Um... could this be "it"?

Mon Feb 19 22:20:28 CST 2018

https://twitter.com/Khanoisseur/status/965637689700577280?t=1&cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjc18y&refsrc=email&iid=43177d221d7a4f5890c9c2a99b4050f8&fl=4&uid=1855289863&nid=244+272699393

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 9:43 AM, Jochen Stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'm sure, some of you have read it but anyway:
>
> http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/02/16/the-peculiar-
> business-of-being-russian-american-in-trumps-usa/?utm_
> medium=email&utm_campaign=NYR%20Venezuela%20Philip%20Roth%
> 20Russian-Americans&utm_content=NYR%20Venezuela%20Philip%20Roth%20Russian-
> Americans+CID_4b9cf7c07b9db30f0e3959087cde6e30&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_
> term=On%20Being%20Russian-American
>
> 2018-02-19 13:50 GMT+01:00 Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>:
>
>> At least this post admits that your last, perhaps as hasty as mine was
>> yesterday morning, stating "bringing Trump to trial" was one of the
>> mistakes I pointed out. Admitting makes the pivot more honest in my
>> ethical framework but that's another judgment call which you may not
>> share, and that's OK.
>>
>> One again, another straightforward conclusion---"the nation is structured
>> to make it very hard to prosecute the rich and powerful"....that is not
>> what we were talking about; that is so true that it does not follow the
>> argument; that is irrelevant to the reality of Russia's interference in the
>> US election . I was talking ultimately---it is all there
>> in my emails--about possible collusion by Team Trump members but I rested
>> on the charges as ALREADY FILED. The Team Trump members who have taken
>> guilty pleas. Who are talking under deals to the Special Prosecutor's team.
>> ...... ...and, speculatively, we will see if collusion goes to the top. I
>> haven't yet mentioned possible obstruction of justice which many good
>> lawyers do think they see. Like Lawrence Tribe.
>>
>> Yes, the rich and powerful, Nixon was pardoned. But he was made to
>> resign.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 1:22 AM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The core problem with the Mueller investigation is that Mueller cannot
>>> according to his role as special prsecutor bring a criminal indictment
>>> directly against Trump. The worst he can do is  1 of these 2 : 1)Present a
>>> conclusion that Trump committed impeachable crimes to the DOJ. Would Ryan
>>> or McConnel then bring impeachment proceedings? Very remote. 2)  name Trump
>>> as an unidicted co-conspirator, as was done to Nixon. Again it goes to the
>>> Republican dominated congress who rely on the same voters who elected Trump.
>>>   If the evidence is a bunch of  infractions that the Republicans can
>>> safely ignore , like the obstruction of Justice case with Comey, it goes
>>> nowhere.
>>>    The original Rosenstein letter for the investigation only authorizes
>>> investigation into collusion with Russia.  It is possible that other crimes
>>> will not be able to be disclosed.
>>>  Mueller has a big team of good lawyers but so do Trump and the
>>> Republicans. The nation is structured to make it very hard to prosecute the
>>> rich and powerful.
>>>
>>> > On Feb 18, 2018, at 8:33 PM, Atticus Pinecone <
>>> atticuspineerecone at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Could this be... the acid test for the Flynn effect?
>>> >
>>> > On Feb 18, 2018, at 4:08 PM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also
>>> know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things
>>> we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don't
>>> know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country
>>> and other free ...
>>> >> ☺
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:39 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> You are correct about overstating the case......too hastily did not
>>> distinguish between a Special Prosecuters' team's fact-based indictments and
>>> >> the same fact-based reporting that so many will doubt--have doubted--
>>> because it hasn't been "vetted' yet by solid evidence-based lawyers, grand
>>> juries, etc.
>>> >>
>>> >> The kind of solid fact-finding reporting-- before a Special
>>> Prosecutor declares-- that is automatically dismissed by so many because
>>> they 'can't show their work' , so to speak.
>>> >> I know a few folks like that.
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks for the rewrite.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> You are overstating the case. An indictment is not legal proof. That
>>> requires a trial and close examination of evidence. A trial seems unlikely.
>>> None of the evidence Mueller has points to collusion. So that particular
>>> media fantasy looks dead in the water. Blaming Jill Stein or Gary Johnson
>>> is undemocratic and will not help decent people run and get elected.
>>> >>    I hope Mueller comes up with something that seriously embarrasses
>>> Trump or puts him on trial, but I would’t put money on it.
>>> >>
>>> >> > On Feb 18, 2018, at 7:26 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Michiko Kakutani‏Verified account @michikokakutani 5h5 hours ago
>>> >> > More
>>> >> > "Counterterrorism intelligence expert Malcolm Nance: Russians
>>> "hacked the mindset of the American public"
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --see the effort to create sympathy and votes for Jill Stein, who,
>>> unlike Bernie Sanders, has NOT denounced the PROVEN, NOW-LEGALLY PROVEN--
>>> >> > FACTS about Russian criminal interference in the US election.
>>> 'Meddling' is the mainstream euphemism.  (I'll give her more time; we know
>>> she doesn't follow US politics very closely)
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Ms Stein got almost 5 times as many votes in Michigan as the
>>> difference in votes between Clinton and Trump.
>>> >> > 5 hours ago
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 10:45 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> > God, you do go on and on... I can barely skim you.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Also you are so often so misguided.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Theses indictments are a strategic first salvo.  They are a dare
>>> against Trump firing Mueller, and they inherently deligitimze his election,
>>> even without any proven collusion.  But collusion is pretty close to
>>> treason, and the flipping of Bannon, Manafort, Gates, etc. make collusion a
>>> real possible deal.  This shit is BIG, no matter how Republicans try to
>>> hide from it.  Their gig is almost up.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > David Morris
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 9:02 PM Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> > It does put teeth in the earlier accusations of Russian efforts to
>>> smear Hillary, but it strikes me as weak and not likely to go anywhere
>>> since the accused are Russians and are highly unikely to go to trial.
>>> Mueller also has given a preliminary if not final statement of no
>>> collusion, no treasonous relationship between Trump election team and
>>> Russia. Indicting people you can’t bring to trial is not so impressive.
>>> Also these Russians don’t seem to have done much but post fake news on the
>>> web, an act which is so common as to be meaningless. The hacked emails
>>> could just as easily been done by someone else and they exposed real
>>> misdeeds by the DNC.
>>> >> >   Whether there are different routes by which Mueller can expose
>>> Trump’s business relations to Russian Oligarchs is open to question.
>>> Unfotunately there may be limits on the scope of his investigation that
>>> prevent him from going into Trump’s business dealings especially with no
>>> indication of electoral collusion.  One obvious hypocrisy problem with the
>>> 13 indictments is that the US interfered in far more direct and
>>> questionable ways in Russian politics to get Yeltsin in power. Also
>>> >> >
>>> >> > James Risen is working now for the Intercept and recently posted 2
>>> stories about Russia. The first is about CIA/NSA cyber weapons that went
>>> missing and seem to be in the hands of the Russians via a group called the
>>> Shadow Brokers. If that ain’t werd enough, Risen says US intel offered to
>>> buy them , mainly because the US agencies don’t know how much was taken and
>>> want to know the extent of the damage. The Russians wanted to throw in
>>> damaging info on Trump but the agencies which had sent money to Germany
>>> then backed off, possibly to avoid the political repercussions  of
>>> processing Trump info with CIA head Pompeo, a  Trump loyalist.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Now it turns out some of the files in question have been sent to
>>> the NYT( Trump files  or cyber spy files is not clear). If they are Trump
>>> files and there is some way of the NYT confirming the validity of any of
>>> the information this may be the next big story.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > So why would Russia now try to get Trump in trouble?
>>> Disinformation? Regrets about Trump? Restore friendlier relations?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The other Risen story  came out the day before the Mueller
>>> announcement and makes it clear Risen thinks the evidence that Russia
>>> hacked the DNC files is very conclusive. It seemed like very strong
>>> evidence to me to me despite my skepticism about one part where the Russian
>>> operative in charge of the operation may be a US double agent and the fact
>>> that the DNC servers were never examined by the FBI. Holy shit it just
>>> keeps getting weirder.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > -
>>> >> > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> -
>>> >> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
www.innergroovemusic.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20180219/65eb095d/attachment.html>