is ethnically and historically complicated, but in essence it resembles the position of Scotland in Britain. The “right to self-determination” of the smaller region in the greater nation is only a right if the Spanish government recognises it as such. Neither the EU, the UN, nor the New World Order can compel Spain to dis-integrate its identity as an independent, self-governing state (insofar as such a state is possible in the EU).

    The Smaller the Political Unit, the Greater the Freedom.

    Tell that to Belarus. Stop me if you’ve heard this Belarussian joke before:

    “Good news, Mr President. You won the election.”
    “Do you mean there is some bad news?”
    “Yes. Nobody voted for you.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    David Cameron made the decision to offer the Scots a referendum on the right to break up the United Kingdom, which is what Scottish independence would mean.
     
    A bit of a technicality about Cameron, I think, seeing that British sovereignty is already compromised by membership of the EU, but an ingenious point all the same.

    I have been away from the UK for many years, having spent my first 29 years there, and am now a US citizen, but I commented at the time that it seemed odd that the vote was not open to all those who would possibly be eligible for Scottish citizenship, rather than just the voters in Scottish constituencies, which might well include people who were not eligible, and that there was no clear reason why the decider should be exactly 50% plus one vote.

    But then Cameron was referendum crazy and next called for the Brexit referendum as a way of deflating UKIP and keeping the tories in office a bit longer, although he must have known that the referendum would be touch and go.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  270. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    If Trump kept his family out of his admin then advisors wouldn’t be required to maintain loyalty when family members do idiotic crap like agree to meet with Russians who claim they have dirt on the opposition.

    Trump Jr & Kushner made a dumb mistake. They should take the flak but NO it’s got to be all about loyalty to the family like a mafia operation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    idiotic crap like agree to meet with Russians who claim they have dirt on the opposition.

    Trump Jr & Kushner made a dumb mistake.


    I don't see why it was idiotic or a mistake. It was not foolish to give someone a hearing who had claimed to have evidence of Clinton wrongdoing. Opportunity versus missed opportunity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  271. @Berty
    Lol I got insulted passive aggressively by Jack Hanson the Civil War deadender who can't overcome his hatred of then there durned Yankees. I consider it a badge of honor.

    Look at this dork nervously laughing while being too scared to address me directly.

    Tell me again what an idiot Trump is after making millions on NYC real estate and torpedoing the two leading US dynasties in the same race, Mr. Posting on a Niche Blog.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    What's wrong with a "Niche Blog"? Do you prefer the Washington Post output or the NYT comments section?
    , @Berty
    I never said Trump was an idiot, I said he's making many bad mistakes. Which he is.

    Also you don't intimidate anyone old man, I just don't care enough to respond directly to you. But since it bothered you so much, here's the response you wanted.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  272. @Berty
    I also think it's adorable how so many of you are willing to believe that all this is staged. You'll do anything for an excuse not to think.

    “Heh I am so very wise” said Berty while inhaling his own farts and smacking his lips together.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  273. L Woods says:
    @utu
    Never knew anyone who specifically called himself ‘intelligent’ online who actually was.

    Intelligence is not the only criterion that is used to categorize including complete dismissal of somebody. ID's comments are not infrequently quite intelligent but his intelligence seems to be just a thin varnish on top of a serious personality disorder. Art Deco who is on the opposite end of the political spectrum to ID is another example of deficient personality with an impressive superstructure of knowledge and operational intelligence. In terms of Turing test Art Deco is closer to a machine while ID to an animal who was given a human power of speech.

    He’s a pompous autistic blowhard. Why so many commenters around here fluff his ego in such a fawningly homoerotic fashion is completely beyond me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    He’s - you mean AD not ID, right?
    , @anonguy

    He’s a pompous autistic blowhard. Why so many commenters around here fluff his ego in such a fawningly homoerotic fashion is completely beyond me.
     
    I certainly don't agree with everything or even much of what Intelligent Dasein writes, but he is far and away the the most articulate and interesting current commenter on this blog. His comments are often a complete, coherent essay.

    As opposed to the countless others who just hurl two or three sentences of childish insults.

    Res was pretty good, but he seems to have disappeared lately.

    There are other reasons, but that should be good enough. Plus, he saves me a lot of trouble having to write my own comments.

    Why do you consider this homoerotic? I certainly don't.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  274. @utu

    If half of what Wolff says is true in this recent article, then maybe the 25th amendment option is not too far-fetched.
     
    I was thinking along the same lines. Supposedly it takes 14 members of Trump's Cabinet. I am sure the establishment and particularly Republicans would rather have Pence. They just do not know whether it would be better to do it before 2018 election or after.

    Roger Stone (self-promoting mythomaniac?, provocateur?, shady operator? ) talked about it recently:

    Dec. 26, 2017
    Roger Stone, former Trump adviser, claims Cabinet members are plotting to remove the president
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/dec/26/roger-stone-former-trump-adviser-claims-cabinet-me/
     

    Wow, eternal handwringer/underminer “utu”, might want to fix his “Hello my fellow alt right!” mask.

    Talking seriously about the 25th AMD. My sides are to the moon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  275. Some of you guys seem 100% determined to live up to MPC’s caricature of the commentariat around here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  276. Pericles says:
    @Pericles
    Strong and increasing smell of a fake news hit job about that book, if you ask me.

    Bannon appears to have affirmed his loyalty on Twitter btw. (I assume it's his account.)

    https://twitter.com/SteveKBannon/status/948847059368636416

    Might be the genuine Bannon after all.

    Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump heralded Steve Bannon’s praise for him on Thursday in his first public comments since he released a fiery statement slamming his former White House chief strategist.

    “I don’t know, he called me a great man last night, so he obviously changed his tune pretty quick,” Trump said Thursday, referring to Bannon’s comments Wednesday night on his Sirius XM radio show in the wake of the firestorm ignited by a new book on the White House.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/04/politics/donald-trump-steve-bannon-praise/index.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  277. Trump hired the wrong Bannon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  278. Not Raul says:
    @Opinionator
    Is it illegal to listen to someone who alleges wrongdoing by your political opponent?

    Not just someone. A representative of a foreign power who wanted to influence the election.

    Bannon was right about firing Comey, too: a disaster for the administration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    A representative of a foreign power

    Was the person in fact a representative of a foreign power?

    who wanted to influence the election.

    Who's to know what someone's motives are when they disclose information? Is this like in contrast to a "representative of a foreign power" who gives info but does not wish to influence an election? Is it a crime to want to influence an election?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  279. Not Raul says:
    @Melendwyr
    You are jesting, right? Baby Boomer theory would seem to require no explanation.

    So it isn’t just all in my head.

    Frank Zappa (definitely not a baby boomer) has a few interesting comments about them https://youtu.be/KZazEM8cgt0

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  280. utu says:
    @L Woods
    He’s a pompous autistic blowhard. Why so many commenters around here fluff his ego in such a fawningly homoerotic fashion is completely beyond me.

    He’s – you mean AD not ID, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  281. anonguy says:
    @L Woods
    He’s a pompous autistic blowhard. Why so many commenters around here fluff his ego in such a fawningly homoerotic fashion is completely beyond me.

    He’s a pompous autistic blowhard. Why so many commenters around here fluff his ego in such a fawningly homoerotic fashion is completely beyond me.

    I certainly don’t agree with everything or even much of what Intelligent Dasein writes, but he is far and away the the most articulate and interesting current commenter on this blog. His comments are often a complete, coherent essay.

    As opposed to the countless others who just hurl two or three sentences of childish insults.

    Res was pretty good, but he seems to have disappeared lately.

    There are other reasons, but that should be good enough. Plus, he saves me a lot of trouble having to write my own comments.

    Why do you consider this homoerotic? I certainly don’t.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  282. @Anonymous
    Heh... you said 'winning'...

    Here's a clue. After despair (probably during your early teenage years, when you begin to figure things out) comes resignation, and then a few more phases before you get to amusement. You'll come along, eventually.

    After despair (probably during your early teenage years, when you begin to figure things out) comes resignation, and then a few more phases before you get to amusement. You’ll come along, eventually.

    I was born in hope, but steeped in hopelessness. Despair was my companion, but never my friend. Resignation was my patrimony from time immemorial and amusement I save for humor, a good story and beauty.

    I won’t come along, because I am working for victory.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bernardista
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  283. MEH 0910 says:
    @utu
    Never knew anyone who specifically called himself ‘intelligent’ online who actually was.

    Intelligence is not the only criterion that is used to categorize including complete dismissal of somebody. ID's comments are not infrequently quite intelligent but his intelligence seems to be just a thin varnish on top of a serious personality disorder. Art Deco who is on the opposite end of the political spectrum to ID is another example of deficient personality with an impressive superstructure of knowledge and operational intelligence. In terms of Turing test Art Deco is closer to a machine while ID to an animal who was given a human power of speech.

    while ID to an animal who was given a human power of speech.

    “Not to go on all-fours; that is the Law. Are we not Men? “Not to suck up Drink; that is the Law. Are we not Men? “Not to eat Fish or Flesh; that is the Law. Are we not Men? “Not to claw the Bark of Trees; that is the Law. Are we not Men? “Not to chase other Men; that is the Law. Are we not Men?”

    No Darwinian genetic change is necessary, monumental phenotypic change by vivisection will suffice. /sarcasm

    “His is the House of Pain. “His is the Hand that makes. “His is the Hand that wounds. “His is the Hand that heals.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  284. @Berty
    I also think it's adorable how so many of you are willing to believe that all this is staged. You'll do anything for an excuse not to think.

    Thinking would lead to what understanding specifically?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  285. @Opinionator
    Here is Trump's stance on immigration. Where do you disagree?

    https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Immigration-Reform-Trump.pdf

    Bannon thinks immigration is central and was one of the few people who was outspoken about legal immigration being a problem. See also the coverage and hires at Breitbart.

    Sanders statement is just an abstract platitude, with no teeth (and intended that way). Safe and meaningless, because he'll never be called on implementing it. He's been a federal lawmaker for how many decades? What is his immigration control legislation?

    Here is Trump’s stance on immigration. Where do you disagree?

    With very little, as it is written. It’s the way it’s being carried out that is frustrating. His emphasis on deportation is getting in the way of reform.

    To me, the holy grail of immigration reform is the wall. Bernie also devotes a great deal of support for it in his Fair and Humane Immigration Policy.
    Secondly, but still very important is getting rid of the disastrous H-1Bs.

    If Trump ever succeeds in getting the wall or any other of his immigration reforms , he will only be able to do it with a compromise regarding DACA that will make a lot of people angry. So be it. IMO I think it should really be enough to deport only dreamers with criminal records.

    I may of course be wrong, because I have no window into the Mr. Trump’s psyche, but I’m pretty sure a lot of his DACA hate springs from his obsessive hatred of Obama. Either that, (or in addition to it) his hard line againt DACA is there to mollify his base, as much as Bernie’s soft in the tooth responses were there in 2016 to mollify his.

    Bernie took some heat for his vote against Immigration Reform in 2007.

    Mr. Sanders was part of an effort by liberal Democrats to kill the bill that year. His language at the time often related not to the concerns of the workers receiving the visas, but to the bill’s impact on American wage-earners. And those words are at odds with how much of the Democratic Party currently discusses immigration overhaul, all but guaranteeing he will continue to be asked to clarify his views.

    https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/19/bernie-sanders-cant-escape-questions-about-2007-vote-on-immigration-overhaul/

    So…… in 2013, he voted in favor of Immigration Reform which passed 68-32 and as you know was all about pathways to citizenship (Dreamers, etc.) and increased security at the border.

    Bannon thinks immigration is central and was one of the few people who was outspoken about legal immigration being a problem.

    I know. I’m a fan.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  286. @Neoconned
    I don't know Charles. We Americans tend to have this perverse optimism about us. Where we care about attitude more than results.

    I'm w the poster anonymous here.

    I'm a natural pessimist and shrewd. I see the worst in ppl and plan accordingly. Those Midwest voters who elected Trump will not sit around forever.

    Many I recall reading voted for him "just to try something new"...thus far he's been long rhetoric and funny one liners and not much in actual results.

    A lot of those Midwest union types, if hasn't produced TANGIBLE results by next yr will start looking for a new choice out of desperation and cynicism....or simply do what they've done for decades and resign themselves to the fact Trump is Dubya term 3 and they need to stay home in 3 years....

    The thing about "the alt right" is it doesn't even exist. It's something Hillary's advisors pulled from their ass and lumped a bunch of random and non connected ppl together who have no real connection. The media took a buzzword and stupidly ran w it thinking it's an actual movement when we predate Hillary's failed campaign and definitions

    I am afraid you are missing the big picture. Trump has called the Left on its dishonesty. Both the Republican Establishment, and the Democrat Overlords, have had to own their positions outright. No more pretending to be patriots. Trump has shifted the window and the debate on immigration.

    Is Trump batting .1000? No. But even if he just won, and did nothing more, his election is a tectonic shift.

    Cheer up. We have a chance to win. And no pessimist thought Trump could win the 2016 Presidential. And no pessimist thinks we can avoid a despotic tyranny. Look at Venezuela, and realize those desperate circumstances are what our ‘betters’ hope to visit upon us. At the same time our betters expect to live like Louis XIV.

    We may have to drag a host of Eeyore wannabes over the finish line. But the alternative is to sign up for slavery.

    We will win.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You'll lose, but you're amusing anyway and the difference between us is that I hope I'm wrong.
    , @Neoconned
    The thing about the presidency that so many reactionaries on both the left and right don't understand is that the president doesn't have that much power or authority

    The Republicans who spent 8 years screaming "usurper in Chief" and "Muslim Communist" was that in all actuality Obama was little more than a half black Tony Robbins speaking political versions of corporate buzzwords. So instead of corporate words like "synergy" or "acquisition" it was hope and change.

    The economy runs itself. The glory of the design of the American system is that by being controlled by an oligarchy it's weirdly decentralized at just enough points to make it hard to establish a central dictatorial authority.

    Obama was a figurehead neolib with just enough Deep State neocons to neuter him where it mattered. Obama was painted as "the most liberal member of the Senate" but governed like a moderate.

    Same thing w Bush.....figurehead for corporate interests.

    Trump is the same. Promised to close the border FAST, build the wall FAST. Then he was going to send the dreamers home AND MAKE IT TO WHERE WE REDUCE LEGAL IMMIGRATION at least in half and go to a skills based immigration system. All of this was supposed to be done FAST as he had solid control of both houses of Congress.

    I grew up and live within an hour of New Orleans. Other than the city this is freaking southern Baptist land. This is Trump's biggest part of the nation. And Alabama, where my grandmother is from, is arguably the most conservative state in the South because it's whiter than Mississippi or Georgia and doesn't have as many Catholics or Yankee transplants like Florida or Louisiana.

    He managed to get the first democrat into the Senate in Bama since the pre integration days. I mean let's not dance around here. Roy Moore was a total cluster fuck loss.

    It's like managing to give your wedding ring to a crackhead thief without them even robbing you.

    All this talk about nuking Korea or Iran....a lot of us want ALL those troops REDEPLOYED HOME.

    That means the foreign bases shuttered, NATO reexamined etc....

    And the factories and construction work of the 1980s-90s BROUGHT BACK and the Latino hordes SENT HOME for their own govts to deal with....

    Trump hasn't done shit. He pissed 3/4 of a yr away fighting with CNN.... literally a dying news network even if Trump wasn't in there due to cord cutting and fewer cable and satellite subs for the under 45 demo....hell they say the median Fox news viewer is a white male in his late 60s.... CNN is worse off.

    If it wasn't for waiting areas in airports, medical offices and fast food joints playing CNN nobody would watch that shit.

    Trump pilfered a full year away and couldn't even get the Dreamers deported. Hell even the Dreamers felons.

    At best he's "better than Hillary".....but what kind of metric is that?

    I stand by my thesis: the alt right isn't even a thing.

    Like I had never even heard that term before Hillary and her politicos invented it....and then they lumped the KKK in w this created category of non related groups, bloggers, activists etc.....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  287. @Anonymous
    If Trump kept his family out of his admin then advisors wouldn't be required to maintain loyalty when family members do idiotic crap like agree to meet with Russians who claim they have dirt on the opposition.

    Trump Jr & Kushner made a dumb mistake. They should take the flak but NO it's got to be all about loyalty to the family like a mafia operation.

    idiotic crap like agree to meet with Russians who claim they have dirt on the opposition.

    Trump Jr & Kushner made a dumb mistake.

    I don’t see why it was idiotic or a mistake. It was not foolish to give someone a hearing who had claimed to have evidence of Clinton wrongdoing. Opportunity versus missed opportunity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  288. @Jack Hanson
    Look at this dork nervously laughing while being too scared to address me directly.

    Tell me again what an idiot Trump is after making millions on NYC real estate and torpedoing the two leading US dynasties in the same race, Mr. Posting on a Niche Blog.

    What’s wrong with a “Niche Blog”? Do you prefer the Washington Post output or the NYT comments section?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    I'm mocking the massive unwarranted self importance many commenters here have, with no credentials other than "posting on a niche blog" and a purposeful obtuseness to their track record of retardedly wrong pronouncements.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  289. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    Never knew anyone who specifically called himself ‘intelligent’ online who actually was.

    Intelligence is not the only criterion that is used to categorize including complete dismissal of somebody. ID's comments are not infrequently quite intelligent but his intelligence seems to be just a thin varnish on top of a serious personality disorder. Art Deco who is on the opposite end of the political spectrum to ID is another example of deficient personality with an impressive superstructure of knowledge and operational intelligence. In terms of Turing test Art Deco is closer to a machine while ID to an animal who was given a human power of speech.

    Okay, this settles it: We need a members-only subforum dedicated to trashing one another. Financial contributions will be required for entry and those who choose to post as Anonymous will not be allowed to participate. Oh snap.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    snap++;
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  290. @Not Raul
    Not just someone. A representative of a foreign power who wanted to influence the election.

    Bannon was right about firing Comey, too: a disaster for the administration.

    A representative of a foreign power

    Was the person in fact a representative of a foreign power?

    who wanted to influence the election.

    Who’s to know what someone’s motives are when they disclose information? Is this like in contrast to a “representative of a foreign power” who gives info but does not wish to influence an election? Is it a crime to want to influence an election?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Don Jr was told in an email from his contact who arranged the meeting that the person was delivering information supplied by the "crown prosecutor of Russia" and the goal was to damage Clinton.

    It's a crime to work with a foreign government to influence the election. You know there's this whole Mueller investigation...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  291. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Pericles
    No checkmark, hence the parentheses ... On the other hand, many legit accounts on the right appear to have been deprived of their checkmarks, so I'm not sure about its significance anymore.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  292. J.Ross says: • Website
    @utu

    I also suspect the elites were in the process of stealing the election for Clinton and then un-stole it due to finding out some things about the Clinton operation at the last minute.
     
    I have entertained a similar idea already few weeks before election when I saw some indicators of the shift in Trumps favor. I do not know the mechanism how the election stealing is done but I think it is possible. Trump may not be too interested in disclosing the mechanism:

    Trump Disbands Commission on Voter Fraud
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/us/politics/trump-voter-fraud-commission.html
    President Trump on Wednesday abruptly shut down a White House commission he had charged with investigating voter fraud, ending a brief quest for evidence of election theft that generated lawsuits, outrage and some scholarly testimony, but no real evidence that American elections are corrupt.
     

    Their pattern (as seen in Alabama) is to let the election play out properly at first, then finally “find” just enough votes in their urban precincts to win. That’s what they were trying to do in November and you could see the shock in real time when the rural turnout just shot past the cities to the point where two points weren’t going to cut it. There have been several elections where the Democrats win by a hair at the last minute.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  293. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    I am afraid you are missing the big picture. Trump has called the Left on its dishonesty. Both the Republican Establishment, and the Democrat Overlords, have had to own their positions outright. No more pretending to be patriots. Trump has shifted the window and the debate on immigration.

    Is Trump batting .1000? No. But even if he just won, and did nothing more, his election is a tectonic shift.

    Cheer up. We have a chance to win. And no pessimist thought Trump could win the 2016 Presidential. And no pessimist thinks we can avoid a despotic tyranny. Look at Venezuela, and realize those desperate circumstances are what our 'betters' hope to visit upon us. At the same time our betters expect to live like Louis XIV.

    We may have to drag a host of Eeyore wannabes over the finish line. But the alternative is to sign up for slavery.

    We will win.

    You’ll lose, but you’re amusing anyway and the difference between us is that I hope I’m wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Neil Templeton
    We'll see. The sea change is the loss of power in lecture and shame. The moralists are no longer able to assume the mantle of elders merely by memorizing the sacred stories. Now they must walk through the fire to earn respect.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  294. @Anonymous
    The core issue here is/was Trump's insane nepotism.

    The nepotism is like cancer in his administration...

    KUSHNERISM IS VICTORIOUS

    MAGA is dead & buried but few can see it.

    The core issue here is/was Trump’s insane nepotism.

    But it kind of comes with the package. Nepotism is the behavioral outcome of high clannishness, which also enables his nationalism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  295. At this stage it looks like Clinton would have been better for alt-right because she would have gone to war on Whites thus taking the mask off the elite and establishment.

    Trump has been bad for alt-right because he has not achieved a single positive thing for Whites but instead stalled a White uprising.

    Where Bannon was the needed alt-right force to burn everything down Trump has now revealed he wanted everything to remain the same, except this time with a place at the trough for him and his.

    Alt-right needs to get back to basic racialist principles and hold Trump’s feet to our fire otherwise the movement will go down with his merchant ship.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  296. Not Raul says:
    @Opinionator
    You know who is leaking and who isn't how?
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  297. @Pincher Martin
    You have no clue what you're talking about.

    The slaveholders of that era were against a tariff and for free trade, the opposite of what free northerners of the time generally supported. The tariff was the most important economic issue of the nineteenth century.

    The slaveholders of the nineteenth century also widely supported Jeffersonian and Jacksonian principles in their economic views. Those include limited government, a small and weak central state, and strong local and state governments. They were widely supportive of Laissez faire economics, as opposed to the strong support the Whigs of the time show for spending federal and state monies on infrastructure.

    Democrats in the 19th century were not like Democrats today in their economic views. Stop projecting your own views into the past.


    "The economic benefits to both blacks and poorer whites once slavery gave way to sharecropping are well-documented."
     
    You'll have to explain to everyone what those economic benefits were. Slavery was undoubtedly a very bad thing, but that's not because the antebellum south was retarded economically. If it had been a separate nation in 1860, the antebellum south would've been one of the wealthiest states in the world, lagging only the northern United States, Great Britain, and one other country whose name I've forgotten. By some estimates, the southern white population was wealthier than whites in the Northeast on a per capita basis.

    True, but gross product stats distract from the main point in the antebellum South, that even the poorer white families had enormous liberty relative to the Current Year, often including their own piece of land to work and loaf on. That, native belligerence, and the pride developed from living an independent life fueled the out-of-market fighting power of the Confederacy. The northern frontier peoples drew from a similar deck, but they weren’t facing an existential threat.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  298. @Anonymous
    You'll lose, but you're amusing anyway and the difference between us is that I hope I'm wrong.

    We’ll see. The sea change is the loss of power in lecture and shame. The moralists are no longer able to assume the mantle of elders merely by memorizing the sacred stories. Now they must walk through the fire to earn respect.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  299. @englishmike

    I most definitely support the right to self-determination of all peoples, and that includes the right of California (or any other state) to secede from the Union.
     
    What is a "people" and how might a people differ from a state? California is a state, but how is/are its "people" distinct from those of other states of the Union? If some of those people want to secede from one of the states of the US they have the option of setting up as a "people" in some other territory outside the USA. There is no wall to stop them leaving.

    At what point does the right to self-determination conflict with the right of Americans to live in the United States of America? Or the right of Britons to live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain?

    Take the Scottish Independence referendum of 2014 as an example. David Cameron made the decision to offer the Scots a referendum on the right to break up the United Kingdom, which is what Scottish independence would mean.

    Few people seemed to understand that it was not a decision he was entitled to make. He was not an elected president but the monarch's appointed Prime (or first) Minister. He and his ministerial colleagues govern the nation on her behalf. It is for the monarch to decide whether her nation should be carved up for political reasons. And if she wants that decision to be delegated to the people of her nation, it is undemocratic to deny a vote to the majority of the British electorate.

    The position of Catalonia in the greater nation of Spain is ethnically and historically complicated, but in essence it resembles the position of Scotland in Britain. The "right to self-determination" of the smaller region in the greater nation is only a right if the Spanish government recognises it as such. Neither the EU, the UN, nor the New World Order can compel Spain to dis-integrate its identity as an independent, self-governing state (insofar as such a state is possible in the EU).

    The Smaller the Political Unit, the Greater the Freedom.

     

    Tell that to Belarus. Stop me if you've heard this Belarussian joke before:

    "Good news, Mr President. You won the election."
    "Do you mean there is some bad news?"
    "Yes. Nobody voted for you."
     

    David Cameron made the decision to offer the Scots a referendum on the right to break up the United Kingdom, which is what Scottish independence would mean.

    A bit of a technicality about Cameron, I think, seeing that British sovereignty is already compromised by membership of the EU, but an ingenious point all the same.

    I have been away from the UK for many years, having spent my first 29 years there, and am now a US citizen, but I commented at the time that it seemed odd that the vote was not open to all those who would possibly be eligible for Scottish citizenship, rather than just the voters in Scottish constituencies, which might well include people who were not eligible, and that there was no clear reason why the decider should be exactly 50% plus one vote.

    But then Cameron was referendum crazy and next called for the Brexit referendum as a way of deflating UKIP and keeping the tories in office a bit longer, although he must have known that the referendum would be touch and go.

    Read More
    • Replies: @englishmike

    A bit of a technicality about Cameron, I think, seeing that British sovereignty is already compromised by membership of the EU, but an ingenious point all the same.

     

    Hi Jonathan.

    It's more than an "ingenious point" because the Scottish National Party (SNP) still wants a repeat referendum, and if they gained a majority for independence it would cause a serious constitutional crisis.

    That would also be "a bit of a technicality" since the SNP hopes to apply for its own membership of the EU, after achieving its "independence".

    You must be relieved to be living in the USA, away from all these pointless quarrels about nationality and identity.

    Have a nice day.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  300. Neoconned says:
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    I am afraid you are missing the big picture. Trump has called the Left on its dishonesty. Both the Republican Establishment, and the Democrat Overlords, have had to own their positions outright. No more pretending to be patriots. Trump has shifted the window and the debate on immigration.

    Is Trump batting .1000? No. But even if he just won, and did nothing more, his election is a tectonic shift.

    Cheer up. We have a chance to win. And no pessimist thought Trump could win the 2016 Presidential. And no pessimist thinks we can avoid a despotic tyranny. Look at Venezuela, and realize those desperate circumstances are what our 'betters' hope to visit upon us. At the same time our betters expect to live like Louis XIV.

    We may have to drag a host of Eeyore wannabes over the finish line. But the alternative is to sign up for slavery.

    We will win.

    The thing about the presidency that so many reactionaries on both the left and right don’t understand is that the president doesn’t have that much power or authority

    The Republicans who spent 8 years screaming “usurper in Chief” and “Muslim Communist” was that in all actuality Obama was little more than a half black Tony Robbins speaking political versions of corporate buzzwords. So instead of corporate words like “synergy” or “acquisition” it was hope and change.

    The economy runs itself. The glory of the design of the American system is that by being controlled by an oligarchy it’s weirdly decentralized at just enough points to make it hard to establish a central dictatorial authority.

    Obama was a figurehead neolib with just enough Deep State neocons to neuter him where it mattered. Obama was painted as “the most liberal member of the Senate” but governed like a moderate.

    Same thing w Bush…..figurehead for corporate interests.

    Trump is the same. Promised to close the border FAST, build the wall FAST. Then he was going to send the dreamers home AND MAKE IT TO WHERE WE REDUCE LEGAL IMMIGRATION at least in half and go to a skills based immigration system. All of this was supposed to be done FAST as he had solid control of both houses of Congress.

    I grew up and live within an hour of New Orleans. Other than the city this is freaking southern Baptist land. This is Trump’s biggest part of the nation. And Alabama, where my grandmother is from, is arguably the most conservative state in the South because it’s whiter than Mississippi or Georgia and doesn’t have as many Catholics or Yankee transplants like Florida or Louisiana.

    He managed to get the first democrat into the Senate in Bama since the pre integration days. I mean let’s not dance around here. Roy Moore was