Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Contents Bulletin Scripting in shell and Perl Network troubleshooting History Humor

Special Prosecutor Mueller and his fishing expedition

Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime ~ Lavrentiy Beria

News Russiagate -- a color revolution against Trump Recommended Links Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit National Security State The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies Coordinated set of leaks as a color revolution tool Trump vs. Deep State Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections
Strzokgate Steele dossier Brennan elections machinations "Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit Michael Flynn Anti Trump Hysteria MSM as attack dogs of color revolution Rosenstein
Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak Fake News scare and US NeoMcCartyism Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite  Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war Rosenstein and appointment of the special prosecutor DNC and Podesta emails leak: blaming Vladimir Putin Hillary Clinton email scandal History of American False Flag Operations
Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few Color revolutions Frustrated underachievers NGOs as braintrust of color revolutions The Real War on Reality Media as a weapon of mass deception Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair Two Party System as polyarchy Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich
US and British media are servants of security apparatus MSM as fake news industry Media-Military-Industrial Complex Neoconservatism New American Militarism Bernie Sanders betrayal of his supporters Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism Hypocrisy of British ruling elite Elite Theory And the Revolt of the Elite
Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war The Deep State The Iron Law of Oligarchy Principal-agent problem Pope Francis on danger of neoliberalism Militarism and reckless jingoism of the US neoliberal elite Skeptic Quotations Politically Incorrect Humor Hypocrisy and Pseudo-democracy

Prosecutors are often in error, but never in doubt

Never underestimate the joy people derive from hearing something they already know. ~Enrico Fermi

When asked what he meant by a miracle: Oh, anything with a probability of less than 20%. ~Enrico Fermi

This witch hunt is modeled after Ken Starr prosecution of Bill Clinton and based on a very fuzzy mandate which is a feature not a bug as it allows "bait and switch" during investigation. Appointment of Mueller was the final move in the gambit which started with Steele dossier, and involves Strzok, 17 agencies memo, wiretapping of Trump team, Comey dismissal (sacrificial pawn), his leaks, and, finally Rosenstein appointment of Mueller

I realize that Clinton wing of Democratic Party (soft neoliberals) and their supporters which include a part of intelligence agencies (especially FBI and CIA), Wall Street, a large part of Silicon valley and most MSM  hat Trump.

But Mueller Russiagate witch hunt is suspicious for one simple reason: no intelligent person would assume that Deep State would allow any politician who are not "vetted" as for foreign and domestic policies to be on iether  party ticket. That includes both Trump and Sanders ( Hillary was the establishment candidate by definition).  So Putin as pretty gifted politician would not play the game in which you can only lose supporting one candidate over another. Let's it be purely domestic circus is much more reasonable attitude.  The only other reasonable explanation is the revenge for the USA interference into 2012 Russian Presidential elections. But this is not the right time, as Russia is still pretty weak after carnage and economic rape of 1990th, and as French say " the revenge is a dish that is better served cold."

But this consideration can't explain why the Deep State went to such length as to launch "color revolution" against Trump administration of which Mueller investigation is the most prominent example (along with Steele dossier, 17 agencies memo and Strzokgate -- swiping Hillary "emailgate" dirt under the carpet).  why they deemed Trump to be so dangerous to gp to such an extraordinary step. Or they were drunk with their own impunity ?

Few people read (and no major MSM for example reported such an interesting quote from 17 intelligence agencies memo, which explsidly state that  they just assessed this possibility of Russian interference (whether they were drunk or not (at Brennan expence) is not mentioned  at all ;-):

Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation and precedents.

That sentence is the core to proper understand Russia-gate and Muller investigation. It defines the latter as a color revolution maneuver  designed to depose Trump and defines Rosenstein as the forth member of the "gang of four" ( Comey, McCabe, Strzok and Rosenstein) hell-bent on removing Trump.  Pretty Machiavellian if you ask me. There were lots of claims, assertions and judgments but no proof at all that any of the alleged Russian influence on elections really happened to warrant opening of this investigation (which is required for such things as appointment of the Special Prosecutor).

They might hate Donald Trump so much for several (and different for various factions) reasons (skeletons in the closet; MIC profits, continuation of globalization, to name a few). What unite them is a strong  believe that any pretext is justified in taking him down, even if it put in negarive light the USA on international arena. AS victoria Nuland  famously said "F*ck EU" ;-)  That's why Clinton Democrats (aka DemoRats) joined efforts with the neoconservatives in the Republican Party to take Trump down. That's why war-mongering against Russia is now established policy for both parties and actually a test for any political commentator who tried to get to any of major MSM. In other words Democratic party now is just the second War Party (as was evident from Hillary campaign) and anti-war left completely disappeared from the USA political landscape. 

Many people who detest Trump also view Russiagate positivly as the most effective path to achieve Trump’s impeachment, so this desirable goal in which "ends justifies the means"  which makes this investigation somewhat similar to Ukrainian "EuroMaydan" charges of corruption, a part of color revolution effort by intelligence agencies and controlled by them MSM.   Moreover the atmosphere in the USA is already poisoned and the majority of people believe that Russia interfered in elections.  In other words Iraq yellowcake story was played on unsuspecting American public again and with the same resounding success.  

But to me it look like Trump surrendered after just 100 days of anti-Russian smear campaign launched by neocons. So why they still  want to finish him like poor colonel Kaddafi?  That's an interesting question. So it must be more on the plate then just forcing Trump to abandon his election promises in foreign policy (which he already did); there might be some dangerous skeletons in the closet revealing of which the previous administration and their factions in intelligence  services the are afraid to death.

Because their action is as close to sedition as one  can get. In other words they went va bank (a common expression among Russian and German speakers. Va bank means to put everything at risk in order to win. As a result you would win everything or lose everything; similar US term might be "all in").  

In any case now two-third or more of US population is brainwashed into adamantly anti-Russian mindset, increasing the risk of the major war

At the foundation of Mueller fishing expedition is so called Steele dossier. The key in understanding Steele dossier is to view it as in integral part of Russiagate plot to remove Trump, an interesting twist of "Color revolutions" methods. See Steele dossier. It has a very interesting chronology and is closely connected with  Strzok-gate

Similarly Trump wanted to reach some level of detente  with Russia rightly considering the level of hostility achieved under Obama dangerous and counterproductive (to the extent that Obama might be controlled by Brennan it might be not Obama personal fought).  In this sense he also crossed the line (with the only difference that he did it during he election campaign) and at this point all power of neocons and neolib including their factions in intelligence agencies was unleashed for his removal. That's why Steele dossier was created and advertized: as part of anti-Trump coup d'état by the neocons, Clinton neoliberals and parts of the US intelligence services.  In both case the interests of the USA and national security suffers. In a way both neocons and neoliberals  are elements of foreign influence that do not care much about ordinary Americans.

From the beginning it was a set up to find dirt on Trump campaign insiders and if possible to topple Donald Trump’s presidential aspirations. It was actually pretty elegant gambit: after Attorney general recluse himself from Russian probe, Rob Rosenstein jumped into action first recommended firing Comey and then on the basis of this decition by Trump appointed the special prosecutor -- Comey friend and mentor Mueller. Whether firing Comey was a trap set up for Trump (and this is quite probably as Trump can be easily played by appealing to his vanity), or he just make the decision with bad timing (day 1 of his Presidency would be much more appropriate)  or not is immaterial.

turbojarhead -> loveyajimbo , Dec 10, 2017 2:37 PM

They played Sessions like a violin. Sessions recluses himself for a bullcrap Kisnyak speech, where he did not even meet him. Rosenstein then recommends Trump fire Comey -- who wanted to be fired so they would appoint a special prosecutor -- which Rosenstein does -- Mueller, to the acclamation of ALL of Con and the Senate -- including Republicans.

When Trump tries to get out of the trap by leaking he is thinking about firing Sessions, Lispin Lindsey goes on television to say that will not be allowed too happen. If he fires Sessions, Congress would not approve ANY of Trump's picks for DOJ-leaving Rosenstein in charge anyway.

Trump was pissed because they removed his only defender from Mueller -- the head of the DOJ. He knew it was a setup, so went ballistic when he found out about Sessions recusing.

Before and after the 2016 election Trump was under tack from intelligence  agencies. And the list includes not only obvious suspects in CIA and NSA, but also FBI (via liaison with CIA, see Strzokgate) as well as a several senior officials in Obama's Justice Department (Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, Bruce Ohr), as well as National security advisor Susan Rise and UN ambassador Samantha Power (both were engaged in so called "unmasking" campaign).  to say nothing about Obama (who has high personal animosity to both Trump and Putin) who fueled Russiagate histeria by his expulsion of 35 Russian  diplomats on December 30, 2017, when he was already "lame duck".

Among the players that promoted Steele dossier and used it for "color revolution" against Trump Davis Stockman mentioned (The Russiagate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy )

Of course, this list is incomplete. CIA, FBI, State Department and Department of Justice all have their strong factions of Clinton loyalists, neocons and globalists.  Add to this large, dominant part of MSM, both newspapers, TV channels and major web sites.  So the critical mass for launching color revolution was present and they just needed a trigger, which was Steele dossier and 17 agencies memo. At this point the color revolution against Trump was launched. And while this operation had many moving parts and alternating players, the mission to unseat Trump never changed. And it remains ongoing with all hoes currently put on the result of 2018 elections (if Democrats regain majority Mueller can definitely to do more and House intelligence committee investigation, which is most damaging to Mueller can be shut). Efforts to find dirt on Trump involved extensive wiretapping (Did Obama order wiretaps of Trump conversations? ):

And likely there were others.

A good overview of Mueller fishing expedition was provided by Mike Whitney on Dec 21, 2017 (unz.com):

While it's clear that this political cage-match is going to persist for some time to come, we'd like to make two points. First, that there was never sufficient

While it's clear that this political cage-match is going to persist for some time to come, we'd like to make two points. First, that there was never sufficient reason to appoint a Special Counsel. The threshold for making such an appointment should have been probable cause, that is, deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein should have shown why he thought there was 'reasonable basis to believe that a crime had been committed.' That's what's required under the Fourth Amendment, and that's the standard that should have been met. But Rosenstein ignored that rule because it improved the Special Counsel's chances of netting indictments

Even so, there's no evidence that a crime has been committed. None. And that's been the main criticism of the investigation from the get go. It's fine for the New York Times and the Washington Post to reiterate the same tedious, unsubstantiated claims over and over again ad nauseam. Their right to fabricate news is guaranteed under the First Amendment and they take full advantage of that privilege. But it's different for professional attorney operating at the highest level of the Justice Department to appoint a Special Counsel to rummage through all manner of private or privileged documents, transcripts, tax returns, private conversations, intercepted phone calls and emails -- of the democratically-elected president -- based on nothing more than the spurious and politically-motivated allegations made in the nation's elite media or by flagrantly-partisan actors operating in the Intelligence Community or law enforcement.

Can you see the problem here? This is not just an attack on Trump (whose immigration, environmental, health care, tax and foreign policies I personally despise.) It is an attempt to roll back the results of the election by bogging him down in legal proceedings making it impossible for him to govern. These attacks are not just on Trump, they're on the legitimate authority of the people to choose their own leaders in democratic elections. That's what's at stake. And that's why there must be a high threshold for launching an investigation like this.

Consider this: On May 17, 2017, when Rosenstein announced his decision to appoint a Special Counsel he said the following:

"In my capacity as acting attorney general I determined that it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authority and appoint a special counsel to assume responsibility for this matter. My decision is not a finding that crimes have been committed or that any prosecution is warranted. I have made no such determination. What I have determined is that based upon the unique circumstances, the public interest requires me to place this investigation under the authority of a person who exercises a degree of independence from the normal chain of command." Rosenstein wrote that his responsibility is to ensure a "full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 election." As special counsel, Mueller is charged with investigating "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump."

That's not good enough. There's no evidence that "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump" were improper, unethical or illegal. Nor do any such presumed "links and/or coordination" imply a crime was committed. Rather, the loosey-goosy standard Rosenstein has applied is an invitation for an open ended fishing expedition aimed at derailing the political agenda of the elected government. This puts too much power in the hands of unelected agents in the bureaucracy who may be influenced by powerbrokers operating behind the scenes who want to disrupt, obstruct, or paralyze the government. And this, in fact, is exactly what is taking place presently.

Naturally, a broad-ranging mandate like Rosenstein's will result in excesses, and it has. Of the four people who have been caught up in Mueller's expansive dragnet, exactly zero have been indicted on charges even remotely connected to the original allegation of "collusion with Russia to sway the presidential election in Trump's favor." Clearly, people's civil liberties are being violated to conduct a political jihad on an unpopular president and his aids.

So, how does one establish whether there's a reasonable basis to believe that a crime has been committed?

The daily blather in the media does not meet that standard nor does the much ballyhooed Intelligence Community Assessment that was supposed to provide ironclad proof of Russian meddling in the elections. The ICA even offered this sweeping disclaimer at the beginning of the report which admits that the intelligence gathered therein should not in any way be construed to represent solid evidence of anything.
Here's the from the report:

"Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation, and precedents."

... ... ...

The fact is, Mueller is no elder statesman or paragon of virtue. He's a political assassin whose task is to take down Trump at all cost. Unfortunately for Mueller, the credibility of his investigation is beginning to wane as conflicts of interest mount and public confidence dwindles. After 18 months of relentless propaganda and political skullduggery, the Russia-gate fiction is beginning to unravel.

 

Mike Whitney May 24 analysis

That's all nice but the truth is that Trump abandoned his agenda in April 2017, a month before appointment of Special Council. Also the intercity of Russian witch hunt was such that appointment of a special council was kind of inevitable. Trigger might be different, but the net result is the same.
The idea that both Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller belong to the same team is plausible. Mueller is also a close friend of Comey. But as Trump folded what would be the gain from his removal ?
Notable quotes:
"... And, yes, I know, people are going to swarm to Rosenstein's defense and say, "Yeah, but, Trump is a bloviating buffoon and a mentally-unstable despot." And, they're right, too, the man is a menace, a narcissist and maybe even a crackpot. Just look at the Saudi arms deal where Trump agreed to provide hundreds of billions of dollars of weapons to a fanatical government that will undoubtedly use them to arm its jihadist army in Syria or kill women and children in Yemen. It just shows that Trump is a vicious, unprincipled militarist. But that doesn't change what Rosenstein did. People need to look beyond Trump's failings to appreciate what type of man we're dealing with here. Rosenstein is a duplicitous back-stabbing serpent. End of story. ..."
"... By appointing a Special Counsel, Rosenstein not only destroyed any chance Trump had at achieving his policy objectives, he also effectively rolled-back the results of the 2016 presidential election. ..."
"... We can now be 100 percent certain that Trump's political agenda will never get off the ground. His tax plan, his infrastructure plan, his health care plan; all of them have gone up in smoke thanks to Rosenstein. Which is good, right, since the Trump's "pamper the rich and screw-the-working-man" plan was crappy policy anyway? So, good riddance. ..."
"... And Rosenstein didn't pick hatchetman Robert Mueller by himself either. That's more malarkey. Mueller was picked by the same shadowy throng of elites that selected the 9-11 Commission, the big money guys who own this fecking country lock, stock and barrel. ..."
"... "Robert Mueller, picked as special prosecutor to investigate President Donald Trump, violated the US Constitution as FBI Director by using secret domestic spy programs, National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower William Binney told Sputnik. ..."
"... "My problem with Mueller is that he agreed with and used the Stellar Wind spying program at NSA against common crime since 2001," Binney said Wednesday. "He admitted to this in a 2011 interview with [Time magazine correspondent] Bart Gellman." ..."
"... Binney said that Mueller's willingness to use secret espionage surveillance techniques designed only for national security functions against suspects in regular criminal investigations revealed his willingness to ignore or break safeguards in the US Constitution. ..."
"... Repeat: He used "secret espionage surveillance techniques designed only for national security functions against suspects in regular criminal investigations." ..."
"... What Aaronson discovered was that, far from preventing terrorism, the FBI uses its funds to "manufacture" terrorists out of marginalized, desperate, mentally ill or immature men (many of the convicted individuals profiled are in their early twenties). In Aaronson's words, "The FBI has been effective at creating the very enemy it is hunting." . ..."
"... And the man who oversaw these operations, Robert Mueller, is the same guy the media has been praising as the embodiment of integrity and moral rectitude. Give me a break. Mueller knew these operations were a hoax, he had to know. The FBI was working a sting to lure hard-luck dimwits into doing things they'd never normally dream of doing. It's called entrapment, which is exactly what it is. ..."
"... So what are the odds that Trump will get a fair shake in this deal? How about zero? There's zero chance that Grand Inquisitor Mueller and his Star Chamber assistants are going to conduct an objective, independent investigation. In fact, the whole Special Counsel meme is just an attempt to dignify the railroading of the Chief Executive. There's not much more to it than that. They need these sham legal proceedings to create the impression that the final outcome hasn't already been decided. But it has already been decided. Trump's going to be driven from office and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. The die has been cast, and Trump came up snake-eyes. ..."

Appointment of rabid anti-Trump prosecutors

Mueller got this appointment after he was rejected by Trump for the position of the director of FBI. So he  might have personal grudges to hold. In any case the selection of his team tells us a lot about the direction of the investigation as "personnel is policy".  Among the most notorious members of his team were

Peter Strzok

Peter Strzok the man who was instrumental in swiping the dirt of Hillary "emailgate" under the carpet as well as using Steele dossire as a ram to put members of Trump team under surveillance. Later became involved in Strzok-gate scandal and  removed from the investigation. Along with Comey and McCabe he influenced the US Presidential election depriving Sanders from chances to became the candidate from the Democratic Party. 

Peter P. Strzok II (born in 1970, currently 47 year old) was until July 2017  the key figure in Clinton Email investigation and Trump Russiagate investigation as a Deputy Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and second in command of counterintelligence.  He is the central figure of so called Strzok-gate scandal.

Despite being  a rabid Hillary Clinton supporter (judging from his texts to Lisa Page with whom he allegedly has an affair ) he was assigned as the investigator both Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server, and allegations of collusion of Trump team with Russians in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election.  which were conducted in highly politized manner ( Anti-Trump FBI Agent Changed Language Of Hillary Email Scandal From Grossly Negligent To Extremely Careless )

Electronic records show Peter Strzok, who led the investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server as the No. 2 official in the counterintelligence division, changed Comey's earlier draft language describing Clinton's actions as "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," the source said. The drafting process was a team effort, CNN is told, with a handful of people reviewing the language as edits were made, according to another US official familiar with the matter.

Subsequently, he joined the 2017 Special Counsel investigation but was quietly removed by Mueller in late July 2017. At this time he was demoted in FBI to HR department.

 

Andrew Weissmann. He is called a legal bulldog of Mueller team. Here is how pro-clinton site thedailybeast.com  chantaterise hims

The FBI’s decision to send a dozen agents on an early-hour raid of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s home struck some observers as an audacious, even unprecedented move for a white collar criminal case.

But to former federal prosecutors familiar with members of special counsel Bob Mueller’s team, it had all the makings of the work of Andrew Weissmann.

A former federal prosecutor from Brooklyn who spent his career going after mobsters, ponzi-schemers, and white collar criminals, Weissmann is known as a tenacious operator who uses strategies that have dazzled some legal experts and disturbed others. They believe his presence on Mueller’s team means the probe may push legal boundaries as it investigates alleged collusion between Trump and Russian interests.

“He fashions himself as a real tactician, in the sense of having a chessboard in front of him and moving pieces around,” said a person who has faced Weissmann in court.

Mueller has known and trusted Weissmann for more than a decade, having made him special counsel at the FBI for a few months in 2005, according to the Houston Chronicle. In 2011, after Weissmann left the bureau for a short stint in private practice, Mueller brought him back and made him the FBI’s general counsel.

“Mueller trusted him to be the FBI’s top lawyer,” said a former federal prosecutor who knows Weissmann. “That’s a pretty big deal.”

While he was general counsel to the FBI, Weissmann was known as quick-moving and decisive.
 

I am so proud Mueller deputy congratulated Sally Yates after she was fired for refusing to enforce Trump's travel ban  The substantive part of Andrew Weissmann’s email to Yates is just 11 words long.

Judicial Watch today released two productions (335 pages and 44 pages) of Justice Department (DOJ) documents showing strong support by top DOJ officials for former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates’ refusal to enforce President Trump’s Middle East travel ban executive order. In one email, Andrew Weissmann, one of Robert Mueller’s top prosecutors and formerly the Obama-era Chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section, applauds Yates writing: “I am so proud. And in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects.”…

“This is an astonishing and disturbing find. Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” stated Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans? Shut it down.”

The Hatch Act, passed in 1939, prohibits civil servants from engaging in political activity, which is directed at the promotion of or advocacy against a political party, group or candidate.  When you consider that Ms. Yates leaked FISA information to the Washington Post without the authority or approval to do so, which is a crime, I would have serious reservations about having anyone supportive of a criminal and who can be viewed as a part of an attempted coup on the new POTUS in the team


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Jan 22, 2018] US Intelligence Could Well Have Wiretapped Trump by Ron Paul

Notable quotes:
"... Unable to come to terms with losing the 2016 election, Democrats are still pushing the 'Russiagate' probe and blocking the release of a memo describing surveillance abuses by the FBI, former Congressman Ron Paul told RT. ..."
"... I don't think anybody is seeking justice or seeking truth as much as they're seeking to get political advantage ..."
"... "I would be surprised if they haven't spied on him. They spy on everybody else. And they have spied on other members of the executive branch and other presidents." ..."
"... "The other day when they voted to get FISA even more power to spy on American people, the president couldn't be influenced by the fact that they used it against him. And I believe they did, and he believes that." ..."
"... "I've always maintained that government ought to be open and the people ought to have their privacy. But right now the people have no privacy and all our government does is work on secrecy and then it becomes competitive between the two parties, who get stuck with the worst deal by arguing, who's guilty of some crime," the politician explained. ..."
"... Paul also blasted the infamous 'Russian Dossier' compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, and which the Democrats used in their attack on Trump, saying it ..."
"... "has no legitimacy being revealing [in terms of] of Trump being associated with Russia. From the people I know The story has been all made up, essentially." ..."
"... "I'm no fan of Trump. I'm not a supporter of his, but I think that has been carried way overboard. I think the Democrats can't stand the fact that they've lost the election, and they can't stand the fact that Trump is a little bit more independent minded than they like," he said. ..."
Jan 20, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

Unable to come to terms with losing the 2016 election, Democrats are still pushing the 'Russiagate' probe and blocking the release of a memo describing surveillance abuses by the FBI, former Congressman Ron Paul told RT.

A top-secret intelligence memo, believed to reveal political bias at the highest levels of the FBI and the DOJ towards President Trump, may well be as significant as the Republicans say, Ron Paul told RT. But, he added, "there's still to many unknowns, especially, from my view point."

"Trump connection to the Russians, I think, has been way overblown, and I'd like to just get to the bottom of this the new information that's coming out, maybe this will reveal things and help us out," he said.

"Right now it's just a political fight," the former US Congressman said. "I think they're dealing with things a lot less important than the issue they ought to be talking about Right now, I don't think anybody is seeking justice or seeking truth as much as they're seeking to get political advantage."

Trump's claims that he was wiretapped by US intelligence agencies on the orders of the Obama administration may well turn out to be true, Paul said.

"I would be surprised if they haven't spied on him. They spy on everybody else. And they have spied on other members of the executive branch and other presidents."

However, he criticized Trump for doing nothing to prevent the Senate from voting in the expansion of warrantless surveillance of US citizens under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) earlier this week.

"The other day when they voted to get FISA even more power to spy on American people, the president couldn't be influenced by the fact that they used it against him. And I believe they did, and he believes that."

"I've always maintained that government ought to be open and the people ought to have their privacy. But right now the people have no privacy and all our government does is work on secrecy and then it becomes competitive between the two parties, who get stuck with the worst deal by arguing, who's guilty of some crime," the politician explained.

The fact that Democrats on the relevant committees have all voted against releasing the memo "might mean that Trump is probably right; there's probably a lot of stuff there that would exonerate him from any accusation they've been making," he said.

Paul also blasted the infamous 'Russian Dossier' compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, and which the Democrats used in their attack on Trump, saying it

"has no legitimacy being revealing [in terms of] of Trump being associated with Russia. From the people I know The story has been all made up, essentially."

"I'm no fan of Trump. I'm not a supporter of his, but I think that has been carried way overboard. I think the Democrats can't stand the fact that they've lost the election, and they can't stand the fact that Trump is a little bit more independent minded than they like," he said.

This article was originally published by RT -

[Jan 22, 2018] Trump Jr. on FISA memo Media, Democrats working together to deceive Americans

Jan 22, 2018 | www.washingtonexaminer.com

Donald Trump Jr. called for the release of a memo that allegedly contains information about Obama administration surveillance abuses and suggested that Democrats are complicit with the media in misleading the public.

"It's the double standard that the people are fed by the Democrats in complicity with the media, that's why neither have any trust from the American people anymore," Trump said on Fox News Friday.

[Jan 22, 2018] Michael Wolff Hints at Current Trump Infidelity Hidden in Fire and Fury

"These people are the lowest form of life; vicious, ignorant, scheming, petty, savage, manipulative -- if given the opportunity and the right incentive, he would stab any one of them, and not lose a minute's sleep... Again, what was his motivation -- something is missing from this puzzle. Drugs or drink or mental illness? ... those rats in that sinking sack, they're fighting... He may be the dictionary definition of a firestarter to some, to me he's a rancid piece of filth." Guardian comment
"If you think abandoning your wife and cashing in on your "batty" mother-in-law's home is cruel, it turns out this is par for the course."
"And, really, sex with someone other than his wife and the attention of other people is all Michael Wolff really wants, at the end of the day."
"A clue to Wolff's character emerged in 2009, when the "bald, trout-pouted" 55-year-old was caught sleeping with a 28-year-old intern at Vanity Fair. His wife kicked him out of their Manhattan home, but not before joining him in an attempt to evict her 85-year-old mother because they wanted to sell the apartment she lived in. As you can tell, he's a charmer."
This is really sleazy interview... Typical project of Wolff own behavior as in
Wolff: "If this is a book that will bring down his President.." And the only topic he is capable to discuss is dirty rumors about President infidelity. For Trump the book title "The great transition" ;-)
Notable quotes:
"... Maher asked if it was about a woman, to which Wolff answered, "Yeah. I didn't have a blue dress." ..."
"... Without hesitation, Wolff said yes. "You just have to read between the lines," he said, adding that it's toward the end of the book. "Now that I've told you, when you hit that paragraph you're going to say bingo." ..."
Jan 22, 2018 | www.thewrap.com

Everybody has been talking about Michael Wolff's best seller "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House" since it came out Jan. 5, but the author said there is one thing hinted at in its pages that he is surprised no has asked him about.

"Real Time With Bill Maher" kicked off its 16th season Friday night with Wolff, who hinted there was a tidbit near the end of the book that he thought would get tongues wagging. At first cagey, he said it's something he is "absolutely sure of, but was so incendiary that I just didn't have the ultimate proof."

Maher asked if it was about a woman, to which Wolff answered, "Yeah. I didn't have a blue dress."

Of course, the "blue dress" he's referring to is Monica Lewinsky's infamous outfit that was said to be stained with President Bill Clinton's semen.

His curiosity piqued, Maher wondered if it was somebody Trump is "f -- ing now?"

Without hesitation, Wolff said yes. "You just have to read between the lines," he said, adding that it's toward the end of the book. "Now that I've told you, when you hit that paragraph you're going to say bingo."

Watch the full interview above.


landshark123 , January 20, 2018 4:48 PM

25 years ago it would be categorized as nothing more then a Kitty Kelly gossip rag.

He wouldn't answer Bill's question because he didn't want to get his butt sued into oblivion. He seems to be reveling in how he BS'd his way into there.

Afra , January 20, 2018 10:16 AM

IMAGINE -- in your wildest imaginings -- that this was President O.
The more sordid America becomes the more his hyperverbal "base", along with our traditional "enemies", celebrate.

ErikKC2 , January 20, 2018 7:06 AM

And, it will only get more "interesting" over the next couple of weeks. I ordered the book on the first day I could. In fact, I pre-ordered it. And, it was just shipped today. Give it a couple of weeks for the shipments from Amazon to be delivered, and the book digested.

And, of course, it's Hope Hicks.

Afra ErikKC2 , January 20, 2018 10:18 AM

I'm going to say a creeper in that back door he mentioned. I like to give the young lady a little more credit. In my head. 😟

I Heart Suckabees , January 20, 2018 4:35 AM

get it, Sarah Sanders!

[Jan 22, 2018] Sleazy Wolff tried to prolong his five minutes of fame

This is the real Wolff -- sleazy and unscrupulous gossip columnist
Notable quotes:
"... Wolff said Friday on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" that he was "absolutely sure" of such a tryst, but acknowledged that he lacked "ultimate proof." "I didn't have the blue dress," Wolff told Maher, referring to the key piece of evidence from Bill Clinton's notorious Oval Office dalliance with Monica Lewinsky. ..."
Jan 20, 2018 | www.nydailynews.com

Originally from: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/michael-wolff-claims-trump-affair-white-house-article-1.3767521

President Trump may be having an extramarital affair in the White House, according to the latest bombshell claim from "Fire and Fury" author Michael Wolff.

Wolff said Friday on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" that he was "absolutely sure" of such a tryst, but acknowledged that he lacked "ultimate proof." "I didn't have the blue dress," Wolff told Maher, referring to the key piece of evidence from Bill Clinton's notorious Oval Office dalliance with Monica Lewinsky.

[Jan 22, 2018] Michael Wolff's Trump Affair Clues Point to Nikki Haley, and We Hate This Story (Column) by Tim Molloy

Yahoo tried to amplify the unsubstantiated and malicious rumor. Not the first time, not the last. So Yahoo bottom feeders are happy to feast on Wolff's excrements...
Notable quotes:
"... By October, however, many on the president's staff took particular notice of one of the few remaining Trump opportunists: Nikki Haley, the UN ambassador. Haley -- 'as ambitious as Lucifer," in the characterization of one member of the senior staff -- had concluded that Trump's tenure would last, at best, a single term, and that she, with requisite submission, could be his heir apparent. Haley had courted and befriended Ivanka, and Ivanka had brought her into the family circle, where she had become a particular focus of Trump's attention, and he of hers. ..."
"... Bingo? Wolff adds that Trump "had been spending a notable amount of private time with Haley on Air Force One and was seen to be grooming her for a political future." Wolff cited one "senior Trumper" who said the problem with Trump mentoring Haley "is that she is so much smarter than him." ..."
"... The White House, Haley and Wolff did not immediately respond to a request for comment. There are many problems with this theory, aside from Wolff going on national television to accuse people of having affairs. Among them: Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, was one of Trump's early Republican critics. ..."
"... She campaigned for Marco Rubio and then supported Ted Cruz. When she gave the Republican response to President Obama's final State of the Union address, she seemed to criticize Trump when she said: "During anxious times, it can be tempting to follow the siren call of the angriest voices." Trump responded by calling her "weak" on immigration . ..."
Jan 22, 2018 | www.yahoo.com

"Fire and Fury" author Michael Wolff's accusation that President Trump is currently having an affair set off online speculation Saturday about who the other party might be. Based on Wolff's clues, it appears he's making insinuations about UN Ambassador Nikki Haley.

A quick side note before we go further: This is gross on every level. We don't have any evidence whatsoever to suggest that what Wolff is hinting at is true, so please consider this a story about an author making an accusation he admits he can't prove.

That said, Wolff went on "Real Time With Bill Maher" Friday to provide some encouragement to readers who may have given up halfway through "Fire and Fury" when he said a passage near the end of his book hints at the affair.

Also Read: Trump Demands Babies Not Be Born After Nine Months: No, Really, He Said This

"Now that I've told you, when you hit that paragraph you're going to say bingo," Wolff told Maher.

We've read the book. While there are icky descriptions about Trump's behavior with his spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, they come before the book's midway point. ("You're the best piece of tail he'll ever have!" Trump is quoted as telling Hicks about an ex, which Wolff says sent Hicks "running from the room.")

The only passage we've found near the end of the book that references a Trump relationship with a woman who isn't his wife or daughter is this one:

By October, however, many on the president's staff took particular notice of one of the few remaining Trump opportunists: Nikki Haley, the UN ambassador. Haley -- 'as ambitious as Lucifer," in the characterization of one member of the senior staff -- had concluded that Trump's tenure would last, at best, a single term, and that she, with requisite submission, could be his heir apparent. Haley had courted and befriended Ivanka, and Ivanka had brought her into the family circle, where she had become a particular focus of Trump's attention, and he of hers.

Bingo? Wolff adds that Trump "had been spending a notable amount of private time with Haley on Air Force One and was seen to be grooming her for a political future." Wolff cited one "senior Trumper" who said the problem with Trump mentoring Haley "is that she is so much smarter than him."

Also Read: 'Real Time': Michael Wolff Hints at Current Trump Infidelity Hidden in Bombshell Book (Video)

The White House, Haley and Wolff did not immediately respond to a request for comment. There are many problems with this theory, aside from Wolff going on national television to accuse people of having affairs. Among them: Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, was one of Trump's early Republican critics.

She campaigned for Marco Rubio and then supported Ted Cruz. When she gave the Republican response to President Obama's final State of the Union address, she seemed to criticize Trump when she said: "During anxious times, it can be tempting to follow the siren call of the angriest voices." Trump responded by calling her "weak" on immigration .

... ... ...

[Jan 22, 2018] Clapper may have been the one behind using British intelligence to spy on Trump.

Highly recommended!
Jan 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

MK ULTRA Alpha -> SethPoor Jan 22, 2018 10:22 AM Permalink

I read about this, it was quickly brushed under the rug. Didn't know it was as extensive because media coverage on this angle hasn't been clear. Good report.

And if this is covered closely, then we may get some traction about how it was done and who pulled the strings. This maybe why former NSC Clapper is running scared, he set up his own personal intelligence network (there were reports early on, Clapper had his own intelligence network besides the 17 official intel agencies) to spy for the Obama WH, both he and former CIA Brennan were running intel ops for the Obama WH. Brennan ran political intel for the Obama election campaign. Indicating the Deep State intelligence apparatus is deeply involved in presidential elections. Brennan political campaign intel network using Deep State assets, next Obama;s NSC, next Obama's CIA director and was said to be the most political CIA director in history by CIA employees.

Clapper may have been the one behind using British intelligence to spy on Trump. It would explain Clappers irrational statements about Trump, sabotage and incitement of government employees not to follow Trump's orders. We got that from Clapper, Brennan and former CIA director Hayden. All three have joined forces in LA, using celebrities to continue the coup against Trump. They formed, essentially a convert political action group using celebrities, to make their case in the media. It's illogical for Clapper to continue with the coup, there is no reward in it unless, he is guilty of treason and must continue the coup to protect himself. In other words, this isn't for Hillary Clinton.

[Jan 22, 2018] The Justice Department and FBI set up the meeting at Trump Tower between Trump Jr., Manafort and Kushner with controversial Russian officials to make Trump's associates appear compromised

Highly recommended!
People are really angry, judging from comments
Notable quotes:
"... Six U.S. agencies created a stealth task force, spearhead by CIA's Brennan, to run domestic surveillance on Trump associates and possibly Trump himself. ..."
"... To feign ignorance and to seemingly operate within U.S. laws, the agencies freelanced the wiretapping of Trump associates to the British spy agency GCHQ. ..."
"... GCHQ did not work from London or the UK. In fact the spy agency worked from NSA's headquarters in Fort Meade, MD with direct NSA supervision and guidance to conduct sweeping surveillance on Trump associates. ..."
"... Following the Trump Tower sit down, GCHQ began digitally wiretapping Manafort, Trump Jr., and Kushner. ..."
"... OK Ron Johnson (R-WI), the author was Steven Boyd, Assistant for Legislative Affairs / DOJ - Hold him in contempt of congress. ..."
Jan 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

SethPoor -> BennyBoy Jan 22, 2018 9:47 AM Permalink

Jim in MN -> SethPoor Jan 22, 2018 9:52 AM Permalink

Bottom Line:

The party in power used the apparatus of the police state to spy on and damage an opposition candidate.

There really isn't a higher crime in our supposed system.

THEN there's the cover-up.....as in deleting files and pretending you never had them even though the IG already does.

otschelnik Jan 22, 2018 8:55 AM Permalink

OK Ron Johnson (R-WI), the author was Steven Boyd, Assistant for Legislative Affairs / DOJ - Hold him in contempt of congress. Have him arrested. During questioning, press him to the wall, get him to tell him who in the FBI told him 'they couldn't find them.' Then go arrest that guy too. Rinse and repeat. Look what these bastards did to Mike Flynn. Go get 'em. NOW!!!

VideoEng_NC Jan 22, 2018 9:10 AM Permalink

One of the silver linings in this mess is the clear view that the FBI is ridiculously compromised & has chucked its standard of non-political leanings right out the window. Shutting it down may have once seemed a long shot, now maybe not so much. If you haven't noticed, another Trump boomerang has happened to the Left with their favorite word starting with the letter S. This time I'm thinking Storm is what's about to follow instead of hole or house.

stustd Jan 22, 2018 9:14 AM Permalink

Business as usual continues: Comey to teach ethical leadership course at William & Mary:

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/369695-comey-to-teach-ethical-leadership-course-at-william-mary

wcole225 Jan 22, 2018 9:21 AM Permalink

If the republican leadership hiccup here on the release of the memo then it's things as usual and forget a full on war from them. I don't trust those bastards as far as I can throw them. Trump then needs to fire Sessions and Mueller and go full on attack mode with a press conference doing what he does and light the left's hair on fire like never before. This is war and it needs kicked off in grand fashion. The left's ability to guilt shame has been neutered and they know it and are scared to death.

CatInTheHat -> wcole225 Jan 22, 2018 11:03 AM Permalink

Why do people think Trump is going to do anything? When his actions say he is doing exactly what the WARMONGERING fuckers want??

Trump is Barry is Clinton is Bush...

the not so mig Jan 22, 2018 9:31 AM Permalink

these FBI Stazi guys are no good, shutter down

two hoots Jan 22, 2018 9:33 AM Permalink

The Genius has lost control. Washington is oozing and dripping its corrupt, manipulating, narcissistic and deceiving bile. Just one thin mint is all it will take. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJZPzQESq_0

wobblie Jan 22, 2018 9:50 AM Permalink

Nothing like a colossal waste of time to distract the herd.

https://therulingclassobserver.com/2018/01/07/unity-at-the-top-division

azusgm Jan 22, 2018 10:10 AM Permalink

At one point, Peter Strzok made reference to a phone that "could not be traced". He probably had a 2nd phone for a period. I'd be willing to bet it was a BlackBerry. While he had (if he had) that 2nd phone, he could have used that more secure phone for his communications with Lisa Page.

The IG may have all of Strzok's text messages with Lisa Page from his official phone, but none from the 2nd phone.

azusgm -> azusgm Jan 22, 2018 10:35 AM Permalink

Here's an article that includes the reference to the 2nd phone.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/peter-strzok-lisa-page-texts-trump-idiot/

The article says that it was Lisa Page who suggested using the 2nd phone. That message from her was in March 2016.

"Also in March, Page seems to be concerned about whether the things they say about Mr. Trump can be found out. "So look, you say we can text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it cant be traced," she wrote."

Haven't read through the entire thread here, but the end date of the interval for the missing data is also the date that Mueller was appointed.

Lostinfortwalton Jan 22, 2018 10:34 AM Permalink

All of this shit is at the NSA Blufdale, Utah, facility. Why are the taxpayers spending umpteen billion dollars collecting and storing this stuff if the government is going to pretend it doesn't exist? You can bet this internet post, and anyone who replies to it, is archived there. We are supposed to be afraid of being surveiled by assholes like Clapper and Brennan. Guess what? We're not.

enough of this Jan 22, 2018 10:34 AM Permalink

If Horowitz now claims he really didn't receive all the text messages he requested, then he too is part of a massive cover-up and any report that is issued by the DOJ's Inspector General's office can't be believed by definition.

insanelysane -> enough of this Jan 22, 2018 10:41 AM Permalink

It's possible Horowitz lied then to placate the Congressional inquiry. I believe that the Deep State believes that they can get Trump impeached before the shit hits the fan with the Sedition by the FBI. There is always Plan B for the Deep State but 50 years after they rid the world of 2 Kennedys the general population isn't buying it.

BendGuyhere Jan 22, 2018 10:37 AM Permalink

The FACT PATTERN supports a RICO indictment and prosecution.

RUDY GIULIANI for SPECIAL PROSECUTOR.

Hang Comey, Lynch, Mueller, Clinton, TO MAKE SURE IT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN!

MrBoompi Jan 22, 2018 11:00 AM Permalink

If I understand how US communication systems work, every network has a splitter which copies all transmissions to NSA, or related agencies, storage devices. I would be shocked if they didn't collect everything from FBI or DOJ employees, and I mean everything, from FBI devices or their private devices. If the files are sitting safe and secure on NSA storage devices, only the NSA could really "lose" them. And this would also be true for every one of Clinton's messages. Why don't we ever see Congress ask NSA for anything? Is that verboten?

Arrow4Truth Jan 22, 2018 11:58 AM Permalink

"This glaring contradiction suggests someone is lying or perhaps simply incompetent." Wrong! It's both.

currency Jan 22, 2018 12:34 PM Permalink

FBI and DOJ and the Weasel Liar Rosenstein are LIARS. They don't want the world and the American people know what Liars, corrupt, in the tank for Hilray to know what they did are still trying to due. Trump needs to clean house of the FBI and DOJ of all Clinton and Obama people.

[Jan 22, 2018] From Elizabeth Taylor to Donald Trump Insinuations, Half Truths and Lies by Dr. Fred Eichelman

Notable quotes:
"... "No, it can really hurt" she replied. She went on to tell us how in one story the cover headline announced "Elizabeth Taylor is slowly killing her mother." As it turned out the story was about how her mom worried about her daughter's health and travels. Elizabeth went on to relate that in the United Kingdom you could not get away with such stories. She had sued successfully 15 times, winning each. "I did not need or want the money" she confided. "I just wanted a retraction. That is not possible in the United States." ..."
"... These kind of distortions about Elizabeth were not just prevalent in magazines. Books have done the same thing. There is a biography of Elizabeth Taylor by an author known for penning page turners about celebrities with as much dirt as possible. In one story she described an argument between Elizabeth and John during a political gathering locally here in the Roanoke Valley. One that had her storming off and not returning. We were there with other friends and no such thing happened. ..."
"... Now I am a strong supporter of the First Amendment and the idea of freedom of speech. I also know I do not have the right to go into a theater showing a film and shout "FIRE" if there is no fire. I could be rightfully arrested for that because of the possible danger to public safety. ..."
"... Today we see people in the liberal media distributing fake news with every opportunity they can find. They have done every thing they possibly can to see the presidency of Donald Trump fail. The Michael Wolff book makes a case that every one around the president, including family, think he is not competent and not smart. He is fair game for such fake news. ..."
Jan 13, 2018 | politichicks.com

The title may cause readers to think this is strictly about the half baked book by Michael Wolff on the Trump Administration. That is already being debunked by even some liberal sources like the Washington Post which has been finding errors on every page. The only criticism I would make is that too much is being said about it and that makes sales of the book go up. The old adage that "Get banned in Boston if you want a best seller" holds true.

The concern here is the interpretation by the courts of the First Amendment that people with a public position are fair game for the spreading of information whether true or untrue. This has been going on for some time and the first I became aware of it was with the entertainment media.

Dr. Fred Eichelman and Elizabeth Taylor

Back in the late seventies my wife Carolyn and I were privileged to host Elizabeth Taylor several times when her husband John Warner was running for the U.S. Senate here in Virginia. We found Elizabeth a very open person and easy to talk with and there was one question I had to ask.

I had seen a number of covers on Super Market magazines with stories hinting of scandals and Elizabeth Taylor was a popular subject. I had heard that Hollywood stars did not mind that sort of thing as bad publicity was still good publicity as long as it kept their name in the news. I had to ask Elizabeth if this was true in her case.

"No, it can really hurt" she replied. She went on to tell us how in one story the cover headline announced "Elizabeth Taylor is slowly killing her mother." As it turned out the story was about how her mom worried about her daughter's health and travels. Elizabeth went on to relate that in the United Kingdom you could not get away with such stories. She had sued successfully 15 times, winning each. "I did not need or want the money" she confided. "I just wanted a retraction. That is not possible in the United States."

These kind of distortions about Elizabeth were not just prevalent in magazines. Books have done the same thing. There is a biography of Elizabeth Taylor by an author known for penning page turners about celebrities with as much dirt as possible. In one story she described an argument between Elizabeth and John during a political gathering locally here in the Roanoke Valley. One that had her storming off and not returning. We were there with other friends and no such thing happened.

Now I am a strong supporter of the First Amendment and the idea of freedom of speech. I also know I do not have the right to go into a theater showing a film and shout "FIRE" if there is no fire. I could be rightfully arrested for that because of the possible danger to public safety.

Today we see people in the liberal media distributing fake news with every opportunity they can find. They have done every thing they possibly can to see the presidency of Donald Trump fail. The Michael Wolff book makes a case that every one around the president, including family, think he is not competent and not smart. He is fair game for such fake news. People with common sense know that a man who was an honor student in college, became a billionaire, was a success on TV and able to get elected president is no small potatoes. The success with our economy alone should erase such ideas.

Of course not being a born politician Donald Trump believes in fighting back and he makes ample use of Twitter for this. This is also not news as when Ronald Reagan was president his competence and ability to lead was often called into question. Speaker of the House Tip O'Neil labeled President Ragean as an "amiable dunce." Reagan made ample use of television to go over the heads of congressional critics and the media. In this digital age Donald Trump is only doing what many wish they could do to protect themselves.

While our president can protect himself, you have to wonder about so many others in government, business. the entertainment world and elsewhere who have found untrue criticism in the media too much to handle. The definition of what people are not exempt from untrue news keeps broadening. This sort of thing is even happening on college campuses where conservative teachers have found themselves under attack by student publications using the First Amendment as their defense even when not telling the truth.

There is no easy answer here and we can only wish that someday common sense will find a solution to protect us all from such attacks.

Dr. Fred Eichelman is a retired teacher and a director for Point North Outreach, a Christian media organization. He recently had a book published, Faith, Family, Film-A Teacher's Trek. Fred is a former local Republican Committee chairman and has attended hundreds of conventions from political to science fiction. He sees the two as compatible. Fred also tells us he values very much a title we gave him since he could not be a PolitiChick. PolitiDude.

[Jan 22, 2018] Gowdy Steve Bannon's Testimony Presented Personal 'Credibility Issue'

Notable quotes:
"... House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said that after lengthy closed-door testimony by two former top Trump aides, he found that one of the men appears to have a "credibility" problem. ..."
"... But, he said that Bannon's testimony was more eventful. Gowdy said that at one point, Bannon attempted to dodge questions by exercising a privilege that does not exist. "That was his slip-up," Gowdy said. "He got this notion that 'hey, I'm going to create a privilege that no one's ever heard of before that doesn't exist in the law." Gowdy said the only "dangerous" issue for President Donald Trump is if "credible evidence" is presented. ..."
"... He said Bannon's credibility has taken a hit, since he once said there was no chance the Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. did not meet Trump Sr. ..."
"... But, after he was fired, Bannon reportedly told author Michael Wolff that there was no chance the meeting hadn't occurred. ..."
"... "This is the same witness that said that members of the president's family committed acts of treason. So, he's got a credibility issue," Gowdy said. "If they're hinging the entire case on Steve Bannon's credibility, good luck to the prosecution." ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | Fox News Insider

As seen on The Story with Martha MacCallum

House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said that after lengthy closed-door testimony by two former top Trump aides, he found that one of the men appears to have a "credibility" problem.

Former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and former White House adviser Steve Bannon spent several hours testifying before Gowdy's committee Tuesday.

Gowdy said Lewandowski wanted to answer every question posed to him, but that his lawyers advised him against answering those regarding his work after he left the campaign. "That [onus is] on the lawyer, not the witness. Corey is going to come back and answer every question anyone has," Gowdy said.

But, he said that Bannon's testimony was more eventful. Gowdy said that at one point, Bannon attempted to dodge questions by exercising a privilege that does not exist. "That was his slip-up," Gowdy said. "He got this notion that 'hey, I'm going to create a privilege that no one's ever heard of before that doesn't exist in the law." Gowdy said the only "dangerous" issue for President Donald Trump is if "credible evidence" is presented.

He said Bannon's credibility has taken a hit, since he once said there was no chance the Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. did not meet Trump Sr.

But, after he was fired, Bannon reportedly told author Michael Wolff that there was no chance the meeting hadn't occurred.

"This is the same witness that said that members of the president's family committed acts of treason. So, he's got a credibility issue," Gowdy said. "If they're hinging the entire case on Steve Bannon's credibility, good luck to the prosecution."

Watch more above.

[Jan 22, 2018] Michael Wolff's 'Fire and Fury' to Become TV Series (Exclusive) by Lesley Goldberg, Andy Lewis

Notable quotes:
"... Endeavor Content -- the financing and sales arm formed in October between sister companies William Morris Endeavor and IMG -- has purchased film and television rights to the No. 1 best-selling book. The massive deal is said to be in the seven-figure range. ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | www.hollywoodreporter.com

Michael Wolff's controversial Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House is coming to television.

Endeavor Content -- the financing and sales arm formed in October between sister companies William Morris Endeavor and IMG -- has purchased film and television rights to the No. 1 best-selling book. The massive deal is said to be in the seven-figure range. Endeavor Content plans to adapt the book as a TV series. A network is not yet attached, as Endeavor will now begin shopping the project.

Wolff will executive produce the series, with veteran Channel 4 and BBC executive Michael Jackson -- now CEO of indie producer Two Cities Television -- also on board to produce.

[Jan 22, 2018] How Michael Wolff duped the White House into giving him access to Trump's aides by Allahpundit

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... According to Bloomberg , Wolff didn't even initiate this project. It fell into his lap when Trump dialed him up out of the blue to compliment him on a CNN appearance in which Wolff bashed the media's coverage of the president. So susceptible is POTUS to flattery and so eager is he to satisfy his eternal grudge with the press that a little bit of cheerleading from Wolff was all it took for him to place his trust, essentially blindly, in a far more devious reporter than the ones he's always complaining about. ..."
"... CNN drives him nuts so he turned to Michael farking Wolff, of all people, to try to balance the scales. The irony is as thick and dense as the brain matter of White House deputies who went along. ..."
"... In fact, for the first six months of Trump's presidency no one in his White House -- including then-Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and then-Press Secretary Sean Spicer -- stopped Wolff from repeatedly scheduling appointments in the West Wing. He visited about 17 times, according to a person familiar with the matter. Nor did they monitor what Trump's aides were telling the controversial author ..."
"... [An] Obama aide said his communications team kept strict tabs on authors' work -- micromanaging access to the White House, assigning press aides to mind the authors during interviews or asking staff for summaries afterward, closely tracking lines of questioning and making sure writers were escorted off the grounds after their appointments. ..."
"... Some of Bloomberg's sources claim that Kellyanne Conway gave him access more than once and appears to have spoken with him at some length. Conway's a longtime political player. What's her excuse for not knowing Wolff's reputation and intervening to protect Trump from him? ..."
"... Dubke left the job in late May but Trump's fateful phone call to Wolff allegedly happened in early February 2017, with Wolff conducting interviews at the White House not long afterward. Dubke's a right-wing media-relations pro of longstanding. He didn't speak up about Wolff either? ..."
"... In the end, though, it all falls on Hope Hicks, who was Trump's informal communications director before being formally appointed to the job in September at the tender age of 29 after Dubke quit. Although she had no leadership role in the West Wing until the fall, she's an old-school Trump deputy who was with him before the campaign. She's either the unofficial head of the Praetorian Guard or she's a very high-ranking member. Where the hell was she when Wolff came knocking? Did she do any due diligence as to whether he could be trusted to write the sort of book he was proposing to write? If so, how did she miss the high-profile critiques of his methods in magazines like Brill's Content and The New Republic ? It's tempting to accuse Hicks of being too young or simply out of her depth to do her job effectively for Trump -- but then how do you explain the apparent negligence on Conway's and Dubke's parts, too? ..."
"... Wolff's going to end up filthy rich from all this, and not just from book royalties. "Fire & Fury" will soon be a TV show (although, more likely, a TV miniseries) with Wolff himself as executive producer. And given the propensity of Trump staffers to leak, he's probably already hard at work on "Fire & Fury 2: More Fiery, More Furious." Congrats to Hope and everyone else for sharpening a knife and handing it to Wolff before allowing him to stab their boss repeatedly with it. Exit question via a million different people: Isn't there already a "Fire & Fury" TV show on cable news every day? ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | hotair.com

... According to Bloomberg , Wolff didn't even initiate this project. It fell into his lap when Trump dialed him up out of the blue to compliment him on a CNN appearance in which Wolff bashed the media's coverage of the president. So susceptible is POTUS to flattery and so eager is he to satisfy his eternal grudge with the press that a little bit of cheerleading from Wolff was all it took for him to place his trust, essentially blindly, in a far more devious reporter than the ones he's always complaining about.

... ... ...

[Jan 22, 2018] Michael Wolff discusses Fire and Fury

British interviewer is heads above US MSM interviewers. He also approach Wolff with kid gloves, but he pins a couple of time his ego ;-)
Of cause BBC is a neoliberal swap and they interviewed Wolff half-dozen times :-)
In his BBC interview and this interview Wolff clearly state that Trump is not fit for the office "mentally unfit for office" ;-). Here Wolff also claims is Trump is like a child.
Also on the question of allegation of "collision with Russia" Wolff state that "emperor has no clothes" while in reality it is Wolff who has no cloth doing this hatcet job without verification of even basic facts. He also pushed Bannon under the bas.
When confronted with that fact that Bannon challenged of Wolff claims, he just start blabbing.
The interviewer suggested that this book is a fascinating gossip taken at the heat of the moment, that this is one dimensional book.
Jan 06, 2018 | bbc.co.uk

Michael Wolff discusses his book Fire and Fury, about US President Donald Trump's first nine months in office, with Nick Robinson. Mr Trump has accused the author of making up stories and has called him a "total loser".

[Jan 22, 2018] EPIC: CNN Host GOES OFF On Anti-Trump Michael Wolff for what he did on Live Tv

Highly recommended!
Nice exposure of duplicitous character Wolff "I certainly said whatever necessary to get the story"
Key question: Did you misrepresent yourself trying to get access to Trump. "I like the person" "I want to humanize the president" "You know that I like him" "Nobody is doing it" "I might be able to change perceptions"
Another interesting question: "Where all those pledges accurate when you made them? " Why you present yourself as a beacon to combat bias against the President.
Jan 21, 2018 | www.youtube.com
Tom S., 3 days ago
Mainstream media turned into political party! Mainstream media professional liars are political assassins for the worst people on this planet. Mainstream media is a political apparatus which is bought and paid off by champagne-socialists, thieves set-up-entirely to serves rich and powerful to extract from small and weak. Mainstream media professional liars will continue to support political scum and their style of cronyism and rampant corruption that is stunting the country's development.

Mainstream media will make sure to siphon off large chunks of targeted electoral subsidies and Lobbying cash which will enable them to preserve their fancy cars, apartments and privileged status as American people suffer!

JD Mott, 1 week ago
Like everything the Left thinks is Nirvana this too is turning against them. Wolfe is well known for injecting fiction into his recollection.

[Jan 22, 2018] CNN's Brian Stelter owned by Michael Wolff: No disrespect, you border on being a ridiculous figure

Notable quotes:
"... CNN, Michael Wolff -- Reliable Sources. HaHaHaHaHaHa! ..."
Feb 01, 2017 | www.youtube.com

Daniel Stetson

CNN, Michael Wolff -- Reliable Sources. HaHaHaHaHaHa! 

Daniel Jansen, 1 month ago
The media is totally ignorant of real issues that matter to the American people they are so involved in defending their own opinions that they have forgotten their purpose of keeping the public informed of what's happening they have taken it upon them self to defend the Democrats and their corrupt world order agenda
Keith M, 2 weeks ago

Media=fake news

 Official Jayo, 1 week ago

Pot meet kettle. I now believe Wolff knew exactly what he was doing with the fake book. He knew the media would eat it up and he could ride off into the sunset with one last big payday.

Frankie Dog Turner, 1 week ago

CNN is just very fake news. Brian Stelter is a ridiculous figure and so if Wolfe. Like Uncle Fester and Mini-Me two pitiful idiots on stage together..

Raymond Armatino, 1 week ago

This was staged. Its there to make Wolf seem like he is telling truth in his book and I dont buy it for many reasons.

[Jan 21, 2018] Mifsud Offering Alu Tubes to Papadopoulos?

Looks like another false flag operation , now with the participation of Italian intelligence services.
Notable quotes:
"... Appears Prof. Mifsud of Maltese descent has close links to former Italian Minister of the Interior Vincenzo Scotti and the Italian Intelligence Agency. See more information from the Link Campus based in Rome. With links to a corrupt Saudi Prince, getting some sense now of a covert operation or a piggy-back Mossad act with knowledge of Intelligence gained from Five Eyes raw data ... ..."
"... "We are very excited to be partnering with the Link Campus Foundation to fund and enable important scholarship that looks to build bridges of mediation in conflict regions around the world," ..."
"... "We have respected the work of Link Campus for some time. The Centre hopes to play an important role in contributing to its efforts toward creating peace and good governance by strengthening the ability of researchers, media, and civil society to speak out and be informed on vital contemporary issues." ..."
"... "The Centre will take a very pragmatic approach to helping bring smarter and more relevant thinking to the area of conflict mediation." ..."
"... "Offering this research platform for experts is EDOF's way of trying to support those who are doing the heavy thinking as to how we can bring resolution to some of the more intractable conflicts in our world." ..."
"... Prince Turki Al Faisal said the evidence, disclosed by the United States late, was "overwhelming" and "clearly shows official Iranian responsibility". "Somebody in Iran will have to pay the price," said Prince Turki , who also served as his country's envoy to Britain and the US. ..."
"... ... Prince Turki al-Faisal , the chairman of the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies, is a former director of Saudi Arabia's intelligence services and ambassador to the United States. ..."
Jan 21, 2018 | www.boomantribune.com

Appears Prof. Mifsud of Maltese descent has close links to former Italian Minister of the Interior Vincenzo Scotti and the Italian Intelligence Agency. See more information from the Link Campus based in Rome. With links to a corrupt Saudi Prince, getting some sense now of a covert operation or a piggy-back Mossad act with knowledge of Intelligence gained from Five Eyes raw data ...

[The Maltese government send a warning to Colonel Gaddafi when the F-111 fighter bombers were en route to Libya in the 1980s.]

Partenariats of EDOF

EDOF & the Link Campus Foundation
Establishing the Essam & Dalal Obaid Foundation Centre for War and Peace Studies at Link Campus University in Rome.

The EDOF Centre will work closely with the various interdisciplinary academic departments at the Link Campus University as well as with international governments and organizations in order to support experts, academics, researchers, diplomats, governments, and civil society activists in their attempts to help countries in conflict, crisis and transition around the world. The Partnership Agreement was signed in Rome on May 8, 2017.

"We are very excited to be partnering with the Link Campus Foundation to fund and enable important scholarship that looks to build bridges of mediation in conflict regions around the world," said EDOF's CEO, Dr. Nawaf Obaid . "We have respected the work of Link Campus for some time. The Centre hopes to play an important role in contributing to its efforts toward creating peace and good governance by strengthening the ability of researchers, media, and civil society to speak out and be informed on vital contemporary issues."

Professor Joseph Mefsud will be appointed the Founding Director of the Centre for a period of three years. Scholarships and bursaries will be allocated in the field of War and Peace studies. The Centre will also hold international seminars and conferences, produce research publications, and appoint Senior Fellows in the field of War and Peace studies.

According to Tarek Obaid ( 1 ), Founder of EDOF, "The Centre will take a very pragmatic approach to helping bring smarter and more relevant thinking to the area of conflict mediation." It will achieve this by having three areas of concentration: training, mentoring, and providing platforms for professional and expert seminars; building up the capacity of institutions and civic groups; and working with independent and official partners to remove barriers to free expression, robust public debate and open citizen engagement. "Offering this research platform for experts is EDOF's way of trying to support those who are doing the heavy thinking as to how we can bring resolution to some of the more intractable conflicts in our world."

[( 1 ) Source: Sarawak Report ]

Belfer Center - Nawaf Obaid Biography

Nawaf Obaid is the Visiting Fellow for Intelligence & Defense Projects at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. He is also a weekly columnist for the pan-Arab daily, Al Hayat Newspaper.

He is currently the CEO of the Essam and Dalal Obaid Foundation (EDOF).

From 2004 to 2007, he was Special Advisor for Strategic Communications to Prince Turki Al Faisal , while Prince Turki was the Saudi Ambassador to the United Kingdom & Ireland, and then the United States. And from 2007 to 2011, he worked with the Saudi Royal Court, where he was seconded as a Special Advisor to the Saudi Information Minister. Most recently, he served as the Special Counselor to the Saudi Ambassador to the United Kingdom from 2011 to 2015.

Joseph Mifsud: Brexit: stepping off a cliff or indipendence day?

Il 20 marzo alle ore 10:30 presso l'Università degli Studi Link Campus University, si è tenuto il convegno "Brexit: stepping off a cliff or indipendence day?"

Il convegno determina il primo atto di una collaborazione italo-britannica post Brexit, ed è stato organizzato in occasione della firma del Protocollo d'intesa tra l'Università degli Studi Link Campus University e la London School of Economics and Political Science, tenutasi lo stesso giorno nella sede dell'università romana.

Sono intervenuti: Franco Frattini - Presidente del Corso in Studi Strategici e Scienze Diplomatiche e Presidente della SIOI, Vincenzo Scotti - Presidente dell'Università degli Studi Link Campus University, Michael Cox - Direttore della LSE IDEAS e Professore di Relazioni Internazionali presso la LSE.

Link Campus University - Vincenzo Scotti, President
Portrait of a Political Leader: Vincenzo Scotti

Linked to Saudi Prince Turki Al Faisal ...

Hariri Caught In Sudairi Power Struggle - US Policy
Iranian dissident does not believe in 'Saudi ambassador' plot

Prince Turki Al Faisal said the evidence, disclosed by the United States late, was "overwhelming" and "clearly shows official Iranian responsibility". "Somebody in Iran will have to pay the price," said Prince Turki , who also served as his country's envoy to Britain and the US.

...
Prince Turki al-Faisal , the chairman of the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies, is a former director of Saudi Arabia's intelligence services and ambassador to the United States.

[Jan 21, 2018] Michael Wolff: Everyone in the liberal media is a Trump enemy

This Jul 12, 2017 interview of Wolff when he took somewhat pro-Trump stance...
Jul 12, 2017 | BBC Newsnight

Explicit statement of Wolff on FBI-contractor organized meeting in Trump tower that definitely suggests malice.

[Jan 21, 2018] Michael Wolff's Book: Trump lawyers threaten ex-aide Bannon - BBC

BBC presstitutes on meeting in Trump tower
Jan 04, 2018 | bbc.co.uk

Tony Blair disclaimed the statement of Wolff in the book

[Jan 21, 2018] The Government Shutdown Is Not Shutting Down Robert Mueller's Russia Probe

Jan 21, 2018 | www.huffingtonpost.com

The Justice Department confirmed this week that employees in Mueller's office are exempt from the shutdown and can continue their work. His office is not funded through the regular congressional appropriations process.

[Jan 20, 2018] Will Steve Bannon s Testimony Bring Down Jared by Abigail Tracy

A more interesting question is how those testimonies might affect Bannon -- he is in a very hot water now. If he thought that the meeting was so incriminating why he did not contact FBI and just decided to feed juicy gossip to Wolff?
Also he was not present at the meeting and was not a member of Trump team until two months later. From who he got all this information ? Was is just a slander by disgruntled employee?
Notable quotes:
"... To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr. ..."
"... Bannon has denied that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the election ..."
"... Wolff also quotes the former White House strategist as saying, "This is all about money laundering. [Robert] 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." ..."
"... Bannon then zeroed in on Kushner specifically, adding that "[i]t 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." ..."
Jan 16, 2018 | www.vanityfair.com

"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," Bannon is quoted as saying in Fire and Fury. "Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it's all of that, you should have called the F.B.I. immediately." Bannon reportedly speculated that the chance the eldest Trump son did not involve his father in the meeting "is zero."

When Bannon's comments became public, Trump excoriated his former strategist, whom he accused of having "lost his mind." But while Bannon has since apologized for the remarks and sought to walk back a number of the quotes, he's stopped short of denying that he viewed the Trump Tower meeting as treasonous. Instead, he's merely shifted the blame away from Trump Jr. and onto Manafort. "My comments were aimed at Paul Manafort, a seasoned campaign professional with experience and knowledge of how the Russians operate. He should have known they are duplicitous, cunning, and not our friends. To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr. ," Bannon said in a statement to Axios. ( Bannon has denied that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the election .)

... ... ...

Though the Trump Tower meeting took place before Bannon joined the Trump campaign, Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House panel, told CNN last week that he plans to question Bannon about "why this meeting at Trump Tower represented his treason and certainly unpatriotic at a minimum."

Jared Kushner's "greasy shit"

Wolff also quotes the former White House strategist as saying, "This is all about money laundering. [Robert] 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." (Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort have all denied wrongdoing.) Bannon then zeroed in on Kushner specifically, adding that "[i]t 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."

He and Trump's son-in-law have never seen eye to eye; their White House feuds were a poorly kept secret, and following his ouster, Bannon has given numerous interviews knocking Kushner, including one to my colleague Gabriel Sherman in which he questioned Kushner's maturity level. If Bannon has dirt on Kushner, he will likely get his chance to reveal it; Schiff also declared his intent to question Bannon on "the basis of his concern over money laundering."

[Jan 20, 2018] Looks like no one edited this book

Jan 20, 2018 | www.amazon.com

C on January 19, 2018

It's like no one edited this book

Badly written. It's like no one edited this book. Really makes me question the author's credibility and journalistic integrity. Doesn't cite sources, even when providing direct quotes. That's not okay.

I'm glad someone had the courage to write about the imbecile in our White House, but this kind of crappy writing that borders on tabloid-level makes our side look just as bad as "the other side".

Wolff is lucky that the Bannon controversy happened, otherwise this book wouldn't have sold more than a handful of copies.

Lisa Popolo on January 19, 2018
Amateur level writing

Gossipy and fun, but a difficult read with such poorly edited, sloppy writing. Such sentences worth only of Trump himself.

joe-maryland on January 19, 2018
Save money, watch the news, Trump nuts in either case

Kind of a waste of money. Just watch the news and read the tweets, you'll figure it out for free.
It would be more interesting if it had some notes on sources, but there is no way to determine 1st hand info, 2nd hand info, and third hand in a mirror info.

Allan on January 19, 2018
Terribly written mess

There was not much here that you didn't already know. But the writing is so terrible that it was difficult to make it to the end of a rather short piece. He repeatedly writes long paragraphs consisting of single sentences. He compulsively inserts long parenthetical expressions everywhere which breaks up the flow and requires reading and reading to try to figure out what he's saying. I would expect a best selling author to be able to construct a comprehensible sentence but he mostly fails.

MTANDIZ on January 19, 2018
#1 for the FAKE BOOKS AWARD.

1st we had FAKE NEWS, now we have FAKE BOOK. Maybe NEXT YEAR, this book will make the FAKE BOOKS AWARD.

Kathleen GAM on January 18, 2018
As much as I wanted to like this book

As much as I wanted to like this book, because I detest Trump, the only thing I can say about this book is it stinks. It's repetitive, poorly written and he could use a proofreader. There's nothing in it that we haven't all read on the internet.

[Jan 19, 2018] Interesting in a voyeuristic sense but stylistically and factually flawed

Notable quotes:
"... The media has done everything to discredit him and are always found to be false. Sure, he is obnoxious but enough already. ..."
"... Fire and fury seemed to be a compilation of the news stories about Trump that had already been worked and reworked in the written media. Other than a little embellishment it was like reruns on cable TV. You had heard the story so many times you could almost say the lines with the characters. ..."
Jan 20, 2018 | www.amazon.com
shoesarei on January 18, 2018
Interesting in a voyeuristic sense but stylistically and factually flawed.

The inaccuracies are off-putting. How credible is the rest of this book if he calls Stephen Miller Jason? I am far from being a Trump fan, but I am also far from being a Bannon fan. Wolff clearly likes Bannon and admires the daily chaos and "war footing" tactics he engendered. I would love to read a book like this but one that is edited and vetted before going to print.

Angela M. Hey VINE VOICE on January 18, 2018
Bannon's White House legacy

This chronicle of life in the White House is more about Steve Bannon and his buddies versus Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner's more liberal views. Highlights of President Trump's first nine months provide material for the book's chapters.

There are almost no good words for Trump. The reader gets tired of hearing he's confused, stupid or uninformed. The writing is tedious and relies on Yiddish and journalistic jargon to add gravitas. If you want to know more about Trump, this is not the book.

One reads about White House chaos and the book explains the political infighting that contributes to it. The communications professionals' comings and goings are explained. The chief of staff gyrations and Air Force One trip insights provide interest.

If you keep up with the news you won't learn much about Trump, but as a partial biography of Bannon this is worth reading.

adam j schlaff on January 18, 2018
Not a Trumpet but come on.

Seriously this book has been debunked by so many. I don't always agree with Trump but this is pure slander. I hope he sues and wins.

The media has done everything to discredit him and are always found to be false. Sure, he is obnoxious but enough already.

teamleade on January 18, 2018
Full of fire and fury but signifying nothing.

The hype on this book got my attention but it was a book "I could put down". Fire and fury seemed to be a compilation of the news stories about Trump that had already been worked and reworked in the written media. Other than a little embellishment it was like reruns on cable TV. You had heard the story so many times you could almost say the lines with the characters.

[Jan 19, 2018] #ReleaseTheMemo Extensive FISA abuse memo could destroy the entire Mueller Russia investigation by Alex Christoforou

Highly recommended!
Looks like Rosenstein might lose his position.
Jan 19, 2018 | theduran.com

Classified documents obtained by members of Congress reportedly show extensive FISA abuses.

André De Koning , January 19, 2018 5:16 AM

What a bombshell! Finally some truth about the "Justice system" in the US.

Following on from this should be the whole subsequent story of the DNC-Fusion-Steele dossier in detail, exposing the MSM too for what it has been worth.
Perhaps then Trump dares to go against the deep state swamp and stop wars instead of following the dictates of CIA, Israel and Military Industrialists. That would be a real POTUS PLUS result.

foxenburg , January 19, 2018 5:13 AM

I thought Trump explained all this last March when he said his campaign was wiretapped, and he called for a Congressional investigation?

"Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!"

12:35 PM - Mar 4, 2017

Rick Manigault foxenburg , January 19, 2018 6:01 AM

Trump gave in to the lie about Russian interference and the republicans who hated him went along with this hoax until recently.

louis robert , January 19, 2018 3:07 PM

""It's troubling. It is shocking," North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows said. "Part of me wishes that I didn't read it because I don't want to believe that those kinds of things could be happening in this country that I call home and love so much.""

***

Come on, child! Enough with that spectacle. Get real. Have the basic courage to know and to admit what everybody has known about your country for ages!... The entire world already knows.

Franz Kafka , January 19, 2018 11:28 AM

More proof, if any were needed, that the only threat to the people of the USA comes from their own government. The 'external threat' is a fiction calculated to enslave the US population and enrich the Oligarchy.

Gano1 , January 19, 2018 8:11 AM

The DOJ, FBI and Democrats have colluded 100%.

Franz Kafka Gano1 , January 19, 2018 11:29 AM

Why omit the US Masked [sic] Media?

Franz Kafka , January 19, 2018 11:31 AM

If the 'swamp' gets drained all at once, can the bottom fall out of the pond?

WeAreYourGods , January 19, 2018 8:14 AM

Somebody's going to leak this in short order. Let's take a real look at what both Dems and Repubs just expanded, let's look at the monster they are feeding in broad daylight.

Rick Manigault , January 19, 2018 6:00 AM

This should be the focus until there are actual convictions of high level perpetrators.

Franz Kafka , January 19, 2018 2:05 PM

Why is Hannity afraid of using the 'C' word? CONSPIRACY!

Sueja , January 19, 2018 4:57 PM

Has the House Intelligence committee's Twitter account really been shut down. How corrupt is Twitter?

[Jan 18, 2018] His great gift is the appearance of intimate access by Kyle Swenson

How you spell "hypocrisy" Mr. Wolff...
Notable quotes:
"... "a portraitist who has mastered the art of the suck-up putdown." ..."
"... "And by repeatedly reminding the reader of what a dishonest, scheming little s -- he is, he seeks to inflate his credibility." ..."
"... "hit piece (plural hit pieces) (idiomatic) a published article or post aiming to sway public opinion by presenting false or biased information in a way that appears objective and truthful." ..."
"... I've seen Wolff on television several times and he comes across very badly. He is pretty full of himself. ..."
Jan 04, 2018 | www.washingtonpost.com

Originally from: Michael Wolff's Trump book The latest in a career of controversy - The Washington Post

Wolff had taken shots in a recent Newsweek column at the media's "apoplexy" over the 45th president, specifically calling out Stelter for delivering on his show each week, in the writer's words, a "pious sermon about Trump's perfidiousness."

"I hope I pronounced that right," Stelter joked for a gawky transition. "Do you feel my style is wrong or my substance is wrong, trying to fact check the president?"

Wolff, snazzy in a dandy banker's navy suit, pocket square, and trademark thick framed glasses, didn't flinch. "I mean this with truly no disrespect, but I think you can border on being quite a ridiculous figure," he told the host. "It's not a good look to repeatedly and self-righteously defend your own self-interest. The media should not be the story."

The television moment -- an acerbic jab at a media heavyweight on his own show -- was classic Wolff. But it was also a bit of foreshadowing. Nearly a year later, Michael Wolff himself is very much the story this week.

...He has also, as The Washington Post's Paul Farhi wrote on Wednesday, been accused by critics of "pushing the facts as far as they'll go, and sometimes further than they can tolerate."

...Critics have blasted the writer in the past for filling his column inches with insight and imaginative recreation rather than actual reporting.

..."His great gift is the appearance of intimate access," an editor told Cottle in 2004. "He is adroit at making the reader think that he has spent hours and days with his subject, when in fact he may have spent no time at all." Another former colleague said: "He did get a lot of things majorly wrong, but he never was just pedestrian . . . You have to admire his balls."

Chicken and tuna sandwich 1 week ago Why would you even mention Jones? He is in no way a legitimate source for anything, not even the entertainment he has admitted in court he engages in. That's like referencing Manson for midwifery. "a portraitist who has mastered the art of the suck-up putdown." "And by repeatedly reminding the reader of what a dishonest, scheming little s -- he is, he seeks to inflate his credibility."

Two of the best lines I've read in a while. I haven't read his books but I like what I'm hearing about this one. Now the real question is not whether or not it is true, it's how will Trump spin this into a whirlwind he can reap unearned profits from?

the cavalier, 1 week ago

Sounds like the perfect supercilious self absorbed twit to cover a supercilious self absorbed twit.

crown scientist, 1 week ago

Based on what I've as yet read in the excerpts published by NewYork Magazine I would suggest Michael Wolff has introduced our distressed democracy to alt-journalism, the Access Hollywoodification of presenedtial history. What drips with irony is that the Stupid Orange Clown essentially fathered this freak of literature.

b everdene 1 week ago

You can see what happened here. Wolff set the stage for gaining Trump's trust (and access) by publically criticizing Trump critics, but then he turned the tables on Trump and wrote an unflattering profile. How fun.

Call it Presidential Pornology.

scchan.2009, 1 week ago

So if I understood what Wolff does: if you - assuming you are famous enough - give Wolff a chance or a hole to write BS about you, he will do it.

The thing about many similar "journalism", the tall tales are not even remotely unbelievable. It is totally consistent with the character even if it is false. It is playing the anti-hero of the Daily Mail or NY Post. People enjoy reading gossip, be that be rubbish on Fox News or BS come out from Wolff's or Stephen Colbert's mouth.

For now, have a good laugh without suspension of belief!

Greatful Deadline , 1 week ago

"hit piece (plural hit pieces) (idiomatic) a published article or post aiming to sway public opinion by presenting false or biased information in a way that appears objective and truthful." https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hit_piece

In other words, if it's true (as in "he has tapes"), then it's NOT a "hit piece."

jim380691910 , 1 week ago

I've seen Wolff on television several times and he comes across very badly. He is pretty full of himself. Trump and Wolff, two unlikeable people, truly deserve each other. I'm so disgusted with Trump that I'm fine with anyone flushing him down the toilet.

mr.natural, 1 week ago
"But Wolff has also been taken to task for blurring the lines between hot take and hatchet job. "Wolff exploits the human tendency to confuse frankness and cruelty with truth-telling," media critic Jack Shafer wrote in Slate in 1998. "And by repeatedly reminding the reader of what a dishonest, scheming little s -- he is, he seeks to inflate his credibility.""

This book will be a must read for all those who need to have their biases reinforced, to be reminded that they are better than the rest, that anyone not agreeing with them is indeed a knuckle dragging Troglodyte.

[Jan 17, 2018] Mediocre book

Notable quotes:
"... A journalist friend recently observed that good journalism leaves you understanding something you never even thought you cared about. This book did the opposite - left me pretty much not caring about something I was really curious about. I found the transcript of Glenn Simpson's testimony at the Senate hearings on the Steele dossier more riveting ..."
"... Wolff had an opportunity to put this disaster in writing -- a writing that any serious observer would want to add to their "reference" library. Wolff failed -- poor editing, overuse of a thesaurus, convoluted sentence structure and frequently leaving the reader wondering if statements made are Wolff's opinions or simply his ideas of what were thoughts of a person or group he has written about. There are some interesting bits in this book but it took work getting through Wolff's poor writing to get to the bits. ..."
"... unless you've been reclusive over the past several weeks, you know about most of the juicy bits. ..."
"... If you're thinking of reading a book, why not try something about a president of accomplishment Lincoln, (there's an entire that lists books about Lincoln)Teddy Roosevelt ( David McCullough's "Morning on Horseback is fantastic and Edmund Morris' trilogy about Roosevelt is not to be missed), Franklin Roosevelt? (Again there's a shelf full of books: I'm partial to Doris Kearns Goodwin's "No Ordinary Time" and Geoffrey C Ward's "Before the Trumpets" and "A First Class Temperament." If you want to read about a shady president try John Farrell's "Richard Nixon: A Life." Nixon is a whole lot more interesting than Trump. ..."
"... Disappointed. Full of innuendo and gossip. Editors should be flogged for all the errors they let by. Also someone needs to tell the author that he doesn't need to use ten dollar words to try and make the book seem credible. ..."
"... After the best parts were revealed in the media, the rest of the book reads as a dry attempt at juicy gossip. ..."
"... I'd like to read a more straight forward plain speaking account with sources to set the record straight. Guess we'll get this from Bannon's testimony quite soon! ..."
Jan 20, 2018 | www.amazon.com

Uppsala on January 17, 2018

Mediocre book about a crappy president.

To begin with, I was very irritated by all the editing mistakes that appeared in the Kindle edition. Writers lose some credibility when their "finished" product is riddled with grammatical errors. This book is just not well-written. At first the account was galvanizing, especially seeing in print one of Trump's speeches--which I would assign a D-minus at best. Incoherent, highly repetitive writing (or in this case Trump's speaking) indicates incoherent thinking; the president does not argue, he asserts. He has anecdotes but no evidence. Facts are clearly anathema to him; logic escapes him. But all this is really no surprise because he has shown himself over and over to be a vain, emotionally needy idiot, who is a compulsive liar being propped up by immoral toadies (in his staff and in congress). That said, after the first 90 or so pages, I became really bored. And why not? Trump (the subject of the book, after all) has nothing to say. He has no plans to solve the country's many problems and seems dangerously susceptible to repeating what the last person he talked to said.

James Garrett on January 17, 2018
Gossip

See the subject line. This book is TMZ material. If you like it, go for it. It is going for s laugh. However, you would be better off reading the summaries online.

David on January 17, 2018
Unsettling and not a lot of new information

I pre-ordered this book primarily because Trump was opposed vehemently to its publication. (The same reason, years ago, that I saw "The Last Temptation of Christ." Local religious extremists were picketing the theater.)

I cannot say that reading the book was enjoyable. It reflects the troubling times we are in now and the likelihood of difficult times ahead. And I am asked to trust this author regarding the details. It would be easier for me if Wolff had been a journalist with the discipline imposed by a news editor. As it is, the quotes and attributions stand as gossip (though I am inclined to believe most or all of them, since they appear to fit logically with information already public).

The broad brush (e.g., "All of the senior staff...") may be true, but could a careful investigator not find a true believer among them? I am certain that I could not work in this administration, but there must be one who is as devoted to Trump as I have been to other elected officials for whom I have worked.

Did I learn anything? Some details, perhaps, but not the big picture. I had known that this president is a dangerously ignorant narcissist from his public statements. Is his public persona (a childish, insecure man who holds grudges, lashes out at real or perceived opposition, and evidences no maturity) likely to be similar to his behavior in the White House? It seems probable.

complexanimal on January 17, 2018
A Tabloid-esque Exposé Befitting our Time

This is a poorly sourced, hearsay laden book that would get ripped to shreds and given a C- if presented as a final project in any top 500 journalism graduate school in the country. However, I very much doubt the author intended it to adhere to The Rulebook of Journalistic Ethics and Integrity. In short, it revels in being a salacious story about gossip and innuendo -- fitting quite well in our age of social media, aggregated and questionable sources, and our own attention span lacking president. In effect, it reads like an extremely long, multi-part post in Reddit's /r/bestof section.

Regarding the "truthiness" and authenticity of the facts that lies within: yeah, I generally believe most of it is probably true. There is not much secrecy in the bumbling ineptitude of the Trump administration and the in-fighting that is hidden in plain sight. Rake stepping seems a constant favorite past time of our Dear Leader and his cohorts. Bear in mind, 'Fire and Fury' seems clearly on the side of Bannon, so I would certainly take any of his character opinions -- particularly, of those he clearly despises (Jarvanka) -- with a boulder sized grain of salt. Also, there are some factual errors that are troubling to say the least. For example, Wolff suggests that Trump's father was definitely a member of the KKK. From my cursory research on the topic, this claim seems circumstantial at best. There are also errors in poll numbers sprinkled throughout the text.

Should you read it? Perhaps, but don't expect anything terribly enlightening. If you're like me: a mainstream liberal who reads the failing New York Times and the Bezos Washington Post, I doubt any of this will be much of a surprise to you. What the book mainly does is sum up the top 50 forehead slapping headlines of this disastrous presidency in the past year, so if you've been paying attention, you've already read a version of this. I suppose it is useful to have a story arc within a single book that covers the first year of the Trump presidency. Had it been better written, properly sourced, and factually correct, it might have really been something.

Plimoth Rock on January 17, 2018
Sound and fury signifying nothing.

This work to me seemed like more than a timeline of events covering the period within which Wolff had been given West Wing access. That the timeline was extruded with often sourceless hearsay makes it a bedfellow with a 14 year old's diary. I learned little that was new, except for the seedier alleged "conversations" with the major and minor players. Reading it made me depressed with the realization that the majority party and its henchmen in DC right now wouldn't know the truth or respect it if it pushed them down the stairs.

Philly Lawyer on January 17, 2018
Disappointing

I am mad that I rushed to buy this book because of the hype and my intense dislike of Trump. A journalist friend recently observed that good journalism leaves you understanding something you never even thought you cared about. This book did the opposite - left me pretty much not caring about something I was really curious about. I found the transcript of Glenn Simpson's testimony at the Senate hearings on the Steele dossier more riveting .

Do yourselves and favor and read that, or read the March 2017 New Yorker piece on Robert Mercer, or any of the many excellent pieces on Trump and his administration in the New York Times or Washington Post. I gave the book 3 stars anyway because - well - it is a only book about the dysfunctional Trump White House.

Cou on January 17, 2018
Important story poorly told

The history of Trump's first year in office has been followed by most Americans who have any level of interest in politics. Wolff had an opportunity to put this disaster in writing -- a writing that any serious observer would want to add to their "reference" library. Wolff failed -- poor editing, overuse of a thesaurus, convoluted sentence structure and frequently leaving the reader wondering if statements made are Wolff's opinions or simply his ideas of what were thoughts of a person or group he has written about. There are some interesting bits in this book but it took work getting through Wolff's poor writing to get to the bits.

Stephanie Patterson on January 17, 2018
Donald Trump is a bore

Donald Trump is a bore.

This book is very readable though unless you've been reclusive over the past several weeks, you know about most of the juicy bits.

On Sunday, the historian Niall Ferguson, was the interviewee in the "By the Book" feature in the New York Times Book Review. He was asked the standard question for this interview: "If you could require the American president to read one book, what would it be? And the prime minister? His answer was priceless: "I agree with you that it would be wonderful if both Mr. Trump and Mrs May read one book. I don't much mind which one it is."

If you're thinking of reading a book, why not try something about a president of accomplishment Lincoln, (there's an entire that lists books about Lincoln)Teddy Roosevelt ( David McCullough's "Morning on Horseback is fantastic and Edmund Morris' trilogy about Roosevelt is not to be missed), Franklin Roosevelt? (Again there's a shelf full of books: I'm partial to Doris Kearns Goodwin's "No Ordinary Time" and Geoffrey C Ward's "Before the Trumpets" and "A First Class Temperament." If you want to read about a shady president try John Farrell's "Richard Nixon: A Life." Nixon is a whole lot more interesting than Trump.

You already know more about Trump than he knows or realizes about himself. Skip this and read about a real president.

Becca on January 17, 2018
Disappointed. Full of innuendo and gossip

Disappointed. Full of innuendo and gossip. Editors should be flogged for all the errors they let by. Also someone needs to tell the author that he doesn't need to use ten dollar words to try and make the book seem credible.

Ricksterf on January 17, 2018
Poorly Written Book

I teetered between 2 and 3 stars, which means I'm somewhere between "don't like the book" and "it's okay. Here's why. The book was poorly written. Mechanically, there were way too many breaks (commas everywhere) throughout the flow of reading. Combine this with there were too many sophisticated words throughout the whole book, and there were typos and grammatical errors along with that. All these things distracted my attention away from what Mr. Wolff was trying to convey. I ultimately lose interest thus stopped reading the book.

To Mr. Wolff: If a reader is spending more time looking up the meaning of words or is constantly re-orientating because there are so many parenthetical notations, they will probably lose interest. I'm sure the material that surrounds the disaster our country is in right now is quite complicated. The task of explaining all this should not involve additional layers of confusion and arcane language.

Johanna Moscoso on January 17, 2018
All the best parts were publicized.

After the best parts were revealed in the media, the rest of the book reads as a dry attempt at juicy gossip.

John Crossland on January 17, 2018
Illuminating reading but a bit pompously worded for a wide audience

I learnt a lot about the nuttiness with the staff and the family, but I was glad I got the Kindle edition to look up some fairly obscure wording with the built in dictionary. I'd like to read a more straight forward plain speaking account with sources to set the record straight. Guess we'll get this from Bannon's testimony quite soon!

[Jan 17, 2018] Is There Life After Liberalism

Notable quotes:
"... As exciting as the 1930s ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

Fourteen months ago, in the first flush of power, Steve Bannon gave an interview to Michael Wolff -- beginning a relationship that would prove his undoing -- in which he boasted about his plan to realign our politics. His nationalist-populist movement, he argued, would transform the G.O.P. into something truly new: a right-wing worker's party that spent freely, "jacked up" infrastructure all over the country, and won "60 percent of the white vote" and "40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote" on its way to a 50-year majority.

"We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks," Bannon said. "It will be as exciting as the 1930s."

As exciting as the 1930s is not a line you hear every day, but rather than an alt-right dog whistle, what I heard in Bannon's formulation was the idea that in the Trump era, as in the crisis years that gave us both F.D.R. and Hitler, everything might be up for grabs: not just electoral coalitions, but the nature and destiny of the liberal order. Which would be a terrifying prospect but also an exciting one, since it would mean that the long "end of history" that followed the Cold War had irrevocably ended, and that it was time to imagine radical revisions to a stagnant-seeming liberal West.

Flash forward a year and a couple months, though, and Bannon's vision seems pretty much dead: its rumpled leader sacked and ritually denounced, its bold populism subsumed into the same old, same old Republican agenda. Trump remains temperamentally authoritarian and personally vile, but the idea of Trump_vs_deep_state as an ideological revolution, whether akin to Roosevelt's or Mussolini's, has mostly evaporated.

Recent Comments

Candlewick 2 days ago

No. There isn't *life* after liberalism; just a bunch of dead men (GOP) wondering the earth with black hooded robes and scythes.

SP 2 days ago

It does not matter what we call these philosophies, whether Liberalism, Capitalism, Libertarianism etc. Good, ethical moral, wise,...

Michael Kubara 2 days ago

This suffers from the journalist disease-- "ism-ism": castigating "liberalism" without defining it." the crisis years that gave us both F.D...

[Jan 17, 2018] Inside the link between the Russian lawyer who met Donald Trump Jr. and the Trump dossier

Jan 17, 2018 | www.washingtonpost.com

Emails released Tuesday by Trump Jr. reveal that his friend Rob Goldstone pitched the meeting based on the promise of damning information on Hillary Clinton that supposedly was being offered by senior Russian government officials. On Monday, Mark Corallo , a spokesman for President Trump's outside counsel, alleged that the meeting had been set up under false pretenses and implied that Veselnitskaya's association with Fusion GPS was relevant to the alleged deception.

[Jan 17, 2018] Journalist Bannon's 'Treason' Charge Against Trump, Jr. 'Is Ridiculous'

Notable quotes:
"... "Bannon is gone, but he's now become fodder for the book by Michael Wolff which is now being mined by both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee. We don't know what Bannon told the intelligence committee, since it was behind closed doors. But the New York Times, who broke the story, speculate that the subpoena is a way to get Bannon to agree to an interview rather than stand before the grand jury." ..."
"... Lauria also discussed Wolff's "Fire and Fury," which paints a highly negative image of the first year of the Trump White House -- including a quote from Bannon describing Donald Trump, Jr. and former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort as "treasonous." ..."
"... The conversation then turned to the specifics of Bannon's claim of treason, the meeting between Manafort, Trump, Jr. and several Russian lobbyists in Trump Tower, and its connection with the famous "dodgy dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele. ..."
"... "The difference is that intelligence reports are vetted by the intelligence agent and then by his superiors and usually by other agencies in his country's intelligence community. It's also a taxpayer-funded operation, supposedly to protect society, although that's not always what intelligence agencies do. Opposition research is a completely different thing: getting dirt on a political opponent, which is what Steele did," Lauria explained. ..."
"... "The idea that Trump, Jr. had gotten this opposition research from the Russian government, as apparently Bannon said, is completely incorrect because there was no one from the Russian government, there was a former KGB agent. The lawyer was not a member of the government and no dirt was ever turned over. [There's] only been one campaign that received opposition research from foreigners during the 2016 campaign: the Clinton campaign that paid for it via a British former intelligence agent and his supposed Russian sources. But foreign opposition research [has] never been established as a crime." ..."
Jan 17, 2018 | sputniknews.com

Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon has been subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury, supposedly on alleged ties between the presidential campaign of Donald Trump and Russian actors. Brian Becker on Radio Sputnik's Loud & Clear was joined by Joe Lauria, a veteran journalist who has also worked for major newspapers in four countries, perhaps most notably as the Wall Street Journal's correspondent to the United Nations.

​"Mr. Bannon has fallen and I think he was the ideological force behind Trump, particularly in relations with Russia," said Lauria. "It's interesting to know why did Trump call for detente, and still seems to be pursuing detente, with Russia. Many people who believe in Russiagate believe it's because he's somehow beholden to them or has been blackmailed or whatever. But professor Jeffrey Summers with the University of Wisconsin wrote an interesting piece where he said Bannon was the one who had impressed upon Trump that he should improve relations with Russia so they can team up against Islamic extremism."

"Bannon is gone, but he's now become fodder for the book by Michael Wolff which is now being mined by both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee. We don't know what Bannon told the intelligence committee, since it was behind closed doors. But the New York Times, who broke the story, speculate that the subpoena is a way to get Bannon to agree to an interview rather than stand before the grand jury."

© REUTERS/ Carlos Barria 'Fit For Duty': White House Physician Sees No Concerns About Trump's Health

Lauria also discussed Wolff's "Fire and Fury," which paints a highly negative image of the first year of the Trump White House -- including a quote from Bannon describing Donald Trump, Jr. and former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort as "treasonous."

"If you read the key quote in that book, the House Intelligence Committee wants to question him about an allegation against Paul Manafort and Donald Trump, Jr. for treason. I find this very curious. If Bannon wanted Trump to have better relations with Russia, it's curious that he would roll out an accusation of treason. He's far from the only one to bring the charge against Trump in this entire Russiagate fiasco, but if you look at treason, it's the only crime defined in the US Constitution. It says clearly treason against the US consists only of assisting an enemy of the US in a state of open hostility with us."

© REUTERS/ Jonathan Ernst Trump Jr.: Bannon Turned His White House Career Opportunity Into Nightmare

"Russia is not in open hostilities with the United States, no one would argue that. The idea that Trump, Jr. has committed treason is ridiculous. I don't know why Bannon used [the term]. Clearly he was angry at Trump for being fired, I don't know if he was begging for his job back as Trump tweeted," Lauria said.

The conversation then turned to the specifics of Bannon's claim of treason, the meeting between Manafort, Trump, Jr. and several Russian lobbyists in Trump Tower, and its connection with the famous "dodgy dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele.

"If I could talk a second about that Don Jr meeting, there's a core issue in it over the difference in opposition research and intelligence," Lauria said. "While Christopher Steele was an MI-6 intelligence agent for Britain, he was working for a private company at the time. He was hired by the Clinton campaign and the [Democratic National Committee] through Fusion GPS. Glenn Simpson, of Fusion, who hired Steele directly, wrote in a New York Times editorial that Steele produced intelligence memos. He was either lying or misleading the readers -- he has to know the difference between them."

© REUTERS/ Jonathan Ernst 'Enough is Enough': Trump Lawyer Sues BuzzFeed, Fusion GPS Over Trump Dossier

"The difference is that intelligence reports are vetted by the intelligence agent and then by his superiors and usually by other agencies in his country's intelligence community. It's also a taxpayer-funded operation, supposedly to protect society, although that's not always what intelligence agencies do. Opposition research is a completely different thing: getting dirt on a political opponent, which is what Steele did," Lauria explained.

"The idea that Trump, Jr. had gotten this opposition research from the Russian government, as apparently Bannon said, is completely incorrect because there was no one from the Russian government, there was a former KGB agent. The lawyer was not a member of the government and no dirt was ever turned over. [There's] only been one campaign that received opposition research from foreigners during the 2016 campaign: the Clinton campaign that paid for it via a British former intelligence agent and his supposed Russian sources. But foreign opposition research [has] never been established as a crime."

[Jan 16, 2018] The Donald Trump Conversation Politics' Dark Heart Is Having the Best Time Anyone's Ever Had

Initial article about Trump by Michael Wolff which allowed him to put a feet into WH door later, in February 2017 when he decided to milk the Trump administration.
That's was probably the only major interaction of Wolff with Trump. Wolff claimed that Trump liked it ("for some reason"), but I do not see what can be liked in this article. It is very mediocre.
It is alarming to see that Trump did not understand whom he is dealing with: "This isn't an interview or a conversation. It's a hit piece by a nobody, Michael Wolff, opinionated and inflaming, punctuated with short hand picked Trump quotes. Trump is correct about the dishonesty of the media."
You see all Wolff's typical tricks, innuendo, and his infatuation with the celebrities here "a pint of vanilla Haagen-Dazs ice cream"... "a 5,395-square-foot Colonial mansion" ...""There had to be over a thousand policeman. They had a neighborhood roped off, four or five blocks away from this beautiful house. Machine guns all over the place.". Nothing of substance. You will never guess from the article whom Trump represents and how he channels the anger of ordinary Americans against neoliberalism and globalization.
You can also can see Wolff's flattery in action (just in case; he decided to write the book much later, in Feb of 2017). Later Woff did the same trick with Bannon and actually got the access to WH via him.
It looks like among readers of Hollywood reporter there here some Trump supporters. Comments to this article are really interesting to read now, two years later and they are more informative that Wolff's article by leap and bounds.
Notable quotes:
"... One thing to understand about Trump is that, rather unexpectedly, he's neither angry nor combative. He may be the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate in modern life, and yet, in person he's almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubs off. He's a New Yorker who actually might be more at home in California (in fact, he says he usually comes to his home here -- two buildings on Rodeo Drive -- only once a year). Life is sunny. Trump is an optimist -- at least about himself. He's in easy and relaxed form campaigning here in these final days before the June 7 California primary, even with Hillary Clinton's biggest backers and a city that is about half Latino surrounding him. ..."
"... If onstage he calls people names, more privately he has only good, embracing things to say about almost everybody. (For most public people I know, it is the opposite.) He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody - at least everybody who's rich and successful (he doesn't really talk about anyone who isn't). Expressing love for everybody, for most of us, would clearly seem to be an act. But with Trump, it's the name-calling and bluster that might be the act. ..."
"... What a self serving article once again, can't you fools write without trying to demean your next president, in every paragraph? ..."
"... Another sleeze. Nuff said. ..."
"... This wasn't an "interview", Mr. Wolff. It read like a terribly biased libturd desperately attempting to 'bait' a Presidential candidate with childish, unimportant questions. We get it...you don't approve of Trump. Now go home and cry in your pillow. ..."
"... Let's get this straight, Trump exists because the leadership of both parties declared an undeclared war on the American people. Their disdain towards ordinary Americans makes them willing to lie to get theirs and screw everybody else. The Republican leadership? Losers. That's why he exists. ..."
"... Totally biased flake article, the author is clearly a Clinton shill. The give away is labeling Clinton Cash a "hatchet job", considering a huge portion of the MSM on the left have validated the book as 100% accurate and true. ..."
"... Surprised Trump bothered giving the antagonistic Michael Wolff the interview, but it does show Trump is fearless. Hillary won't go within 5 miles of Fox News. ..."
"... The arrogance of the writer, Michael Wolff is breathtaking. We get it Mr. Wolff. Your story included the small talk and you articulated YOUR pre-conceived opinions and impressions of Mr. Trump. ..."
"... Like or hate 'em there is one thing that Trump and Sanders have both accomplished: They have thoroughly exposed the corruption and the contempt for the American People that is "mainstream" politics for both sides. ..."
"... For that reason alone, it's been great to have these guys in the race. ..."
"... This isn't an interview or a conversation. It's a hit piece by a nobody, Michael Wolff, opinionated and inflaming, punctuated with short hand picked Trump quotes. Trump is correct about the dishonesty of the media. ..."
"... Here in "liberal" Boston the Trump signs are everywhere. Bad sign for Madame Mao. Trump may not take Massachusetts but he is closing the gap with that hideous woman. ..."
"... Like Trump said: "The press are very, very dishonest. Some of them are downright sleazy".Thank God for the internet, otherwise the MSM would have us believe Madame Mao is the Virgin Mary. ..."
"... I wouldn't be surprised to see the 'Hollywood Reporter' shut off comments early. ..."
"... They delete all non-liberal comments, usually later in the morning... the millennial lib's arrive late to work in the morning because they're out partying all night... ..."
Jan 16, 2018 | www.hollywoodreporter.com

The long day is ending for Donald Trump with a pint of vanilla Haagen-Dazs ice cream. We're settling in for a late-night chat at his Beverly Hills house, a 5,395-square-foot Colonial mansion directly across from the Beverly Hills Hotel. He's here for the final presidential primary, a California coronation of sorts, after rallies in Orange County (where violence broke out and seven people were arrested). He is, as he has been for much of our conversation - and perhaps much of the last year - marveling at his own campaign. "You looked outside before, you see what's going on," he boasts about the police surrounding his house, and the Secret Service detail cramming his garage and snaking around the pool at the center of the front drive. And he's just returned from a big donor fundraiser in Brentwood for the Republican Party at the home of Tom Barrack, the investor and former Miramax co-owner. "There had to be over a thousand policeman. They had a neighborhood roped off, four or five blocks away from this beautiful house. Machine guns all over the place."

One thing to understand about Trump is that, rather unexpectedly, he's neither angry nor combative. He may be the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate in modern life, and yet, in person he's almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubs off. He's a New Yorker who actually might be more at home in California (in fact, he says he usually comes to his home here -- two buildings on Rodeo Drive -- only once a year). Life is sunny. Trump is an optimist -- at least about himself. He's in easy and relaxed form campaigning here in these final days before the June 7 California primary, even with Hillary Clinton's biggest backers and a city that is about half Latino surrounding him.

... ... ...

If onstage he calls people names, more privately he has only good, embracing things to say about almost everybody. (For most public people I know, it is the opposite.) He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody - at least everybody who's rich and successful (he doesn't really talk about anyone who isn't). Expressing love for everybody, for most of us, would clearly seem to be an act. But with Trump, it's the name-calling and bluster that might be the act.

... ... ...

Trump will turn 70 on June 14, but he shows no sign of fatigue even as our conversation drifts toward 11 p.m. He's been at this since either 4 a.m. or 6 a.m. (he offers different times at different moments).

...Then I came back and did more meetings, then I did a fundraiser tonight, then I did Kimmel. And now you. You're not a two-minute interview guy."

V. M. Varga > HelloTommy • 2 years ago

Bernie has no chance and Hillary is a neocon. What war next.

Ranger_Ric > Political Hostage • 2 years ago

Neocon or neoliberal, they are the same animals and there is no difference between George Bush and Hillary Clinton. They all answer to the same NWO masters.

There is a difference in Hillary's case... She is a habitual liar, a fake, a criminal and a lesbian. Other than that, there is one uniparty, the Washington Criminal Mafia.

Penny • 2 years ago

I love the smell of radical establishment media's hysteria this early in the morning. Naturally, the media elite who have not gone after Obama for not having a press conference since 2009 and Clinton, who has not had one in over a year, doesn't make a bean's hill of difference. ROT is the name of the "mainstream" media, especially when they see their D.C. lifestyle of corruption and cover-ups threatened by a straight-shooting, take-no-prisoners man like Trump.

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN--TRUMP/SESSIONS 2016

YesMeansNOMeansYES • 2 years ago

What a self serving article once again, can't you fools write without trying to demean your next president, in every paragraph?

Walter White > YesMeansNOMeansYES • 2 years ago

Another sleeze. Nuff said.

mredward > Political Hostage • 2 years ago

As you read the anti Trump posts, remember the Hillary pacs have purchased over a million dollars worth of bogus posters here.

SmartDoctor • 2 years ago

Hmm. The real news is NOT that the competition is in a statistical dead heat during the first week of June. The real news is that Hillary's polls have been steadily plummeting, and with her level of charisma, charm, and message, it is totally illogical to assume that they are going to improve anytime soon. They won't. And Trump, the "clown", the totally undetectable candidate, the spoiler, the guy with no Republican backing what so ever, keeps going up and up and up. Of course the left never, ever shows the size of the crowds he attracts to his rallies. The left is completely out of touch with the American mainstream (you know, the folks Mr. Nixon once called "the silent majority".) Trump has the momentum nationwide, and no one except Southern black ladies likes Hillary. There is your story! Next paragraph, "how did this happen?" And keep in mind, the FBI hasn't spoken yet, Bernie ain't through yet, the left wing, Soros financed riots haven't begun yet, 2 weeks in politics is a lifetime, and we haven't gotten to the convention boost yet. Yeah, I'm biased. In America's favor, sorry if that offends anyone. TRUMP 2016

Political Hostage > SmartDoctor • 2 years ago

I live in the South, with a ton of black folks, and have yet to see any HRC bumper stickers on their cars. It's mostly Coopers, Beetles, and Cubes that have the HRC swag on them. Not many though.

Our building has about 6,000 people working in it and there maybe a handful of Bernie stickers too. Most working people aren't looking in the direction of democrats.

Bill Strang • 2 years ago

And you don't think the media is too easy on Hillary? Every time she opens her mouth, she lies and the media just ignores it. But lets just hold Trump to a much higher standard then a standard democrat.

Penny > Bill Strang • 2 years ago

That is the job description of the elitists (a/k/a "mainstream" media). A recent survey revealed that 85 percent-plus media are demRATS

Wilkins Micawber • 2 years ago

A vote for Clinton is a vote for the leftist, moonbat, felon, gay, generational welfare leech, gov union, drug addicted, pervert, lgtqxyz, pedophile, academic, stupid college kid, white guilt ridden, illiterate third world invading trash, in other words the Democrat base, that supports her.

Angry black woman > Wilkins Micawber • 2 years ago

10000 up votes

TroyGale • 2 years ago

I like confident people who are confident because they have struggled and won in the arena. Trump is no different, he wins...Why?
Here is a quote from General George Patton, I think it explains it perfectly....

"All men are timid on entering any fight. Whether it is the first or the last fight, all of us are timid. Cowards are those who let their timidity get the better
of their manhood."

Trump doesn't let his timidity get involved, AT ALL.

Brian washere • 2 years ago

Here's an inconvenient truth liberals (media) don't want to face. All those blue collar dems that have always been brainwashed into thinking the Bolsheviks (D) were for the "working man" are finally opening their dim eyes and realizing they have been sold down the river.

The regulations puked out by government that chases their workplaces out of the country and the illegals they have to compete with for replacement jobs, all trademarks of the progressives, have f--ked them hard. They are going to go Trump in huge numbers.

All the dems voter fraud and manipulation won't save Shrillary from that fact. This is going to be so lopsided it will make Reagan/Carter look like a nail-biter.

Bill Thompson • 2 years ago

I'll vote for him because I want to control our border, enforce our immigration laws, cut the H-1B visas, keep our troops home, eliminate free trade, protect the 2nd amendment.

phosgene • 2 years ago

is trump ever going to have to answer a single challenging question about how he is full of sheet? this is an "interview" where he eats ice cream and talks about himself. we already know he can do that. the only policy or current events based questions i saw he was completely oblivious. there is no room for anything in trump's world but trump.

hillary volunteered for the goldwater campaign when she was younger. her credentials as a republican and a conservative are stronger than trump's. the guy has conned millions into completely selling out their party and beliefs. sad.

nonuser > phosgene • 2 years ago

Congratulations, you've made Michael Wolff very happy.

dudefromdixie • 2 years ago

Trump is going to unite the right like none before him. He is also going to conquer the left, like none before him.

HelloTommy • 2 years ago

Donald Trump's new finance guru: once a Clinton donor, Soros employee. Steven Mnuchin also contributed to Obama, Kerry and Gore. You Trumpets are so gullible. He is also an ex-Goldman-Sachs employee and PAC donor. We're suppose to hate that right? Tell me how that is okay?

MICHAELNLA > HelloTommy • 2 years ago

"gullible?"

You Liberals voted for a guy who you thought was Black, not once but twice...guess you forgot to ask him who his mother was.

Meanwhile, Hussein has DOUBLED the National Debt in 8 years!

We have 95 MILLION Americans out of the work force.
50 MILLION Americans on Food Stamps.
Half of college grads unemployed.

And you expect Americans to give the "D" party another
four years in the White House...KEEP DREAMING, LEFTY!

OWilson • 2 years ago

The arrogant left, and their pals in the Media, are not used to being questioned. Hillary hasn't had a press conference in 2016. She lets CNN do all the Trump bashing, all the time. They see a change coming, and it scares the hell out of them all.

jj333 • 2 years ago

This wasn't an "interview", Mr. Wolff. It read like a terribly biased libturd desperately attempting to 'bait' a Presidential candidate with childish, unimportant questions. We get it...you don't approve of Trump. Now go home and cry in your pillow.

SamVaughn • 2 years ago

Let's get this straight, Trump exists because the leadership of both parties declared an undeclared war on the American people. Their disdain towards ordinary Americans makes them willing to lie to get theirs and screw everybody else. The Republican leadership? Losers. That's why he exists.


ObiterDictum • 2 years ago

Menacing who? If he financially runs the country like his campaign, expect some of those non-essential government employees to be out on the street. For years our Government has not been afraid of the governed, but now they fear our proxy.

Bluto Redneck ✓Shithole Appr. > ObiterDictum • 2 years ago

Exactly. I predict a 15-20% real cut in our federal bureaucracy. And God help any of those fools that go out on strike. Air traffic controllers anyone?

phosgene > ObiterDictum • 2 years ago

he's not going to cut a damn thing. do you even listen to what he says? build a wall, kick out 11 million people, massive military increases, massive increase for veterans, massive infrastructure rebuilding, replacing obamacare with something "better".

none of this is small government stuff, kids. he hasn't mentioned cutting a single thing on the stump. oh yeah, and the age old republican idea of reforming entitlements? OUT THE WINDOW!

well, that only costs a few TRILLION.

Reaganite✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ • 2 years ago

One of the more obvious reasons Trump has been viewed by so many as the GOP´s best hope of defeating Our Empress of the Seven Genders is precisely because he - and he alone among the candidates - doesn´t give a flying flip about the "civility" speech code Democrats impose upon Republicans (or the New Tone muzzle Republicans impose upon themselves) that prohibit the Left from ever having to face the mocking, the insults, the scathing satire, and the verbal abuse they themselves vomit upon the Right on a daily basis. The establishment still doesn´t seem to understand just how refreshing this is.

Reaganite✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ • 2 years ago

Donald Trump and his people are upending the Political Media/Progressive Establishment industrial complex narrative. These " media cretins of PC conformity" are staring into the abyss of their own personal irrelevancy. Trump's celebrity and unapologetic surrogates allow his campaign to fight them with devastating effect. The professionally offended are blinded to their own hypocrisy.

Weezy -Stable Genius • 2 years ago

Totally biased flake article, the author is clearly a Clinton shill. The give away is labeling Clinton Cash a "hatchet job", considering a huge portion of the MSM on the left have validated the book as 100% accurate and true.

What kills many is these reporters really believe the public is incapable of discerning their real intentions when producing articles like this.

In the meantime, Trump continues to roll on and gain further momentum.

notimportant > phosgene • 2 years ago

Completely different situation. Make the media responsible for what they tout! They can say what they want, but they better make sure it's correct. Of course, liberals don't believe in personal responsibility. By the way, Putin has an 80% approval rating in his country and many people respect the man outside the country. That's because he's a man and stands up for what he believes. He doesn't allow bullying or ugliness by those who disagree with him to effect him. Time we had that in our country and we will when Trump is president. Neither Putin nor Trump are one world order supporters. Neither am I

ScottPM • 2 years ago

Nothing would be worse than having a President that has shown that they are utterly reckless, arrogant, and shows a total disregard for American lives by INTENTIONALLY mishandling classified information. Information is classified because people die if it gets out. hillary has shown she can NOT be trusted as President.

phosgene > ScottPM • 2 years ago

you are completely ignorant. half the paperwork the government generates is classified. they completely misuse it ON PURPOSE. it is meant to control information. lives have nothing to do with it. it is about protecting their butts

strongisland • 2 years ago

Amazing how a mere journalist for the Hollyweird Reporter repeatedly attempts to elevate himself intellectually above a man who is light years more successful than himself. The mocking doesn't work here. In fact, it belies what the author is all about. The typical Gen Y, millennial liberal snark that is never to be taken seriously...because, well, these fools think no issues are actually serious. As long as the progressive playbook is being fulfilled...these fools are happy in their rapidly deteriorating paradise.

For someone who is seemingly so in tune with the important issues...he sure skirted them as conveniently as possible when it came to this interview. Sometimes...a worthy opponent brings out the best in an individual. Sadly, for Donald Trump...he was tangling with a total lightweight here.

cageysea • 2 years ago

"... He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody - at least everybody who's rich and successful (he doesn't really talk about anyone who isn't)..."

Uh.... Yeah, I got nothin'.

Mitch Alan > Bad Will Hunting • 2 years ago

...Surprised Trump bothered giving the antagonistic Michael Wolff the interview, but it does show Trump is fearless. Hillary won't go within 5 miles of Fox News.

Deplorable- jean Lee • 2 years ago

The arrogance of the writer, Michael Wolff is breathtaking. We get it Mr. Wolff. Your story included the small talk and you articulated YOUR pre-conceived opinions and impressions of Mr. Trump. You are the one with the black heart! Trump 2016

Stormrdr • 2 years ago

Like or hate 'em there is one thing that Trump and Sanders have both accomplished: They have thoroughly exposed the corruption and the contempt for the American People that is "mainstream" politics for both sides. The mechanizations and back-room dealings have been fully revealed with each attempt to derail these "outsiders". For that reason alone, it's been great to have these guys in the race.

I can't say I'm a big fan of either one of them, but I do admire what they've accomplished for America's political future (whether or not it was intentional).

Rocky • 2 years ago

This isn't an interview or a conversation. It's a hit piece by a nobody, Michael Wolff, opinionated and inflaming, punctuated with short hand picked Trump quotes. Trump is correct about the dishonesty of the media.

jack4949 • 2 years ago

Here in "liberal" Boston the Trump signs are everywhere. Bad sign for Madame Mao. Trump may not take Massachusetts but he is closing the gap with that hideous woman.

jack4949 • 2 years ago

Like Trump said: "The press are very, very dishonest. Some of them are downright sleazy".Thank God for the internet, otherwise the MSM would have us believe Madame Mao is the Virgin Mary.

Yip Yap • 2 years ago

I wouldn't be surprised to see the 'Hollywood Reporter' shut off comments early. It has been doing that lately when comments don't go it's way. THAT WALL'S GOIN' TA BE HUUUGE!!!

barney59 > Yip Yap • 2 years ago

They delete all non-liberal comments, usually later in the morning... the millennial lib's arrive late to work in the morning because they're out partying all night...

[Jan 16, 2018] In the emails, Goldstone said he made contact with Trump Jr at the behest of the Russian-Azeri businessman Aras Agalarov and Aglaravov's pop-star son, Emin. On Wednesday, Aras Agalarov claimed the story was invented.

Jan 16, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, said it was "wild" that Trump's son was being blamed for speaking with a Russian attorney. Lavrov – who met Trump last week at the G20 summit in Hamburg, together with Vladimir Putin – said he knew nothing of the meeting with the lawyer. Serious people were trying to "make a mountain out of a molehill", Lavrov said.

In the emails, Goldstone said he made contact with Trump Jr at the behest of the Russian-Azeri businessman Aras Agalarov and Aglaravov's pop-star son, Emin. The Agalarovs hosted Trump when he visited Moscow in 2013 for the Miss Universe beauty pageant.

On Wednesday, Aras Agalarov claimed the story was invented. "I think this is some sort of fiction. I don't know who is making it up," he told Russia's Business FM radio station, adding: "What has Hillary Clinton got to do with anything? I don't know."

[Jan 16, 2018] Is There Life After Liberalism - The New York Times

Notable quotes:
"... As exciting as the 1930s ..."
Jan 16, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

Fourteen months ago, in the first flush of power, Steve Bannon gave an interview to Michael Wolff -- beginning a relationship that would prove his undoing -- in which he boasted about his plan to realign our politics. His nationalist-populist movement, he argued, would transform the G.O.P. into something truly new: a right-wing worker's party that spent freely, "jacked up" infrastructure all over the country, and won "60 percent of the white vote" and "40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote" on its way to a 50-year majority.

"We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks," Bannon said. "It will be as exciting as the 1930s."

As exciting as the 1930s is not a line you hear every day, but rather than an alt-right dog whistle, what I heard in Bannon's formulation was the idea that in the Trump era, as in the crisis years that gave us both F.D.R. and Hitler, everything might be up for grabs: not just electoral coalitions, but the nature and destiny of the liberal order. Which would be a terrifying prospect but also an exciting one, since it would mean that the long "end of history" that followed the Cold War had irrevocably ended, and that it was time to imagine radical revisions to a stagnant-seeming liberal West.

Flash forward a year and a couple months, though, and Bannon's vision seems pretty much dead: its rumpled leader sacked and ritually denounced, its bold populism subsumed into the same old, same old Republican agenda. Trump remains temperamentally authoritarian and personally vile, but the idea of Trump_vs_deep_state as an ideological revolution, whether akin to Roosevelt's or Mussolini's, has mostly evaporated.

Continue reading the main story