Trump's Russian Collusion

[seacoaster]

More commentary:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... look-away/

"Quid. Pro. Quo.

We knew that already. But Bolton’s testimony would make that devastating conclusion inescapable, even to Republican senators who have striven mightily to blind themselves to the obvious.

Bolton, who has already announced that he would comply with a Senate trial subpoena, actually wants to testify, it seems. He wants to testify “for several reasons,” says the Times. “He believes he has relevant information.” (Gee, do you think?) He’s also rightly worried he’ll get trashed if he doesn’t testify and his explosive account comes out only later for $32.50 on Amazon. (One hopes he’d like to do it for the sake of the country, too.)

No wonder Trump’s lawyers so vehemently opposed Bolton’s being subpoenaed last week. No wonder they’ve been plotting with Senate Republicans to make sure that, if Bolton does testify, he does so in secret. No wonder Trump himself expressed concern last week about the possibility of Bolton testifying. No wonder why, on Saturday, none of the president’s lawyers dared even utter the word “Bolton.”

And no wonder that, just after midnight Monday, a few hours after the Times story came out, Trump tweeted a flat (but unsworn) denial of Bolton’s account: “I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens. … If John Bolton said this, it was only to sell a book.”

From Trump on down, they all know how damning Bolton’s testimony would be to Trump’s defense. Indeed, the leak of what’s in Bolton’s book shows how disingenuous the president’s defense has been.

Before the Senate on Saturday, deputy White House counsel Michael Purpura laid out the elements of that defense. Key among them: “Not a single witness testified that the President himself said there was any connection between any investigations and security assistance, a Presidential meeting, or anything else.”

He continued: “Most of the Democrats’ witnesses have never spoken to the President at all, let alone about Ukraine security assistance.” And: “The Democrats’ entire quid pro quo theory is based on nothing more than the initial speculation of one person” — U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland.

If Bolton testifies to what’s in his manuscript, these arguments, weak as they are, will collapse. The words will come from Trump’s mouth, because Bolton will have put them there. The direct witness whose absence Trump’s lawyers trumpeted will have appeared.

And that witness would destroy the central defense Trump’s lawyers have raised. Which is that the call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was perfect — factually, legally, and constitutionally.

Or, as Purpura put it on Saturday: “The Democrats’ allegation that the President engaged in a quid pro quo is unfounded and contrary to the facts. … The President was, at all times, acting in our national interest and pursuant to his oath of office.” The president has “done nothing wrong”; “rightly, he had real concerns” about “burden-sharing” and “corruption,” which was why he held back the aid.

Bolton begs to differ.

In light of Trump’s own arguments, it would now be preposterous, if it ever wasn’t, for the Senate not to call Bolton as a witness. To refuse to do so would ensure that the trial would be recorded forever in history as a GOP-orchestrated farce. And if the president’s defense is that Bolton is now peddling this tale of quid pro quo “only to sell a book,” fine. Let’s also have a look at the documents that could demonstrate who is telling the truth.

Trump’s own lawyers have framed the removal question as turning on proof of the president’s true motives. Well, here’s a witness who can tell us what the president, in a face-to-face conversation, said he wanted.

Trump’s lawyers complain that no witness talked to Trump about the linkage between the aid and the investigation. Well, here’s Bolton, ready, willing, and able to testify.

Trump himself claims that Bolton is lying. Well, there’s a tried-and-true way to find out if he is or is not.

Mr. Bolton, please raise your right hand."

[jhu72]

You know, Orange Duce has just been covering up for Bolton because he likes him. The drug deal was really John's. That's why Orange Duce fired him.

[a fan]

Kristol is pro government-expansion

Says the biggest "pro-government expansion" poster on the board.

You're THRILLED with Trump's $3+ Trillion expansion of socialism, handouts, and bigger government. How many times have you bragged about this economy that's fully fueled by big government expansion, and using the government's credit to borrow money and hand it out to guys like you?

No one here likes Trump economic policies more. And how many times have you hit the free press, and instead preferring the party line from your government?

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt, Pete......you're the poster boy for big government.

[seacoaster]

You know, Orange Duce has just been covering up for Bolton because he likes him. The drug deal was really John's. That's why Orange Duce fired him.

One sure gets the feeling that, if the document floodgate opened, the Vice President would be in this up to Mother's knickertops -- and that the real concern is with an interim President named Nancy. I just can't find another explanation why the GOP members of the Senate don't just say, OK, Pence will be the President and will run in 2020, and the Mar-A-Lago crime family can just move out and move on.

[Typical Lax Dad]

You know, Orange Duce has just been covering up for Bolton because he likes him. The drug deal was really John's. That's why Orange Duce fired him.

One sure gets the feeling that, if the document floodgate opened, the Vice President would be in this up to Mother's knickertops -- and that the real concern is with an interim President named Nancy. I just can't find another explanation why the GOP members of the Senate don't just say, OK, Pence will be the President and will run in 2020, and the Mar-A-Lago crime family can just move out and move on.

Seems plausible.....

[RedFromMI]

You know, Orange Duce has just been covering up for Bolton because he likes him. The drug deal was really John's. That's why Orange Duce fired him.

One sure gets the feeling that, if the document floodgate opened, the Vice President would be in this up to Mother's knickertops -- and that the real concern is with an interim President named Nancy. I just can't find another explanation why the GOP members of the Senate don't just say, OK, Pence will be the President and will run in 2020, and the Mar-A-Lago crime family can just move out and move on.

Seems plausible.....

Don't think you would ever see it get that far - even a short term President Pence would quickly name a VP and get swift Senate approval, particularly if he named someone like Romney or even Haley.

[jhu72]

You know, Orange Duce has just been covering up for Bolton because he likes him. The drug deal was really John's. That's why Orange Duce fired him.

One sure gets the feeling that, if the document floodgate opened, the Vice President would be in this up to Mother's knickertops -- and that the real concern is with an interim President named Nancy. I just can't find another explanation why the GOP members of the Senate don't just say, OK, Pence will be the President and will run in 2020, and the Mar-A-Lago crime family can just move out and move on.

Seems plausible.....

Don't think you would ever see it get that far - even a short term President Pence would quickly name a VP and get swift Senate approval, particularly if he named someone like Romney or even Haley.

Pence, another POS, would never do that. He would not name anyone who could eclipse him. That's a really low bar to clear.

[njbill]

Yeah, but the nominee would have much more difficulty getting approved by the House (both Senate and House approval are required). So Nancy would pick the VP.

[seacoaster]

Yeah, but the nominee would have much more difficulty getting approved by the House (both Senate and House approval are required). So Nancy would pick the VP.

Then he hobbles along without a VP for a few months?

[old salt]

He was duly elected, remember?

You keep thinking alllll the consequences of voting for Trump are going to fall solely on the liberals.

Nope.

And of course, you blame the MSM instead of Trump for this mess. We've now passed the three year mark, and old salt's Xmas miracle of "nothing being Trump's fault" continues.

Neat. If he makes it to four years doing nothing wrong, does he get in to Cooperstown? Not sure how the voting works with that....

He was duly elected, but he had no shadow govt, waiting in the wings & think tanks, ready to re-enter through the revolving door.

Given the strength of The Resistance, from all sides, from without & within, it's remarkable that Trump has lasted this long.

If he should somehow survive & win re-election, will he be allowed to serve another term ? Doubtful.
The Deep State & MSM won't tolerate it. Schiff's already telling us not to trust the 2020 election.

If it was any other poster, I'd replace the word 'Trump' the word 'Obama", and repost this as "fixed it". But I respect you, and your polite request....so instead I'll simply say, that's what they said about Obama. And Bush, for that matter.

And if Biden gets elected? Same thing will happen to him. McConnell will refuse to work with him, and the four year Ukraine investigation will start in the Senate.

Meanwhile, nothing will get done, and we'll be back here talking about all the stuff that didn't get done while "Mom and Dad" pretend to fight....and the 1% will have an even larger share of our wealth.

You may consider extending that same courtesy to all posters & not mess with the words they post.
It might help reduce the rancor in these discussions.

My point was the availability of a shadow govt of experienced DC hands. Biden will be able to bring back an entire govt of Obama alums, to augment Obama holdovers still serving within the Deep State. Trump has no such talent pool from which to draw. His foreign policy is as much an anathema to NeoCons & NeverTrumper (R)'s as it is to the (D)'s. Bolton & the leakers are Exhibit A. On foreign policy & national security issues, Biden will get 60 Senate votes, even if the (R)'s still control. The sequester budget caps are gone, the Russia Hawks will be ascendant & the (D)'s won't be able to walk back the Red Scare they've been hyping since 2016.

[Kismet]

Senate Chaplain Barry Black delivers the line of the day at the opening of today's impeachment trial proceedings

"You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

[foreverlax]

Senate Chaplain Barry Black delivers the line of the day at the opening of today's impeachment trial proceedings

"You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

Followed by Sekulow suggesting the impeachment is over a policy issue.

[Peter Brown]

I am a very consistent hater of John Bolton.

Consistent meaning this is the first time you have made any comment about Bolton....gottcha.

Consistent in my circle; I do not know if I have ever said anything about him here. The same goes for Kristol. You will never hear me say a nice thing about these guys. They are thoroughly bad for America, and especially bad for our enlisted men and women.

These guys have never met a war they didn't love and they never met an enlistment agency they'd personally visit. Backbencher worms. Befriend him at your peril.

This entire impeachment exercise really isn't about one's love of John Bolton or Bill Kristol. It is in the long run an exercise on the part of elected politicians to seek and provide some level of truth. We can start with the supposition ( likely true) that all pols are inherently compromised if not outright corrupt on some level, but the question at the end of the day in our democracy is how much corruption the public is willing to tolerate. A big part of what I see as current political corruption involves deviation from the truth. In this hyper partisan age our tolerance for such shenanigans seems to have risen to a seemingly unprecedented level, but perhaps this impeachment exercise will enable us to throttle back a notch or two.

Apart from the never Trump republicans, all republicans are willing to accept infinite corruption. There is no democratic equivalent, or even close to the cult of Trump and his zombies.

I can't understand why a guy like Trump was elected and not another squish republican...guys like JHU72 have always been fair to people like Romney ("binders full of women") and McCain ("racist"). Clearly from the sentence above, he is a very nuanced fellow.

[jhu72]

He was duly elected, remember?

You keep thinking alllll the consequences of voting for Trump are going to fall solely on the liberals.

Nope.

And of course, you blame the MSM instead of Trump for this mess. We've now passed the three year mark, and old salt's Xmas miracle of "nothing being Trump's fault" continues.

Neat. If he makes it to four years doing nothing wrong, does he get in to Cooperstown? Not sure how the voting works with that....

He was duly elected, but he had no shadow govt, waiting in the wings & think tanks, ready to re-enter through the revolving door.

Given the strength of The Resistance, from all sides, from without & within, it's remarkable that Trump has lasted this long.

If he should somehow survive & win re-election, will he be allowed to serve another term ? Doubtful.
The Deep State & MSM won't tolerate it. Schiff's already telling us not to trust the 2020 election.

If it was any other poster, I'd replace the word 'Trump' the word 'Obama", and repost this as "fixed it". But I respect you, and your polite request....so instead I'll simply say, that's what they said about Obama. And Bush, for that matter.

And if Biden gets elected? Same thing will happen to him. McConnell will refuse to work with him, and the four year Ukraine investigation will start in the Senate.

Meanwhile, nothing will get done, and we'll be back here talking about all the stuff that didn't get done while "Mom and Dad" pretend to fight....and the 1% will have an even larger share of our wealth.

You may consider extending that same courtesy to all posters & not mess with the words they post.
It might help reduce the rancor in these discussions.

My point was the availability of a shadow govt of experienced DC hands. Biden will be able to bring back an entire govt of Obama alums, to augment Obama holdovers still serving within the Deep State. Trump has no such talent pool from which to draw. His foreign policy is as much an anathema to NeoCons & NeverTrumper (R)'s as it is to the (D)'s. Bolton & the leakers are Exhibit A. On foreign policy & national security issues, Biden will get 60 Senate votes, even if the (R)'s still control. The sequester budget caps are gone, the Russia Hawks will be ascendant & the (D)'s won't be able to walk back the Red Scare they've been hyping since 2016.

There is no democratic "red scare". The democrats only issue with the Russians is their cyber intrusion and Trump's unwillingness to do anything about it. No one is afraid of the Russian conventional or nuclear military save for neocons (like yourself).

[old salt]

The call is coming from inside the (White) house:

Geoff Bennett
@GeoffRBennett
New from John Bolton aide Sarah Tinsley: “Several weeks ago, the ambassador sent a hard copy of his draft manuscript to the White House for prepublication review by the National Security Council. The ambassador has not passed that manuscript to anyone else for review. Period.”
5:28 PM · Jan 26, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

The Deep State strikes back -- again!!

Imagine that.

Don't tell old salt. He doesn't want to hear that his Deep State is Trump's own people.

Must be an undercover Hillary supporter.

The NYT''s been sitting on this for max impact. Who knows how long they've been holding this hole card. How many times have MSM talking heads hinted that other stuff would soon be coming out, specifically citing Bolton's book as an example. The MSM's not going to let the Senate decide. The unbiased, impartial Fifth Column/Fourth Estate, working their will. What's new ? Just more details about the drug deal already in the record. Bolton will sell some books but who will ever trust him in their Admin again ? Will this change any Senate votes on witnesses ?

.and you know this about NYT, how exactly? Does your know-it-all persona have any limits? Not only are you an allged expert on the press, national security, military affairs and every other subject, your myopia about Trump is simply stunning. If your alleged deep state Apparatchiks really do all of the things you think they do, why is it that this stuff only started with the current occupant of the WH and not with ANY of the preceding Presidents? Like your hero DOPUS, you blame everything on Obama to this day. Very weak sauce, Sherlock. Keep yammering and maybe it will qualify you for a spot on the defense team.

You pay to read the NYT. You should pay closer attention to what their reporters say in their tv talking head roles.
Can you honestly say you've never heard them (& their WP colleagues) opine that more would be coming out from Bolton's book ?
Just like the Steele Dossier, they've likely had leaks from Bolton's manuscript for weeks. They just needed a hook to publish & cover for their source(s). Bolton's submitting it to the NSC for review, gave them the cover they needed. You know the way the game is played.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The call is coming from inside the (White) house:

Geoff Bennett
@GeoffRBennett
New from John Bolton aide Sarah Tinsley: “Several weeks ago, the ambassador sent a hard copy of his draft manuscript to the White House for prepublication review by the National Security Council. The ambassador has not passed that manuscript to anyone else for review. Period.”
5:28 PM · Jan 26, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

The Deep State strikes back -- again!!

Imagine that.

Don't tell old salt. He doesn't want to hear that his Deep State is Trump's own people.

Must be an undercover Hillary supporter.

The NYT''s been sitting on this for max impact. Who knows how long they've been holding this hole card. How many times have MSM talking heads hinted that other stuff would soon be coming out, specifically citing Bolton's book as an example. The MSM's not going to let the Senate decide. The unbiased, impartial Fifth Column/Fourth Estate, working their will. What's new ? Just more details about the drug deal already in the record. Bolton will sell some books but who will ever trust him in their Admin again ? Will this change any Senate votes on witnesses ?

.and you know this about NYT, how exactly? Does your know-it-all persona have any limits? Not only are you an allged expert on the press, national security, military affairs and every other subject, your myopia about Trump is simply stunning. If your alleged deep state Apparatchiks really do all of the things you think they do, why is it that this stuff only started with the current occupant of the WH and not with ANY of the preceding Presidents? Like your hero DOPUS, you blame everything on Obama to this day. Very weak sauce, Sherlock. Keep yammering and maybe it will qualify you for a spot on the defense team.

You pay to read the NYT. You should pay closer attention to what their reporters say in their tv talking head roles.
Can you honestly say you've never heard them (& their WP colleagues) opine that more would be coming out from Bolton's book ?
Just like the Steele Dossier, they've likely had leaks from Bolton's manuscript for weeks. They just needed a hook to publish & cover for their source(s). Bolton's submitting it to the NSC for review, gave them the cover they needed. You know the way the game is played.

Trump team could have hit Bolton in the pocketbook by introducing documents and witnesses.....Old Bolton would have to work off that advance by delivering future books or taking out a mortgage.

[old salt]

He was duly elected, remember?

You keep thinking alllll the consequences of voting for Trump are going to fall solely on the liberals.

Nope.

And of course, you blame the MSM instead of Trump for this mess. We've now passed the three year mark, and old salt's Xmas miracle of "nothing being Trump's fault" continues.

Neat. If he makes it to four years doing nothing wrong, does he get in to Cooperstown? Not sure how the voting works with that....

He was duly elected, but he had no shadow govt, waiting in the wings & think tanks, ready to re-enter through the revolving door.

Given the strength of The Resistance, from all sides, from without & within, it's remarkable that Trump has lasted this long.

If he should somehow survive & win re-election, will he be allowed to serve another term ? Doubtful.
The Deep State & MSM won't tolerate it. Schiff's already telling us not to trust the 2020 election.

If it was any other poster, I'd replace the word 'Trump' the word 'Obama", and repost this as "fixed it". But I respect you, and your polite request....so instead I'll simply say, that's what they said about Obama. And Bush, for that matter.

And if Biden gets elected? Same thing will happen to him. McConnell will refuse to work with him, and the four year Ukraine investigation will start in the Senate.

Meanwhile, nothing will get done, and we'll be back here talking about all the stuff that didn't get done while "Mom and Dad" pretend to fight....and the 1% will have an even larger share of our wealth.

You may consider extending that same courtesy to all posters & not mess with the words they post.
It might help reduce the rancor in these discussions.

My point was the availability of a shadow govt of experienced DC hands. Biden will be able to bring back an entire govt of Obama alums, to augment Obama holdovers still serving within the Deep State. Trump has no such talent pool from which to draw. His foreign policy is as much an anathema to NeoCons & NeverTrumper (R)'s as it is to the (D)'s. Bolton & the leakers are Exhibit A. On foreign policy & national security issues, Biden will get 60 Senate votes, even if the (R)'s still control. The sequester budget caps are gone, the Russia Hawks will be ascendant & the (D)'s won't be able to walk back the Red Scare they've been hyping since 2016.

There is no democratic "red scare". The democrats only issue with the Russians is their cyber intrusion and Trump's unwillingness to do anything about it. No one is afraid of the Russian conventional or nuclear military save for neocons (like yourself).

Then why are we spending billions garrisoning Europe & arming Ukraine ?

[old salt]

A little history for our resident expert on all things - The author, noted British historian Miranda Carter, would run rings around him and his sycophants.

Pay extra attention to her LAST line.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultu ... -an-empire

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A BAD-TEMPERED, DISTRACTIBLE DOOFUS RUNS AN EMPIRE?

"One of the few things that Kaiser Wilhelm II, who ruled Germany from 1888 to 1918, had a talent for was causing outrage. A particular specialty was insulting other monarchs. He called the diminutive King Victor Emmanuel III of Italy “the dwarf” in front of the king’s own entourage. He called Prince (later Tsar) Ferdinand, of Bulgaria, “Fernando naso,” on account of his beaky nose, and spread rumors that he was a hermaphrodite. Since Wilhelm was notably indiscreet, people always knew what he was saying behind their backs. Ferdinand had his revenge. After a visit to Germany, in 1909, during which the Kaiser slapped him on the bottom in public and then refused to apologize, Ferdinand awarded a valuable arms contract that had been promised to the Germans to a French company instead.

Not that this deterred the Kaiser. One of the many things that Wilhelm was convinced he was brilliant at, despite all evidence to the contrary, was “personal diplomacy,” fixing foreign policy through one-on-one meetings with other European monarchs and statesmen. In fact, Wilhelm could do neither the personal nor the diplomacy, and these meetings rarely went well. The Kaiser viewed other people in instrumental terms, was a compulsive liar, and seemed to have a limited understanding of cause and effect. In 1890, he let lapse a long-standing defensive agreement with Russia—the German Empire’s vast and sometimes threatening eastern neighbor. He judged, wrongly, that Russia was so desperate for German good will that he could keep it dangling. Instead, Russia immediately made an alliance with Germany’s western neighbor and enemy, France. Wilhelm decided he would charm and manipulate Tsar Nicholas II (a “ninny” and a “whimperer,” according to Wilhelm, fit only “to grow turnips”) into abandoning the alliance. In 1897, Nicholas told Wilhelm to get lost; the German-Russian alliance withered.

About a decade ago, I published “George, Nicholas and Wilhelm: Three Royal Cousins and the Road to World War I,” a book that was, in part, about Kaiser Wilhelm, who is probably best known for being Queen Victoria’s first grandchild and for leading Germany into the First World War. Ever since Donald Trump started campaigning for President, the Kaiser has once again been on my mind—his personal failings, and the global fallout they led to.

Trump’s tweets were what first reminded me of the Kaiser. Wilhelm was a compulsive speechmaker who constantly strayed off script. Even his staff couldn’t stop him, though it tried, distributing copies of speeches to the German press before he’d actually given them. Unfortunately, the Austrian press printed the speeches as they were delivered, and the gaffes and insults soon circulated around Europe. “There is only one person who is master in this empire and I am not going to tolerate any other,” Wilhelm liked to say, even though Germany had a democratic assembly and political parties. (“I’m the only one that matters,” Trump has said.) The Kaiser reserved particular abuse for political parties that voted against his policies. “I regard every Social Democrat as an enemy of the Fatherland,” he said, and he denounced the German Socialist party as a “gang of traitors.” August Bebel, the Socialist party leader, said that every time the Kaiser opened his mouth, the party gained another hundred thousand votes.

When Wilhelm became emperor, in 1888, at twenty-nine years old, he was determined to be seen as tough and powerful. He fetishized the Army, surrounded himself with generals (though, like Trump, he didn’t like listening to them), owned a hundred and twenty military uniforms, and wore little else. He cultivated a special severe facial expression for public occasions and photographs—there are many, as Wilhelm would send out signed photos and portrait busts to anyone who’d have one—and also a heavily waxed, upward-turned moustache that was so famous it had its own name, “Er ist Erreicht!” (It is accomplished!)

In fact, Wilhelm didn’t accomplish very much. The general staff of the German Army agreed that the Kaiser couldn’t “lead three soldiers over a gutter.” He had neither the attention span nor the ability. “Distractions, whether they are little games with his army or navy, travelling or hunting—are everything to him,” a disillusioned former mentor wrote. “He reads very little apart from newspaper cuttings, hardly writes anything himself apart from marginalia on reports and considers those talks best which are quickly over and done with.” The Kaiser’s entourage compiled press cuttings for him, mostly about himself, which he read as obsessively as Trump watches television. A critical story would send him into paroxysms of fury.

During Wilhelm’s reign, the upper echelons of the German government began to unravel into a free-for-all, with officials wrangling against one another. “The most contradictory opinions are now urged at high and all-highest level,” a German diplomat lamented. To add to the confusion, Wilhelm changed his position every five minutes. He was deeply suggestible and would defer to the last person he’d spoken to or cutting he’d read—at least until he’d spoken to the next person. “It is unendurable,” a foreign minister wrote, in 1894. “Today one thing and tomorrow the next and after a few days something completely different.” Wilhelm’s staff and ministers resorted to manipulation, distraction, and flattery to manage him. “In order to get him to accept an idea you must act as if the idea were his,” the Kaiser’s closest friend, Philipp zu Eulenburg, advised his colleagues, adding, “Don’t forget the sugar.” (In “Fire and Fury,” Michael Wolff writes that to get Trump to take an action his White House staff has to persuade him that “he had thought of it himself.”)

More sinisterly, Wilhelm’s patronage of the aggressive, nationalistic right left him surrounded by ministers who held a collective conviction that a European war was inevitable and even desirable. Alfred von Tirpitz, Germany’s Naval chief—who realized at his first meeting with the Kaiser that he did “not live in the real world”—consciously exploited Wilhelm’s envy and rage in order to extract the astronomical sums required to build a German Navy to rival Britain’s, a project that created an arms race and became an intractable block to peace negotiations.

The Kaiser was susceptible but never truly controllable. He asserted his authority unpredictably, as if to prove he was still in charge, staging rogue interventions into his own advisers’ policies and sacking ministers without warning. “You cannot have the faintest idea what I have prevented,” his most obsequious aide, Bernhard von Bülow, complained to a friend, “and how much of my time I must devote to restoring order where our All Highest Master has created chaos.”

The Kaiser’s darkest secret was that every few years—after his meddling and blunders had exposed his incompetence or resulted in a crisis—he would suffer a full-blown collapse. His entourage would scrape him off the floor, and he would retire to one of his palaces, where, prostrate, he would weep and complain that he’d been victimized. After the moaning came the pacing, in uncharacteristic silence. Occasionally he would give way to tears. Gradually he would recalibrate his sense of reality—or unreality—and after a few weeks would bounce up again, as boisterous and obstreperous as ever.

I spent six years writing my book about Wilhelm and his cousins, King George V, of England, and Tsar Nicholas II, and the Kaiser’s egotism and eccentricity made him by far the most entertaining of the three to write about. After a while, though, living with Wilhelm—as you do when you write about another person over a long period—became onerous. It was dispiriting, even oppressive, to spend so much time around someone who never learned, and never changed.

The Kaiser wasn’t singly responsible for the First World War, but his actions and choices helped to bring it on. If international conflict is around the corner, it would seem that you really don’t want a narcissist in control of a global power. Wilhelm’s touchiness, his unpredictability, his need to be acknowledged: these things struck a chord with elements in Germany, which was in a kind of adolescent spasm—quick to perceive slights, excited by the idea of flexing its muscles, filled with a sense of entitlement. At the same time, Wilhelm’s posturing raised tensions in Europe. His clumsy personal diplomacy created suspicion. His alliance with the vitriolic right and his slavish admiration for the Army inched the country closer and closer to war. Once the war was actually upon him, the government and military effectively swept the Kaiser aside. And the gravest damage occurred only after Wilhelm abdicated, in November of 1918. (He spent the rest of his life—he survived until 1941—in central Holland.) The defeated Germany sank into years of depression, resentments sharpened, the toxic lie that Germany had been “robbed” of its rightful victory in the war took hold. The rest, as they say, is history.

I’m not suggesting that Trump is about to start the Third World War. But recent foreign developments—the wild swings with North Korea, the ditching of the Iran nuclear deal, the threat of a trade war with China—suggest upheavals that could quickly grow out of American control. Some of Trump’s critics suppose that these escalating crises might cause him to loosen, or even lose, his grip on the Presidency. The real lesson of Kaiser Wilhelm II, however, may be that Trump’s leaving office might not be the end of the problems he may bring on or exacerbate—it may be only the beginning."

Who are we going to fight in the coming WW III ? Iran ? N Korea ?
What colonial empires are we competing to control ?
Trump wants to divest of foreign entanglements, not acquire more.
The Kaiser did not have to stand for election every 4 years,
...& he didn't even have parity in Dreadnoughts, let alone conventional & nuclear superiority.
Trump's inbred cousins aren't ruling China & Russia.

[Kismet]

The call is coming from inside the (White) house:

Geoff Bennett
@GeoffRBennett
New from John Bolton aide Sarah Tinsley: “Several weeks ago, the ambassador sent a hard copy of his draft manuscript to the White House for prepublication review by the National Security Council. The ambassador has not passed that manuscript to anyone else for review. Period.”
5:28 PM · Jan 26, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

The Deep State strikes back -- again!!

Imagine that.

Don't tell old salt. He doesn't want to hear that his Deep State is Trump's own people.

Must be an undercover Hillary supporter.

The NYT''s been sitting on this for max impact. Who knows how long they've been holding this hole card. How many times have MSM talking heads hinted that other stuff would soon be coming out, specifically citing Bolton's book as an example. The MSM's not going to let the Senate decide. The unbiased, impartial Fifth Column/Fourth Estate, working their will. What's new ? Just more details about the drug deal already in the record. Bolton will sell some books but who will ever trust him in their Admin again ? Will this change any Senate votes on witnesses ?

.and you know this about NYT, how exactly? Does your know-it-all persona have any limits? Not only are you an allged expert on the press, national security, military affairs and every other subject, your myopia about Trump is simply stunning. If your alleged deep state Apparatchiks really do all of the things you think they do, why is it that this stuff only started with the current occupant of the WH and not with ANY of the preceding Presidents? Like your hero DOPUS, you blame everything on Obama to this day. Very weak sauce, Sherlock. Keep yammering and maybe it will qualify you for a spot on the defense team.

You pay to read the NYT. You should pay closer attention to what their reporters say in their tv talking head roles.
Can you honestly say you've never heard them (& their WP colleagues) opine that more would be coming out from Bolton's book ?
Just like the Steele Dossier, they've likely had leaks from Bolton's manuscript for weeks. They just needed a hook to publish & cover for their source(s). Bolton's submitting it to the NSC for review, gave them the cover they needed. You know the way the game is played.

SECOND REQUEST - Please do tell us how you came by this information regarding the inner workings of the NYT? A three year old could mention Bolton's upcoming book and that would not tell us anything more than you have right now. You supposition on "how the game is played" is your typical BS fantasy of how you WISH that things go.

[Kismet]

The call is coming from inside the (White) house:

Geoff Bennett
@GeoffRBennett
New from John Bolton aide Sarah Tinsley: “Several weeks ago, the ambassador sent a hard copy of his draft manuscript to the White House for prepublication review by the National Security Council. The ambassador has not passed that manuscript to anyone else for review. Period.”
5:28 PM · Jan 26, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

The Deep State strikes back -- again!!

Imagine that.

Don't tell old salt. He doesn't want to hear that his Deep State is Trump's own people.

Must be an undercover Hillary supporter.

The NYT''s been sitting on this for max impact. Who knows how long they've been holding this hole card. How many times have MSM talking heads hinted that other stuff would soon be coming out, specifically citing Bolton's book as an example. The MSM's not going to let the Senate decide. The unbiased, impartial Fifth Column/Fourth Estate, working their will. What's new ? Just more details about the drug deal already in the record. Bolton will sell some books but who will ever trust him in their Admin again ? Will this change any Senate votes on witnesses ?

.and you know this about NYT, how exactly? Does your know-it-all persona have any limits? Not only are you an allged expert on the press, national security, military affairs and every other subject, your myopia about Trump is simply stunning. If your alleged deep state Apparatchiks really do all of the things you think they do, why is it that this stuff only started with the current occupant of the WH and not with ANY of the preceding Presidents? Like your hero DOPUS, you blame everything on Obama to this day. Very weak sauce, Sherlock. Keep yammering and maybe it will qualify you for a spot on the defense team.

You pay to read the NYT. You should pay closer attention to what their reporters say in their tv talking head roles.
Can you honestly say you've never heard them (& their WP colleagues) opine that more would be coming out from Bolton's book ?
Just like the Steele Dossier, they've likely had leaks from Bolton's manuscript for weeks. They just needed a hook to publish & cover for their source(s). Bolton's submitting it to the NSC for review, gave them the cover they needed. You know the way the game is played.

SECOND REQUEST - Please do tell us how you came by this information regarding the inner workings of the NYT? A three year old could mention Bolton's upcoming book and that would not tell us anything more than you have right now. You supposition on "how the game is played" is your typical BS fantasy of how you WISH that things go.