Matt Taibbi

you got me.

These Chapo/Teen Racket takes that somehow looking into the Russia scandal equals Booker 2020 are getting tiresome. Trump leaves a stick lying around you pick it up and beat the guy he pays to take his beatings with it.

Focusing on Russia is pretty stupid, politically, as is the emoluments clause stuff.

Both have way less traction than focusing on the fucked up shit that Trump and the GOP are definitely and openly doing and neither will go anywhere with the GOP controlling Congress anyway.

The Russia stuff needs to be investigated strenuously, but it shouldn't be the central focus of the party. As the investigation progresses it will become more apparent if the scandal has the necessary depth or substance to wound or weaken Trump. For now, I'd prefer they focus on clamoring for an infrastructure bill, because the Republicans are going to be talking all about tax cuts and the public is not really that into tax cuts for the rich, but do see the value in infrastructure. Trump talked up this issue in the campaign, but the Dems can steal this issue while Trump is sidetracked and distracted, which seems to be his perpetual state atm.

This entire argument (Russia is an important issue to attack Trump on! No, stupid, focus on the real issues!) is rote and dumb

Corruption is corruption is corruption. There are plenty of people and plenty of places to attack this administration and thank goodness, because it merits a lot of attacking.

Oh, I was going to post that article, but then search was down and I couldn't be bothered. But it's spectacularly stupid, and his weird attack against people thinking the DNC and Podesta hacks, which was in the news for months, might have influenced the election just a tiny bit, is one of the stupider ones.

This is the most amazing one, though:

Moreover, even those who detest Trump with every fiber of their being must see the dangerous endgame implicit in this entire line of thinking. If the Democrats succeed in spreading the idea that straying from the DNC-approved candidate – in either the past or the future – is/was an act of "unwitting" cooperation with the evil Putin regime, then the entire idea of legitimate dissent is going to be in trouble.

Imagine it's four years from now (if indeed that's when we have our next election). A Democratic candidate stands before the stump, and announces that a consortium of intelligence experts has concluded that Putin is backing the hippie/anti-war/anti-corporate opposition candidate.

Or, even better: that same candidate reminds us "what happened last time" when people decided to vote their consciences during primary season. It will be argued, in seriousness, that true Americans will owe their votes to the non-Putin candidate. It would be a shock if some version of this didn't become an effective political trope going forward.

He is somehow warning libs that if they go down this path, they... will have an effective attack against leftists in four years? How is that supposed to influence any centrists to stop the investigations? Shouldn't that warning have come back in July, at a time where it was already pretty obvious the DNC leaks were from the Russians, and shouldn't that warning have been sent to Sanders' people: 'Hey guys, don't let your legitimate dissent become mixed up with Russian hacks, it might backfire in the long run...'

It's just faux concern trying to mask that he is preaching to the choir. Libs are evil and deranged, while leftists are legitimate and driven by honest enthusiasm. Every argument is based on that worldview.

Taibbi referencing Michael Tracey and Zaid Jilani as credible reporters means he's really fucking sad.

The tendency to dismiss the Russian story to the extent from some quarters (given that it's unequivocally damaged the administration at this point and continues to do so) makes their agenda seem pretty blatantly "anti-mainstream dem". Like, listening to them only you wouldn't have any idea that Michael Flynn had to resign over it.

Idk. I was an enthusiastic Hillary voter but I also think the Democrats need to take some responsibility for sucking so much. They lost a presidential election to Donald fucking Trump. And it wasn't just her fault -- it is a failure of the party overall that they couldn't speak effectively to the issues of the day, which contributed to low minority turnout and white working class defections. "Russia" is in some ways a scapegoat -- there is always nonsense floating around; it's the candidate's job to set the record straight.

Is it possible trumps undeniable Russian associations present an actual current danger after his election that exceed and are different to those which were related to him overcoming a mediocre candidate with shitloads of electoral baggage?

I'm sure some people will make the argument when battles for leadership/direction take place but I don't buy the idea that "Russia" will measurably be seen to "vindicate" HRC/Dem campaign failures. The base of the party wants to move further left, that's not going to roll back. I don't think it will happen but if it really becomes Trump's undoing, the argument becomes "hey you lost to these extremely corrupt people". Nevertheless if you think the Trump admin is dangerous there's no argument for not supporting an investigation, especially at this point.

and *who* is arguing there shouldn't be an investigation? Many fewer ppl than are arguing "BernieBros (TM) were Russian dupes."

Creating stupid arguments, however few people actually agree with them, is the very basis of the multi-billion dollar straw man manufacturing industry.

x-post: That might be because some BernieBros were duped by the Russians, while nobody in their right mind could look at the evidence and think there was nothing to investigate.

You have the weirdest way of dealing with facts and figures, Morbs.

You have the weirdest way of dealing with facts and figures, Morbs.

2 + 2 = HILLARY

Everything that pulls political attention and discussion away from government policies and actions, and toward backward-looking blame-casting, is a harmful distraction.

I again refer to a recent LGM post on this topic:

The purpose of the leaks and how Wikileaks framed them was precisely to sucker journalists into covering anodyne behavior as if it was scandalous. . . . It’s very hard to imagine even Clinton haters as obsessive as Fang and Greenwald writing a story about Hillary Clinton engaging in completely unexceptionable media engagement strategies any minimally competent campaign engages in if the story had been obtained from conventional sources, let alone hyping their “findings” as if they had he 21st century Pentagon Papers on their hands.

To the extent that the positioning of "OMG the Clinton campaign engages in public relations!!" as "scandalous" succeeded in turning off/turning away potential Clinton voters or allowing an already hostile media to say, "See, THE CLINTON BODY COUNT IS REAL" then a little finger-pointing is perfectly appropriate.

Everything that pulls political attention and discussion away from government policies and actions, and toward backward-looking blame-casting, is a harmful distraction.

Given that impeachment is impossible based on my understanding of the dynamics, I am inclined to agree. But if past interactions clearly reflect current/future policy obligations by trumpco, it's slightly scarier than the also clear facts they are anti-democratic, almost purely self-interested, inexperienced, uneducated morans, and incidentally closely allied with groups that actually are even worse.

they're a harmful distraction TO TRUMP, eg they are worth it

eg = ergo

XPOST OTM. It's amazing that a lot of people still don't understand (or disingenuously pretend not to understand) how the leaks function as propaganda and that it leads to the spread of misinformation. It's beyond depressing to hear someone say "but the information in the emails was true!"

replace "reflect" with "reveal"
xpost

where's the tax returns?

shakey otm. the russia stuff is pretty stupid but it is definitely paying off, dems should continue to hammer at it

"and *who* is arguing there shouldn't be an investigation"

That's generally the Intercept audience and left twitter's feeling on it. It's actually not uncommon to see it compared to birtherism. Defining the issue as "hysteria" and repeatedly pointing to marginal conspiracists as fully representative of the Dems on it might have something to do with that.

you are aware there is a spectrum of "Let's investigate" positions, yes? One end being Louise Batshit Mensch.

"left Twitter's feeling"

ah, its FEELING as measured by you, Nerdstrom. Very persuasive.

"and *who* is arguing there shouldn't be an investigation"

That's generally the Intercept audience and left twitter's feeling on it. It's actually not uncommon to see it compared to birtherism. Defining the issue as "hysteria" and repeatedly pointing to marginal conspiracists as fully representative of the Dems on it might have something to do with that.

― Nerdstrom Poindexter, Tuesday, April 4, 2017 11:56 AM (six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/849270233957355521

I think everyone needs to back off the "treason" claims or even the "Putin puppet" claims, but there is clearly a political advantage for Trump opponents in bringing up the Russia connections, especially since the admin. squirms and deflects every time anyone takes a close look. The main reason that Dems are focusing on the Russia stuff is because that is the one area where there is even a modicum of Republican cooperation, with guys like McCain, Graham, and Grassley acknowledging the need for an investigation.

What concerns me is when people on both sides of the aisle try to claim that the Russian hacking and propaganda machines did not influence any votes. Obviously, the leaked emails were not the primary reason for her loss, but conspiracy theory and disinformation caused a guy to storm Comet Pizza with a goddamn assault rifle, fergodsake. You're telling me that the disinformation couldn't convince people to change their votes or stay at home?

X-post: That's pretty disingenuous. They've been loud in their clamoring for 'real' proof, as in something that wasn't already brought up by independent observers last summer, and isn't classified, but they're calling every step of investigating it McCarthyism.

lol i got your independent observers right here

"they're calling every step of investigating it McCarthyism"

are you dumb or evil?

transparency in democracy was a bad idea. thank you Russia for showing us that.

Yeah Glenn legitimately wants an investigation of the issue he's been smugly dismissive about for months even after being wrong and cackling w Tucker Carlson about it on Fox. The best was when he said that Flynn and Sessions were victims of Russian hysteria.

https://twitter.com/charliearchy/status/849021749173731328

Could we have HOOS and the others back to save ILX leftism from these two fucking dolts, please?

our political threads have lacked a bit of steendriving IMO

Yeah Glenn legitimately wants an investigation of the issue he's been smugly dismissive about for months even after being wrong and cackling w Tucker Carlson about it on Fox. The best was when he said that Flynn and Sessions were victims of Russian hysteria.

https://twitter.com/charliearchy/status/849021749173731328

― Nerdstrom Poindexter, 4. april 2017 21:34 (twelve minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Otm. Go back a few steps on that Twitter to find Greenwald dismissing the evidence back in july.

i'm afraid you centrist dolts have driven HOOS away forever

btw gr8 discussion of Taibbi's piece as always, guys

thanks, teach

'When I said it was McCarthyism I just meant we instead need to have a House Committee to investigate these sort of Activities'

I think the point here is that if you want to get the democratic base (which I guess you guys are now, derisively(?) calling The Left) to resist, to show up and help pay for mid-term candidates, then maybe focusing on all of this Russia speculation might not be as effective as you think it is.

If what you want is more to "distract" Trump, sure, I guess this fits the bill. So far, I haven't seen that it is really doing a whole lot to derail Trump's agenda (he's managing to do that with his own horrible policy-making), but I am seeing that it is a nice way for centrist folks in the party to continue ignoring the fucking cancer of neoliberalism that has sucked all of the enthusiasm out of being a democrat. Replacing that with red-baiting and conspiracy theories may work - we'll see - for some, but it's not working for me.

oh great we're recycling that angle for the 345th time

I'll stop recycling if anyone listens.

'The Left' is not the Democratic base.

he's managing to do that with his own horrible policy-making

Trump isn't writing policy because he a) can't/is not interested and b) is spending all his time picking fights over this Russia stuff

I think the two are totally unrelated.

like is it really that difficult to acknowledge that this isn't a damn conspiracy theory but rather something that actually needs investigating and is only growing larger in volume because the White House, instead of saying "Y'know, fine, investigate, you won't find anything", is actively interfering?

remember how during inauguration week how silent the Russia story had become? It only grew to this height because he kept throwing gasoline on his own fire which led to more and more leaks. personally if an actual bipartisan investigation somehow miraculously happened and revealed there were some shady actions by individual players but no actual collusion with Russia, I'd accept it and move on, but it's impossible to get to that point when nobody will approve a special prosecutor and the White House attempts to get people inside intelligence organizations and even within the House intel committee itself to dismiss negative reports against it.

as much as I'm "yeah, weaken this administration by any legal means necessary because it's dangerous", the concept of Russia interfering in our electoral process actually DOES bother me.

OF COURSE INVESTIGATE. Just don't get your hopes up is all Taibbi is saying.

And who is the Democratic base, O' wise Frederik? Do you ever stop being smug? You were wildly wrong about EVERYTHING last election, and you're still acting like you know what the fuck you're talking about. When I make arguments, I add things like "I think" and "to me." Some of you guys have a real knack for making pronouncements without a hint of humility or uncertainty. Yeah yeah posts that sum up ilx or whatever.