“Oceania Has Never Been At War With Eurasia, Winston”

Ed Driscoll:

‘\I’m enjoying the sight of Democrats who were calling for Comey to be fired suddenly turning him into a Saturday Night Massacre martyr.

It’d be a Berg’s Law, except it’s almost too obvious: logical consistency would make most liberal positions self-refuting.

My prediction: there’s no there there. But the chattering classdes – and the Hillarycrats whose only source of information those chattering classes are – will chase this around and around and around their pole until they run out of leash. because there’s no there there.

(And if there is a there, there, Truimp is an idiot and deserves what he gets. That would fit with the dumbest two or three quartiles of Democrat opinion – the same people who were calling Trump stupid and crazy even after he beat The Greatest Candidate Ever™.

Posted

May 10, 2017

Uncategorized

Mitch Berg

Tags:

Comments

73 responses to ““Oceania Has Never Been At War With Eurasia, Winston””

Emery

May 10, 2017

So the guy who’s campaign is being investigated fires the guy running the investigation? Imagine if Clinton had fired the FBI Director while under investigation.

To your point; for those of us who resented Comey’s indefensible double standard in speaking of the candidates’ respective ongoing investigations, there is no lost love for Comey. It almost feels like poetic justice. Still, this is so Trump. Comey had power which kept Trump’s in check. The elimination of Comey’s employment is a grave warning about Trump’s ability to abuse the White House.

What are the odds Giuliani is the next head of the FBI?
justplainangry

May 10, 2017

And comey’s replacement will not have that power? You absence of coherence and ability to pass a simple logic test tells everything anyone needs to know about the substance of your ramblings, SFB, eTASS.
Emery

May 10, 2017

Trump openly praised Comey multiple times for the very same reason he now uses to fire him, and this was a dead horse issue that only his defeated opponent still railed on about. All of a sudden Trump is so worried about it that he fires Comey. Trump really thinks he is way smarter than the rest of us. Remember when he brought reams of paper onto a press conference to convince us that there was no conflict of interest issue with his presidency?

Look for Trump to try to place another compliant civilian in Comey’s place, one with convenient myopia. Problem solved.
bikebubba

May 10, 2017

You could see it as trying to stop Comey’s investigation of Russian campaign meddling (not of the Trump campaign, by the way), or you could see it as Trump noticing that if Comey makes unforced errors in stating the extent of Hilliary’s emails found on Anthony Weener’s hard drive, he’s also likely to make the same unforced errors in describing Russian involvement in the campaign.

Here are ten big scandals on Comey’s watch. My take is that if Obama didn’t value certain portions of how Comey was screwing up, he wouldn’t have lasted into 2015.

https://news.grabien.com/story-10-major-fbi-scandals-comeys-watch
Emery

May 10, 2017

BB: These are concerns:
1) The Russian attack on our election was and is a serious matter, no less serious than a physical military attack. Because it involved electrons and not bombs, most Americans have not yet understood the magnitude of the threat.
2) At least four members of the Trump campaign had or have deep financial and other ties to Russia and were in communication with Russia during the campaign. It is undisputed that Putin sought to aid Trump. It is not much of a reach to think that Trump’s campaign would have explored ways in which they could facilitate that “help.” At the very minimum, it needs to be fully understood, just as thoroughly as the 9/11 commission looked at that attack.
3) Rosenstein’s letter, while on its face is accurate in its description of Comey’s mistakes, does not make sense as a grounds for firing since these mistakes were things the President praised Comey for, back when he was a candidate.
4) Multiple pieces of corroboration now show that Trump is simply exasperated that this story won’t go away, and he viewed Comey’s commitment to the case as a sign that the story would continue to hound him. So he fired Comey, thinking that the Rosenstein letter and Democrats’ disgust with Comey would give him enough cover.
He has miscalculated badly. We will now be taking about Russia all the way through this Presidency.

Political calculations by Republicans are clear (i.e. Mitch McConnell…): they desperately want to ride the Trump train as far as they can before god knows what happens to it, and they want to be in control of when they jump off.

A special prosecutor is the biggest of wild cards — little to no way to limit scope of investigation, and who the hell knows what would turn up in Trump world.
justplainangry

May 10, 2017

Look for Trump to try to place another compliant civilian in Comey’s place, one with convenient myopia. Problem solved.

And comey did not have myopia? He was an exemplary and outstanding director? Geez… What a maroon…
TheFedSucks

May 10, 2017

How did Russia interfere in our election? What did they do? Wikileaks exposing the DNC Ruling Class for what they are with a phishing scam doesn’t count.
Emery

May 10, 2017

JPA: Use some logic, you idiot.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/10/comey-firing-trump-russia-238192
bikebubba

May 10, 2017

Emery,all we know at this point is that after months of investigation, we’ve learned that wikileaks told the truth about Mrs. Clinton because her staff were idiots, and that actual proof that the Russians were involved is pretty much nonexistent.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/01/evidence-for-russian-involvement-in-dnc-hack-is-nonexistent.php

And no, it’s not “undisputed” that Putin tried to aid Trump, but rather counterintuitive. Mrs. Clinton’s policies were far more favorable to Russia than Trump’s. The Russians (or bored teenagers) could possibly have hacked her accounts simply to destabilize the presumptive winner. And working with the Russians? Do you mean like giving them control of 20% of our uranium supply after donating to the Clinton Foundation? Stuff like that?

You want evidence of clear collusion, you can go to John Kerry meeting with the Viet Cong or Teddy Kennedy working with Brezhnev. But you got bupkus regarding Mr. Trump.
Troy

May 10, 2017

Emery wrote: “We will now be taking about Russia all the way through this Presidency.”

Yeah, sure, _now_ we will do that.

Because irrational parrots like yourself would not have been doing so regardless of circumstances? “Pull the other one”.
justplainangry

May 10, 2017

Using politico as a source? Shit for brains indeed. Keep digging, snowflake.

Plus this gem:
Rosenstein’s letter, while on its face is accurate in its description of Comey’s mistakes, does not make sense as a grounds for firing

You are a slug of contradictions and infinitely fiskable.
Troy

May 10, 2017

Is “logic” really believing everything you read in a Politico article with tons of quotes from conveniently anonymous sources?

“two advisers said”
“one adviser said”
“Other top officials”
“one senior White House official said”
“White House officials believed”
“one person briefed on the administration’s deliberations said”
“a White House official said”
“White House aide asked”
“Two White House officials”
“one White House official said”
“Aides soon circulated”
“a spokesman said”
“The spokesman said”
“one senior official said”
“said the official”
“said one recently retired top FBI official”
“one White House official said”
“said one senior White House official”

Or is “logic” following the three contributers to “Trump Is Teh Evil” land, where Emery lies?

Seems convenient.
Emery

May 10, 2017

You are missing the alternative narrative that will emerge in Trump-world — that Trump fired Comey because he did not prosecute crooked Hillary. This is misdirection from the Russia investigation but watch how he plays this with his base.
justplainangry

May 10, 2017

Hey, you illogical moron, did sTrumpet have the benefit of Rosenstein ‘s memo last year? DID HE? Your tin foil hat must be actually a lead foil hat. How else could anyone reconcile your utter idiotic ramblings?
Mammuthus Primigenius

May 10, 2017

1) The Russian attack on our election was and is a serious matter, no less serious than a physical military attack.
Complete bullshit. An indefensible statement.
It is as stupid as saying “Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky was as serious a matter as World War Two.”
No useful discussion can follow so foolish a statement.
Alt-Good Swiftee

May 10, 2017

Meanwhile, while Dunning _Kruger performs an asshat dance for our amusement, I’m over here trying to give less fucks about the FBI, Comey and the Trump / Russian investigation than Trump and the Russians.
Mammuthus Primigenius

May 10, 2017

Y’know, it’s kind of weird. When you read serious political publications, there isn’t much on Trump & Russia. There is a lot on Trump, just not Trump and the Russians. I expect that this is because there is nothing to talk about other than insinuations.
Yet when I turn on the television news — which is aimed at less well-informed people with short attention spans (they give equal time to North Korean nukes and getting your kid into his/her “dream college”) — it’s all Trump and the Russians.
Those stories are like the stories where they cover some city scandal, and at the end you realize that despite the impression the news reader wanted to make, he or she never claimed that anyone was actually guilty of any wrong doing.
Sane people would have dropped this after the revelation that the Steele dossier was dog crap. Comey deserved to be fired for publicizing that steaming turd alone. Steele admits to using paid, anonymous sources within Russia to compile the dossier (this explains the fantastic elements). It would be interesting to know where the money came from to pay the anonymous informants. Could be the FBI, could be Putin’s FSB. It certainly wasn’t Steele.
For some reason, the media is completely uninterested in investigating this.
Emery

May 10, 2017

Okay you got me. I’m sure it had nothing to do with the White House being investigated for that whole Russia thing. Nope. Nothing to see here, folks.
Mammuthus Primigenius

May 10, 2017

Emery, how do you know that the Russian government instigated the hacking of Podesta’s email account?
You desperately need to make an epistemology check.
Emery

May 10, 2017

I don’t know – it’s hard for me to see any U.S. ties to Russia…except for the Flynn thing and the Manafort thing
and the Tillerson thing
and the Sessions thing
and the Kushner thing
and the Carter Page thing
and the Roger Stone thing
and the Felix Sater thing
and the Boris Ephsteyn thing
and the Rosneft thing
and the Gazprom thing
and the Sergey Gorkov banker thing
and the Azerbajain thing
and the Donald Trump, Jr. thing
and the Sergey Kislyak thing
and the Russian Affiliated Interests thing
and the Russian Business Interests thing
and the Alex Schnaider thing
and the hack of the DNC thing
and the Guccifer 2.0 thing
and the Mike Pence “I don’t know anything” thing
and the Russians mysteriously dying thing
and Trump’s public request to Russia to hack Hillary’s email thing
and the Trump house sale for $100 million at the bottom of the housing bust to the Russian fertilizer king thing
and the Russian fertilizer king’s plane showing up in Concord, NC during Trump rally campaign thing
and the Nunes sudden flight to the White House in the night thing
and the Nunes personal investments in the Russian winery thing
and the Cyprus bank thing
and Trump not releasing his tax returns thing
and the election hacking thing
and the GOP platform change to the Ukraine thing
and the Steele Dossier thing
and the Sally Yates thing
and the Comey thing
and the intelligence community’s investigative reports thing
and Trump’s reassurance that the Russian connection is all “fake news” thing
so there’s probably nothing there
since the swamp has been drained, these people would never lie
probably why Nunes cancels the investigation meetings
all of this must be normal
just a bunch of separate dots with no connection.
Mammuthus Primigenius

May 10, 2017

Once again, Emery, I’m asking how you know that the Russian government instigated the hacking of Podesta’s email account?
It’s a simple enough question, isn’t it?
Otherwise you sound like a conspiracy nut.
Mammuthus Primigenius

May 10, 2017

Y’know, I once had an discussion online with a liberal who was really into guilt by association. I explained to him why guild by association was bunk. It allows you to project your own beliefs into a pseudo-reality. Mr. X (who you hate) may have had a working relationship with a neo-nazi. That makes Mr. X a neo-nazi, or at least a neo-nazi sympathizer. But if the same Mr. X has the same sort of working relationship with Mother Theresa, that doesn’t make Mr. X a Catholic or even a Catholic sympathizer. See what I mean?
This liberal didn’t. He carefully considered what I had written and told me that he was going to go with his guilt-by-association assumption because that was the only way to prove he was right.
Uh, yeah, whatever, dude.
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/862492805960278016 * https://twitter.com/LionelMedia/status/862587815086960640
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

https://twitter.com/LionelMedia/status/862594072153903104
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

I have no g d idea what the algorithm is for getting put in moderation hell. None.
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

This is Trump changing the valence https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/862136065435590656

Trump is an instrument of God’s Will, obviously. #MAGA
Emery

May 11, 2017

The Director of the FBI is not supposed to be “loyal” to the President Nobody believes this was anything but revenge for Comey asking for more resources to investigate the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. Anyone who has studied Trump closely is not surprised in the least by this move to fire James Comey. Everything is transactional with Trump. While he has use for another person, the relationship goes on. Eventually, he betrays everyone, bankers and lenders, employees, wives – everyone. When Comey went after Clinton, the transaction worked in Trump’s favor. When Comey would not back up Trump’s delusional tweet that Obama wiretapped Trump in Trump Tower, and kept the Russia probe going, Trump no longer had any use for this person.

“You’re fired!” are words Trump lives by.
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

Trump can’t stop the Russia investigation by firing Comey.

The problem with Comey is he’s gotten really weird. Loretta Lynch is truly an historical bureaucratic crook but Comey handled that all wrong.
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

What is the ***informed speculation*** on what needs to be investigated about Trump and Russia?

Tell me.
jdm

May 11, 2017

Understanding people like Emery 1 and 2 – as well as DG – is easy enough. As written on that other MN blog, Vox Populi (heh):

Left-wingers will only change their minds if they experience enough emotional pain to provoke the desire to avoid it. They are entirely irrational; the more intelligent they are, the more highly developed their facility for rationalizing away any logical inconsistencies is. And that’s why those on the Left are always calling people on the Right stupid, racist, and so on, because they are attempting to convince us by inflicting emotional pain and triggering aversive reactions. It may sound like insults, but in reality, that is how the Left makes converts.
Emery

May 11, 2017

Everyone in the Trump administration is a victim. They are being attacked by scientists, teachers, engineers, health care professionals, experts of all types, by the OMB, by professional protesters, by non-right wing media. I give the president credit. Pushing back against reality is no easy thing.
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

“experts”

Ask them why we have chronic 2% GDP.
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

People want ***their*** thug’s fascistic policies, not experts. That is our new system. See the ACA.

http://tinyurl.com/awqvvc5
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

President Trump Is The Fascistic Machete Cutting The Trail To The Holly Land Of Mises.Org

http://tinyurl.com/lqaggeo
jdm

May 11, 2017

Everyone in the Trump administration is a victim. They are being attacked by scientists, teachers, engineers, health care professionals, experts of all types, by the OMB, by professional protesters, by non-right wing media.

But how is this any different that the last 8 years? The oh-so-concerned Progs are constantly attacking anyone who isn’t in lock-step with the tenets of their theocracy.

I give the president credit. Pushing back against reality is no easy thing.

And this is how you got Trump: every so often the Progs annoy just enough people to be kicked to the curb. They stand up, dust themselves off and continue with the very same behavior: they learn nothing, they forget nothing.
Emery

May 11, 2017

Trump has delivered optimism to a group of people that were pessimistic for the past eight years. Time will tell if their optimism is any more justified than their pessimism was.
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

Emery: You have a frame of reference that believes in the possibilities of “good government” making our lives better. We are way past that, even if it ever made any sense, which it doesn’t. The system is a scam and it is falling apart. Trump is mostly just a symptom.
Mammuthus Primigenius

May 11, 2017

Nobody believes this was anything but revenge for Comey asking for more resources to investigate the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.
I think Comey should have gone when he endorsed the findings in the ludicrous “Steele Dossier.”
That was incompetence, right there.
The “cult of experts” is what has gotten us here. The problem is, the experts turn out to be no better at predicting the future than anyone else. As recently as the 1990s, in the wake of the collapse of the USSR, people on the Left admitted this. Expert knowledge pales before the Wisdom of Crowds. Hayek, a better political philosopher than an economist, explained why: in crowds, people consider their own area of expertise (what is good for them). The wisdom is additive. You have millions of correct decisions made over small matters every second. Experts try to guess what is best for others. The wisdom is not additive, they cannot know the value of the things they manage. An economy with diffuse decision making by idiots will out perform and economy centrally managed by PhD’s every time.
Emery

May 11, 2017

You appear to say there is no evidence of a conspiracy between Trump’s organization and the Russians. What most people don’t realize is it is far to early to make that assumption. The Whitewater probe took years to complete. Nixon was reelected while the investigation of Watergate was going on. Investigations are not like crime shows on TV, they are not solved in an hour.

Everyone, including Trump, should be asking for an Independent Special Prosecutor. If Teump is innocent, then having someone not beholden to him declare that there is no case would be the best scenario. Not allowing an Independent Special Prosecutor will leave a stench of corruption hanging over Trump for the rest of his term.
bikebubba

May 11, 2017

Emery, in the Watergate scandal, the FBI had a ton of evidence within weeks and a set of indictments within months. In contrast, the Obama administration was looking for evidence for half a year and came up with bupkus.

Sorry, but a lack of evidence after this period of time does mean something. Specifically, it’s a fishing expedition, not an investigation.
justplainangry

May 11, 2017

Otherwise you sound like a conspiracy nut.

Sound like? SFB proves he is with every post, every sentence, every word!
justplainangry

May 11, 2017

When Comey went after Clinton, the transaction worked in Trump’s favor

went AFTER sHrillary? After listing all the crimes she committed, he got her off, you ignorant slut! But hey, nobody expects you to comprehend things. You are not capable. Keep digging, deranged snowflake.
Mammuthus Primigenius

May 11, 2017

You appear to say there is no evidence of a conspiracy between Trump’s organization and the Russians. What most people don’t realize is it is far to early to make that assumption.
This is silly.
You can’t prove a negative.
It’s not “an assumption.”
Tell me what evidence their is of collusion between Trump and the Russians to hack Podesta’s email. It is a very specific request. I’ve asked it several times, and you have never responded.
You seem to want a fishing expedition, as in “we don’t know exactly what crime he has committed, give us the power to investigate and we will find something.”
What, exactly, are you accusing Trump of doing?
Mammuthus Primigenius

May 11, 2017

justplainangry on May 11, 2017 at 11:55 am said:
When Comey went after Clinton, the transaction worked in Trump’s favor

went AFTER sHrillary? After listing all the crimes she committed, he got her off, you ignorant slut!
This is why nobody on the R is taking down Trump for firing Comey. In his press conference of last July, argued that Hillary had handled classified documents with gross negligence — then declined to prosecute on the grounds that he could not prove “willful intent.”
Problem is, the statute Clinton was accused of violating, 18 U.S.C. § 793(f), requires only a finding of gross negligence, not willful intent. Comey endorsed Hillary’s pernicious law breaking.
Throughout this entire affair, there has been plenty of evidence of law breaking, but it all seems to have been law breaking done by Obama’s people and Hillary’s people.
Emery

May 11, 2017

Fortunately, Obama’s wiretaps should have picked this up so there is audio to back this up, correct?
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

It’s about priorities. https://twitter.com/ektrit/status/862728520614674432
Emery

May 11, 2017

The overall impression is that Trump hasn’t a clue what he’s talking about. He doesn’t understand even the basic concepts. Reagan and Bush 2 were no intellectual giants, but there was a sense that they knew what they knew, and deferred to others when they needed to. You could judge their policy positions by their advisors.

Trump doesn’t understand that he doesn’t understand.
Mammuthus Primigenius

May 11, 2017

Reagan and Bush 2 were no intellectual giants, but there was a sense that they knew what they knew, and deferred to others when they needed to.
Poppycock. Reagan had an undergrad degree in economics, was two-term governor of California during a very turbulent time in that state, and was twice elected president of the Screen Actors Guild. Reagan also correctly saw that the days of the USSR were numbered (all the “experts” did not).
GW Bush has a graduate degree in business from Harvard and was elected governor of Texas X 2 (the first TX governor elected to two consecutive terms). He won re-election by a landslide in 1998.
If you want to know how badly you’ve been fooled, Emery, compare the CV’s of GW Bush and Al Gore.
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

I saw somewhere that many, many GOP establishment, won’t help Trump or get hired in any way for Trump, to keep them informed on The System or how to make it work better. They are terrified of being associated with him.

It was a good source but I forget what it was.

Exit question: What does ***MISES.ORG*** say about this?
TheFedSucks

May 11, 2017

Reagan had all manor of government management skills and experience and busted his ass studying policy (during his GE rep days) like no one else.

The big issue with Reagan is, defeating the USSR involved a ton of domestic compromise. In hindsight, it wasn’t worth it.