Why The "America First" President Is Really America's First Traitor President (The Evidence Is In Thanks To Max Boot!)

Hanging where he is now, on Putin's puppet strings, and where he should be hanging after stealing the 2016 election with Putin's help

George Will's article appearing in last Sunday's Denver Post ('Perspective', p. 5D, 'Why The  'America First President Put America Last in Helsinki')) basically put the recent Helsinki debacle in somber perspective.. As Will writes:

"America's child president had a play date with a KGB alumnus, who surely enjoyed providing daycare. It was a useful, illuminating event: Because we shall now see how many Republicans retain a capacity for embarrassment."

Well, as it turns out, a lot. At least enough of the throwback, knuckledragger faction - led by Tea baggers Jim Jordan (OH) and Mark Meadows (NC) - who've remained consummate Trump "asslickers" to borrow from Janice's parlance.  How so? Well, because they've launched out on a deranged quest to try to impeach Rod Rosenstein.  (Effort since shelved, probably because Jordan - up to his ears in a  sexual abuse case at Ohio State - has to get his bearings)  So there remain many quislings, i.e. minor traitors,  willing to carry the Traitor's water for him, for whatever reason. As Mr. Will put it:

"In Helsinki the president who bandies the phrase 'America First', put himself first - as always- and America last, behind Vladimir Putin's regime."

Of course, most of us aware, sane and still in contact with objective reality know what he did next: he again tried to deny anything amiss, but then in the next breath - invited Putin over for anther "summit" just before the midterms. Can you say "terrible optics"? How about  'ghastly guilty as sin' optics?  How about using Twitter recklessly like a tweet troll, such as this morning's bombastic effluent about Michael Cohen's assertion he was told in advance about the Trump Tower meet? Well, again, most of us knew that, and that a liar's denials will remain lies.  How does that old saw go? He "doth protest too much?"  In a "liar's contest"  who wins, Trump or Cohen? Well, Trump, hands down.

Then yesterday we were informed the Putin fall  meet was "pushed back" until next year, ostensibly "after the "Russia witch hunt" - according to John 'Ripper' Bolton.  This was echoed by a story in yesterday's WSJ 'Putin Summit Pushed Back' (p. A4) where we read:

"Trump won't hold another official bilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin until next year, the White House said Wednesday, citing the  continuing special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election."

Thus the spin was that Dotard controlled the timing, whereas in fact, as security specialist Malcolm Nance pointed out on 'Last Word':  "It was just Putin giving Trump a thumb in the eye, after leading him around with a nose ring in Helsinki."

In other words, Vlad is da boss man here, not the Donald. After the obsequious Dotard blurted out the invite - as a slap to DNI Dan Coats, in Boulder for a security summit- he got a rather cool non- response from  Vlad as if to say: "What the fuck are you thinking, slave boy? You're really gonna invite me to the White House before the midterms after I helped you snatch the presidency in 2016?".  And, of course, nationwide all hell broke loose, because people still in possession of their faculties could not believe their eyes and ears that a sitting president - and I use that term loosely - would actually invite a co-conspirator in facilitating his election two years ago, to the White House. Had he finally gone round the bend?  Was his dementia finally catching up to him as it did his old man, Fred?  In any case "officials said they still hadn't been told what Messrs. Trump and Putin agreed to in their closed door meet in Helsinki".

And not even our intelligence agencies know yet what the duo agreed to, only that the Russkie media has been blurting out non-stop "updates" on alleged agreements.

Another chestnut from the WSJ account (ibid.):

"It is unclear what basis the White House has for believing special counsel Robert Mueller will conclude his investigation by the beginning of next year."

In fact, there is NO basis at all, zero, zilch and nada. Mueller's probe could be going on well into next year at this time or two further years, a la Watergate.  It is only wishful thinking to believe that Trump,  Putin's on site co -conspirator,  will be free of the Mueller spotlight by then. In fact, if he doesn't cooperate in answering questions of the special counsel it could drag on indefinitely.

Oh, wait, did I write 'co-conspirator" with Putin and the GRU in stealing that 2016 election? Yes I did and though the mutt incessantly bellows "no collusion" like a fucking mantra - and at least 264 times since Helsinki -  we  now know the opposite is true. . As Max Boot writes in the WaPo from two days ago:

"Trump is willing, under duress, to briefly and begrudgingly admit that Russian “meddling” took place in 2016 before reverting to calling it a “big hoax.” But he always maintains that the plot against America had no impact; he describes it as a “Democrat excuse for losing the ’16 Election.” Faithfully echoing the president, other Republicans, such as House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), say it’s “clear” that the Russian interference “didn’t have a material effect on our elections.” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders even claims that the U.S. intelligence community reached that conclusion.

Here is the intelligence community’s assessment, partially declassified in January 2017: “We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election. The US Intelligence Community is charged with monitoring and assessing the intentions, capabilities, and actions of foreign actors; it does not analyze US political processes or US public opinion.” When then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo claimed last fall that “the intelligence community's assessment is that the Russian meddling that took place did not affect the outcome of the election,” his own agency rebuked him.

While the intelligence agencies are silent on the impact of Russia’s attack, outside experts who have examined the Kremlin campaign — which included stealing and sharing Democratic Party emails, spreading propaganda online and hacking state voter rolls — have concluded that it did affect an extremely close election decided by fewer than 80,000 votes in three states. Clint Watts, a former FBI agent, writes in his recent book, “Messing with the Enemy,” that “Russia absolutely influenced the U.S. presidential election,” especially in Michigan and Wisconsin, where Trump’s winning margin was less than 1 percent in each state.

We still don’t know the full extent of the Russian interference, but we know its propaganda reached 126 million people via Facebook alone. A BuzzFeed analysis found that fake news stories on Facebook generated more social engagement in the last three months of the campaign than did legitimate articles: The “20 top-performing false election stories from hoax sites and hyperpartisan blogs generated 8,711,000 shares, reactions, and comments on Facebook.” Almost all of this “fake news” was either started or spread by Russian bots, including claims that the pope had endorsed Trump and that Hillary Clinton had sold weapons to the Islamic State."

Even more appalling:

 "the Russians may have been able to 'alter or delete voter registration data,' potentially disenfranchising Clinton voters."

Sounds like an election theft to me!

Boot goes on:

"Then there was the crucial impact of the Russian hacks of Democratic documents disseminated primarily by WikiLeaks. The first tranche of stolen documents — more than 19,000 emails and 8,000 attachments — was strategically released on July 22, 2016, three days before the Democratic convention.  The second tranche of stolen documents was released on Oct. 7, just 29 minutes after The Post reported on the “Access Hollywood” videotape in which Trump is heard boasting about grabbing women by the genitals. These emails, stolen from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, distracted voter attention by revealing the transcripts of lucrative speeches Clinton had given to Goldman Sachs, a populist boogeyman.

A third release of stolen emails, on Oct. 11, revealed that Democratic operative Donna Brazile, while working at CNN, had provided debate questions to Clinton during the primaries and that senior Democratic operatives, who were themselves Catholics, had exchanged emails disparaging Republicans who cherry-picked their faith for political gain. This fueled Trump’s narrative that the election was “rigged” and that the “Clinton team” was, as he said, “viciously attacking Catholics and Evangelicals.” The latter charge, unfair as it was, proved especially important in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — swing states with lots of Catholic voters."

As Boot put it:

"Little wonder that Trump said “I love WikiLeaks” and mentioned its revelations 164 times in the last month of the campaign. “This WikiLeaks stuff is unbelievable,” Trump said on Oct. 12. Eight days later, he marveled, “Boy, that WikiLeaks has done a job on her, hasn’t it?”

Why all the praise for WikiLeaks? Clearly, as Janice put it, "there has to be something rotten in Denmark." ' By contrast, Trump and his apologists like  Devin Nunes and "Nosferatu" Giulani,

pretend that the Russian attack — including the WikiLeaks revelations — was no big deal. That beggars belief, as Boot put it, given the attack succeeded. Dotard got shoehorned into the White House,  after all, and Hillary didn't. This isn't a case of "sour grapes"   but of acknowledging Trump's prime beneficiary - Vlad Putin - who,  as Julia Joffee explained a week ago,  is where the Kompromat lies, e.g.

"Many people tried to speculate on what it was,  what kind of Kompromat, the Russians had on Trump. When the answer - like infidelity or death-  was staring them in the face. Yes, Putin has something on Trump. He helped him win. That's the Kompromat."

So no the collaborators -conspirators  didn’t fail: Trump won, and even then only in the archaic electoral college - which also failed to do its job in stopping a populist demagogue, especially one adopted by one party with billions of bucks at its disposal and Russian agents to help . See e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2016/12/electors-alas-set-to-rubberstamp-4.html

And:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/commentary-why-the-electoral-college-system-makes-little-sense-today

Russian disinformation wasn’t the only factor in the outcome and was probably less important in the end than FBI Director James B. Comey’s announcement 11 days before the election that he was reopening the Clinton email investigation.

But  as former FBI agent Cliff Watts concludes: “Without the Russian influence effort, I believe Trump would not have even been within striking distance of Clinton on Election Day.” 

That is the inconvenient truth the Putin Republicans won’t admit.

Lastly, a clear piece of any whole conspiracy fabric is trying to cover up the crime, or nullify its reporting for history. This happened within days of Helsinki after a Reuters reporter at the press conference directly asked Putin if he'd helped Trump into power.  Within days the official White House transcript and video had been altered as Rachel Maddow originally reported, e.g.

Maddow: White House removed Putin support for Trump from official 

As per The Hill  account from the above link:

"Maddow specifically references a question from Reuters reporter Jeff Mason, who asked Putin if he wanted Trump to win the 2016 presidential election and if he directed any of his officials to interfere in the election to help Trump's campaign. 

Putin responds that he did want Trump to win the election because "he talked about bringing the U.S.-Russia relationship back to normal." 

Maddow contrasted that footage with what the White House posted, which omits the first part of Mason's question. Mason is only seen asking if Putin directed officials to help with election interference.

"This was by no means malicious," a White House official told CNN. The White House told the outlet that the audio feed used to produce the video and the transcript did not turn up Mason's audio in time to catch the beginning of the question while the translator was still speaking.

But Maddow argued that the White House did it on purpose.

"They just dropped it out," Maddow said. “What the White House has disappeared from the official U.S. government record of that meeting ... is President Putin answering in the affirmative when asked if he wanted Trump to win the election,”

Whom to believe? Having investigated other conspiracies and their methods of cover up, e.g. in the fake paper trails in Iran-Contra and the BCCI banking conspiracies, I side with Rachel.  Probably a more direct analogy is with Warren Commissioner Gerald Ford (who knew diddly  squat about anatomy) altering the JFK autopsy report location of the back wound to conform to the single bullet theory, e.g.

Ford asserted his autopsy edits were merely "minor changes" that didn't affect history - a claim as false and disingenuous as Trump's telling a  Kansas City VFW convention several days ago:

"Just remember, what you are seeing and what you are reading is not what’s happening,” 

Seriously? This is straight out of the playbook of totalitarian  "Oceania" as portrayed in Orwell's  '1984'. As noted in John Hohmann's 'The Daily', Trump's bizarre quote:

"reminded many people — including a former CIA case officer — of “1984,” the dystopian novel. “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command,” wrote George Orwell. “And if all others accepted the lie, which the party imposed, if all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became the truth.” 

This is what Traitor Trump and his quisling accomplices want to happen, make no mistake. It is thus up to the rest of us - in possession of fully conscious brains and functional eyes,  ears  -  to ensure that travesty doesn't happen. So there you have it. And whether Trump is indicted or not the evidence is out there he's as guilty of high crimes, even treason, as any other historical collaborator n a nefarious conspiracy to undermine our nation.   

Right now this white....errr....orange  trash, lowlife "billionaire" grifter is on Putin's puppet strings. He deserves to swinging from a tree in D.C. after a Mueller indictment for treason.  Giving this treasonous rat a military parade would amount to a consummate insult not only to the military, but the nation. Right now, on learning of that, my Revolutionary War ancestors would be turning over in their graves.