The 2024 Election Cycle

[seacoaster]

The 2024 election cycle, way too early thread? No, says Orange Duce:

https://www.axios.com/trump-2024-campai ... ntent=1100

Not so fast say Republican hopefuls and insiders:

"Reality check: Several allies who talk regularly to Trump told Axios they believe he'll announce for 2024, but ultimately not make the run because of what one Republican close to Trump called "hurdles he has never before experienced."

"I think he will have more trouble than he can begin to imagine," the Republican said. "No one is going to let him have a free pass in the primary."
"The only question left open is whether the media will give up their addiction to him or not — that will determine a great deal."
When Axios asked if that was a reference more to political trouble, financial trouble or legal trouble, the person replied: "Yes."

But announcing would complicate moves by 2024 rivals and would feed Trump his drug — coverage."

Assuming Biden does not seek a second term, the Primary melee and money is going to be intergalactic. Candidates for both parties' nominations, and jockeying within a Biden Administration for the front row.

[a fan]

The 2024 election cycle, way too early thread? No, says Orange Duce:

https://www.axios.com/trump-2024-campai ... ntent=1100

Not so fast say Republican hopefuls and insiders:

"Reality check: Several allies who talk regularly to Trump told Axios they believe he'll announce for 2024, but ultimately not make the run because of what one Republican close to Trump called "hurdles he has never before experienced."

"I think he will have more trouble than he can begin to imagine," the Republican said. "No one is going to let him have a free pass in the primary."

Like so many TrumpFans on this forum, these idiots think that TrumpNation is temporary, and that they'll wash away.

I told the Forum years ago that you're completely unaware of all the cultural damage cheering Trump on would have.

Trump isn't the problem, folks. TrumpNation and their enablers are the problem. And that problem isn't going away in January.

You can only stick a dog's nose in the poop and say "bad dog" so many times.....

[DMac]

Is he talking about a third term or is he going to concede defeat this time around?
This man is beyond belief, and you suckers who fall for and support his BS disappoint me bigglier than bigly.
The man is trash and has embarrassed this country from his campaign, through his presidency, and now with
his (non) exit. You wanted him in there to rattle things up and he did, his disastrous presidency is done and
the country needs to be done with him. I'm sure China would like to see him stay, Kim Jong-un and Putin too,
but those of us who hold our President to a higher standard have seen enough of this load.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZqUkk6fVuQ

[Typical Lax Dad]

Is he talking about a third term or is he going to concede defeat this time around?
This man is beyond belief, and you suckers who fall for and support his BS disappoint me bigglier than bigly.
The man is trash and has embarrassed this country from his campaign, through his presidency, and now with
his (non) exit. You wanted him in there to rattle things up and he did, his disastrous presidency is done and
the country needs to be done with him. I'm sure China would like to see him stay, Kim Jong-un and Putin too,
but those of us who hold our President to a higher standard have seen enough of this load.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZqUkk6fVuQ

Nah DMac.....you are just upset that Hillary lost and Trump isn’t politically correct!

[seacoaster]

Is he talking about a third term or is he going to concede defeat this time around?
This man is beyond belief, and you suckers who fall for and support his BS disappoint me bigglier than bigly.
The man is trash and has embarrassed this country from his campaign, through his presidency, and now with
his (non) exit. You wanted him in there to rattle things up and he did, his disastrous presidency is done and
the country needs to be done with him. I'm sure China would like to see him stay, Kim Jong-un and Putin too,
but those of us who hold our President to a higher standard have seen enough of this load.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZqUkk6fVuQ

Bigglier than Bigly.

Trump knows he's toast. His "legal challenges" are effectively fundraising for his own PAC, and to try over the next 3 years to keep a throttling chokehold over the GOP base that will be the energy during the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. The GOP primary will be one of the greatest fiascos and free for alls in the history of the nation, every candidate trying to out-populist Trump, drain more of the swamp than Trump, beat up on "elites" and establishment paradigms more than Trump, etc. Take a look at the current pieces of sh*t Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley and Nikki Haley: the mimicry is remarkable. Trump is out of office; the GOP will make sure he is here to stay.

[a fan]

Take a look at the current pieces of sh*t Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley and Nikki Haley: the mimicry is remarkable. Trump is out of office; the GOP will make sure he is here to stay.

Yep. The GOP will double down on TrumpLand. They're not "returning to normal" as so many Republican thinkers believe.

[RedFromMI]

Take a look at the current pieces of sh*t Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley and Nikki Haley: the mimicry is remarkable. Trump is out of office; the GOP will make sure he is here to stay.

Yep. The GOP will double down on TrumpLand. They're not "returning to normal" as so many Republican thinkers believe.

Which is why the best thing to happen to them is to get beat badly. But it is really hard when you have so much RW media devoted to nothing but the cause of the GOP.

[a fan]

Take a look at the current pieces of sh*t Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley and Nikki Haley: the mimicry is remarkable. Trump is out of office; the GOP will make sure he is here to stay.

Yep. The GOP will double down on TrumpLand. They're not "returning to normal" as so many Republican thinkers believe.

Which is why the best thing to happen to them is to get beat badly.

Yes, except they're in TrumpLand....they think they won.

The GOP isn't returning to "normal". I said as much a couple years back. Easiest call I made during the TrumpEra, outside of explaining that Trump wouldn't "win" his fake Trade War with China.

Only part that will be fun, is watching the next Republican nominee for President to try and "out-crazy" Trump.

[old salt]

The 2024 election cycle, way too early thread? No, says Orange Duce:

https://www.axios.com/trump-2024-campai ... ntent=1100

Not so fast say Republican hopefuls and insiders:

"Reality check: Several allies who talk regularly to Trump told Axios they believe he'll announce for 2024, but ultimately not make the run because of what one Republican close to Trump called "hurdles he has never before experienced."

"I think he will have more trouble than he can begin to imagine," the Republican said. "No one is going to let him have a free pass in the primary."

Like so many TrumpFans on this forum, these idiots think that TrumpNation is temporary, and that they'll wash away.

I told the Forum years ago that you're completely unaware of all the cultural damage cheering Trump on would have.

Trump isn't the problem, folks. TrumpNation and their enablers are the problem. And that problem isn't going away in January.

You can only stick a dog's nose in the poop and say "bad dog" so many times.....

Given their age, Trump & Biden are both temporary.

[youthathletics]

The 2024 election cycle, way too early thread? No, says Orange Duce:

https://www.axios.com/trump-2024-campai ... ntent=1100

Not so fast say Republican hopefuls and insiders:

"Reality check: Several allies who talk regularly to Trump told Axios they believe he'll announce for 2024, but ultimately not make the run because of what one Republican close to Trump called "hurdles he has never before experienced."

"I think he will have more trouble than he can begin to imagine," the Republican said. "No one is going to let him have a free pass in the primary."

Like so many TrumpFans on this forum, these idiots think that TrumpNation is temporary, and that they'll wash away.

I told the Forum years ago that you're completely unaware of all the cultural damage cheering Trump on would have.

Trump isn't the problem, folks. TrumpNation and their enablers are the problem. And that problem isn't going away in January.

You can only stick a dog's nose in the poop and say "bad dog" so many times.....

Given their age, Trump & Biden are both temporary.

Nostr’afan’damus

[Farfromgeneva]

Think you meant negrodamus

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/szbbz4/ch ... el-jackson

[old salt]

Think you meant negrodamus

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/szbbz4/ch ... el-jackson

Thank goodness he's not Jewish.

[Farfromgeneva]

Like my sister?

I don’t think I was running around using pejorative terms for others here it was someone else who only knows next to nothing about me who called em a money changer to make themselves Feel better about their own increasing irrelevance and lack of understanding of the world they live in anymore. There’s this person who craps on young women he doesn’t know and never met at all over some pathetic, feeble minded approach to politics. A person who thinks everyone should bow down and that their singular military experience qualifies them to be right on everything and know better than everyone else and judge all sorts of fellow servicemen he doesn’t know at all as well. I think that’s the person you have the real problem with here.

[old salt]

Making fun of a highly partisan public figure, as opposed to demeaning millions of women who fail to meet your standards of appearance.
You choose to mock my life experience, then take umbrage when it comes back at you in kind. Weak.

[Farfromgeneva]

You really just believe or read into things whatever you want even if it’s far from reality eh? Demean millions of women? Jokes. You ever volunteer at a battered women’s shelter? I have but I guess it must’ve been to get new material so I could demean Millions of women. So dumb.

I never demeaned your profession if you could read critically. I simply point out perspectives and related contextual relevance (see Husserl) in conjunction with historical posting to attempt to clarify the place where people are coming from and then you got all huffy worse than my princess, absurdly dramatic 6yr old daughter would. I am actually glad you called me a money changer. It betrays what you would generally want to hide from others and supports a number of conclusions I (and perhaps some others) have drawn about how you think. Not upset or mad at all. You seriously don’t know how to read well do you?

Of course you’ve been crying about Afan putting words in your mouth and then accuse me of some random not accurate or just interpretation ti in based on obtuse thinking and an inability to have any nuance. I love all women, talk s**t about all types of people including myself Mel Brooks style. It’s all superficial and doesn’t have the intent of your nasty and unjust comments.

Intelligent people see through bs, you do understand that right? Either way, keep on keeping on as an bitter old man out of place and out of touch. Doesn’t bother me at all,I just like to illustrate the out of touch bs.

[old salt]

You ever volunteer at a battered women’s shelter?

I've fostered their pets & provided vet care, until they could be reunited. Does that count ?

[a fan]

The 2024 election cycle, way too early thread? No, says Orange Duce:

https://www.axios.com/trump-2024-campai ... ntent=1100

Not so fast say Republican hopefuls and insiders:

"Reality check: Several allies who talk regularly to Trump told Axios they believe he'll announce for 2024, but ultimately not make the run because of what one Republican close to Trump called "hurdles he has never before experienced."

"I think he will have more trouble than he can begin to imagine," the Republican said. "No one is going to let him have a free pass in the primary."

Like so many TrumpFans on this forum, these idiots think that TrumpNation is temporary, and that they'll wash away.

I told the Forum years ago that you're completely unaware of all the cultural damage cheering Trump on would have.

Trump isn't the problem, folks. TrumpNation and their enablers are the problem. And that problem isn't going away in January.

You can only stick a dog's nose in the poop and say "bad dog" so many times.....

Given their age, Trump & Biden are both temporary.

Nostr’afan’damus

My man, just like last election, I'm happy to take wagers on these forecasts! None of you took me up on the 2016 wagers. Good thing you didn't!

TrumpNation isn't going away, and they're not going to tone it down. They're going to double down. I mean----do you REALLY think the National GOP is going to (snicker) calm down, grow up, and govern in the next two years?

No chance.

[Farfromgeneva]

You ever volunteer at a battered women’s shelter?

I've fostered their pets & provided vet care, until they could be reunited. Does that count ?

Only if you think of women as less than human...

Good for you, I love dogs by the topic was treatment of women, words vs actions and also serious vitriolic comments vs married, young children 40 something dude joking around.

[old salt]

There’s this person who craps on young women he doesn’t know and never met at all over some pathetic, feeble minded approach to politics.

I'ii forward your complaint to the Wash Post media critic :

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... to-tv-gig/

How Politico’s Natasha Bertrand bootstrapped dossier credulity into MSNBC gig

Opinion by
Erik Wemple
Media critic
Feb. 28, 2020

Russian election interference is back in the news. According to reports from last week, Congress received warnings from intelligence officials that the Kremlin favors the reelection of President Trump. Those sirens prompted a freak-out from Trump himself, who worried that his Democratic detractors would use the information against him.

Where there’s a report on Russian meddling, there’s an MSNBC segment waiting to be taped. Last Thursday night, MSNBC host Joy Reid — subbing for “All In” host Chris Hayes — turned to Politico national security reporter Natasha Bertrand with a question about whether Trump “wants” Russian meddling or whether he can’t accept that "foreign help is there.“ Bertrand responded: “We don’t have the reporting that suggests that the president has told aides, for example, that he really wants Russia to interfere because he thinks that it’s going to help him, right?”

No, we don’t have that reporting — though there’s no prohibition against fantasizing about it on national television. Such is the theme of Bertrand’s commentary during previous coverage of Russian interference, specifically the dossier of memos drawn up by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. With winks and nods from MSNBC hosts, Bertrand heaped credibility on the dossier — which was published in full by BuzzFeed News in January 2017 — in repeated television appearances. Her written work has appeared on Business Insider, the Atlantic and Politico, where she is now a national security reporter. Along the way, she bootstrapped her punditry into a contributor’s role on MSNBC.

The boosterism dates back years. On Sept. 18, 2017, for example, Bertrand participated in a collective journalistic failure on the MSNBC airwaves. On “All In," Bertrand, who then worked for Business Insider, discussed an apparent scoop from CNN that Paul Manafort, the former campaign chairman for Trump, had been “wiretapped” before and after the 2016 presidential election under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

To shower context on the apparent news, Bertrand remarked that securing a FISA warrant is “extremely difficult.” And she sandwiched the report with previous reporting that the feds had taken a similar action regarding former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page: “They also got a warrant for Carter Page, who if you remember in the infamous Trump-Russia Steele dossier, it said that Carter Page was actually working as a liaison, being managed by Paul Manafort as kind of a go-between. So these pieces are all starting to come together and it’s really alarming.”

Not so alarming, as it turned out. For one, CNN was wrong about the Manafort wiretapping story, as made clear in the report from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz. The network added a weaselly editor’s note to the Manafort story as a means of wishing away the bad news. For another, the Horowitz report made clear that the FBI made numerous omissions and errors in the FISA process and still secured authorizations. For yet another, the “pieces” didn’t particularly “come together": Though Steele’s 35-page dossier alleged that Page was in collusive cahoots with Manafort, the FBI concluded otherwise, according to the Horowitz report.

The Bertrand highlight reel features a great deal of thumb-on-scale speculation regarding the dossier. Some highlights:

Trump bodyguard Keith Schiller reportedly told Congress in November 2017 that on a trip to Moscow in 2013, an unidentified man offered to send “five women” to Trump’s hotel room, though the offer was rejected. The dossier contained an allegation that Russia had kompromat against Trump in the form of video footage of a perverted act in the Moscow Ritz-Carlton. Discussing the matter on “All In,” Bertrand said, “Well, one of the biggest things that I took away was how much it seems to corroborate the part of the dossier, the parts of the dossier that discuss how Russia uses things like this to gain kompromat over people that they want to blackmail in the future,” she said. “I mean, this idea that Russia actually offered up five prostitutes to Trump while he was in Moscow in 2013 really raises additional questions about, well, what may have happened in other instances when Trump was in Russia, for example?”

After details emerged regarding hush-money payments routed to women with whom Trump allegedly had affairs, Bertrand said in January 2018 on MSNBC: “I think that this whole story, what happens from it is that it makes it much more plausible that Trump did go to Russia and he did have these kinds of sexual escapades with prostitutes. I mean, Stormy Daniels was talking to magazines about this as early as 2011. And as we know, Trump has been traveling to Moscow for quite some time and it just makes it all the more plausible that what the dossier says he did actually did occur,” she told host Ari Melber.

In April 2018, McClatchy reported that then-special counsel Robert S. Mueller III had evidence that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen had traveled to Prague in 2016, lending credence to a claim in the dossier about Cohen’s involvement in alleged Trump-Russia collusion. Bertrand’s analysis: “Well, it’s absolutely massive. I mean, this is a rumor that’s been swirling around Washington for months now,” Bertrand (working for the Atlantic at the time) told Hayes. “The idea was that Cohen had flown into Germany in early September of 2016 and then had made his way by a bus or by a train down to the Czech Republic down to Prague. It was never something that anyone has really been able to confirm. But now we know that Mueller has evidence that it did happen.”

Candidate Trump, in a famous moment from the campaign, urged the Russians to find Hillary Clinton’s missing emails. In a July 2018 edition of “All In,” Bertrand said: “What if Donald Trump actually knew beforehand that the Russians planned to do this and was kind of giving them a signal to proceed? Because former intelligence officials that I spoke to said that this might have been in fact a signal to the Russians to give them kind of political cover in order to hack into Clinton’s emails,” said Bertrand. “Another alternative explanation is that they could do this and use it as leverage later on and say that they were just acting on the president’s orders, essentially.”

In August 2018, the New York Times reported that Trump had hatched a plan to buy up embarrassing material compiled by the National Enquirer and its parent company. Bertrand observed on MSNBC:
The idea is that this is potentially the most blackmail-able president in United States history. I mean, the fact that the National Enquirer had decades of information about his affairs, about his children about even [first lady Melania Trump] speaks volumes about the president’s life and all of the kind of shady things he did throughout his career, many of which, most of which, perhaps all of which he actually never even faced real consequences for.
But I think that this substantiates two big claims in the dossier. The first, of course, is that Michael Cohen was the President’s fixer in all things related to Russia. So just as he was the fixer and all things related to burying stories about Trump’s extramarital affairs, he was also according to the dossier his fixer in burying the story of the Trump’s — of Trump campaign’s conspiracy with Russia to win the election.
He was alleged to have paid off the hackers and to kind of clean the whole thing up at the end of the election.
Cohen was indeed alleged to have paid off the hackers — until that allegation fell apart, a process punctuated by the Horowitz report. The Cohen-Prague claims in the dossier were “not true,” according to Horowitz. Such findings filtered into a more global assessment of the dossier by the FBI: “The FBI concluded, among other things, that although consistent with known efforts by Russia to interfere in the 2016 U.S. elections, much of the material in the Steele election reports, including allegations about Donald Trump and members of the Trump campaign relied upon in the Carter Page FISA applications, could not be corroborated; that certain allegations were inaccurate or inconsistent with information gathered by the Crossfire Hurricane team; and that the limited information that was corroborated related to time, location, and title information, much of which was publicly available.”

Those conclusions may well have surprised anyone who relied on Bertrand’s reporting on MSNBC and elsewhere. In a Politico story about the inspector general’s interview with Steele in June 2019, Bertrand wrote: “The interview was contentious at first, the sources added, but investigators ultimately found Steele’s testimony credible and even surprising. The takeaway has irked some U.S. officials interviewed as part of the probe — they argue that it shouldn’t have taken a foreign national to convince the inspector general that the FBI acted properly in 2016.”

Well, actually, the inspector general wasn’t so convinced. Though Horowitz ultimately concluded that the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was properly launched, it bashed the FBI’s work in seeking FISA surveillance for Page, an effort that relied heavily on the dossier.

The speculative mess that Bertrand has left all over Nexis transcripts serves as an indictment of cable-news sensibilities. Incentives on prime-time MSNBC shows point precisely in the direction that Bertrand ventured on too many occasions — that is, toward believing the specifics of a document whose veracity she and others couldn’t begin to assess. Lefty hosts wanted to hear that the Michael Cohen stuff looked plausible, that the Russians had indeed been cultivating Trump, and that it was all coming together. So that’s what she said, and in March 2018, she was rewarded with an MSNBC contributor gig.

Her statements on MSNBC about the dossier left Bertrand in a bind vis-a-vis the Horowitz report. How to deal with a document that debunks your punditry? Attack!

In a Politico story headlined “Watchdog report a ‘roadmap’ for Russian spooks, intel vets say,” Bertrand questioned a decision by the Justice Department to leave vast portions of the document unredacted. “Experts," according to Bertrand, were sounding alarms about too much information, insisting that “the depiction of sources and vetting in the report could pose problems for the [United States’] information sharing relationships, and undermine the FBI’s recruitment efforts.”

Steven Aftergood, an expert on government disclosures with the Federation of American Scientists, told the Erik Wemple Blog that the inspector general’s report did indeed disclose more information than usual and declared that “this just smells bad.”

Consider, however, that Beltway reporters for decades have been fighting over-redaction from the national security bureaucracy. Here, Politico was all but clamoring for it. “I cannot fathom being a journalist and complaining that the government isn’t hiding more information,” says the Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald.

The Erik Wemple Blog sent a copy of Bertrand’s dossier-related comments to MSNBC along with a question: Do you stand by this material? MSNBC declined to comment. Politico editor Carrie Budoff Brown issued this statement: "Natasha is an extremely well sourced journalist and her depth of knowledge on national security issues is outstanding.” (Bertrand’s MSNBC dossier-related comments cited above were made before she joined Politico in April 2019). Bertrand herself sent this statement via email: “I stand by everything I’ve said on air and reported.”

Bertrand sent an additional comment by email after this piece was published. “This is really low even for you Erik,” she wrote. “I got my msnbc gig through hard work reporting on a range of issues related to Mueller, not through “bootstrapping” the dossier. I hope it was worth the 3 retweets.”

This was before Betrand's most recent MSNBC "bombshell" when she went all in on a social media "tip" about the Air Force routing flights via Scotland so over nighting crews could stay at a Trump resort. It prompted a Congressional hearing & an Air Force investrigation which showed that it was a rare stand by operational contingency, begun under Obama, which actually saved tax payers' money.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/09/ ... o-scandal/

[Farfromgeneva]

You gave me a opinion piece, not the Waco, rather an individual which does not reflect any judgement or values of the paper. Either you understand this and are being disingenuous or don’t which is a whole other problem.

I missed where she was commonly referred to as “nasty Natasha” in your opinion piece as well. Unless you show me otherwise I’m taking that as a moniker you have to a 26-27yr old chick. I did see where the editor of Politico had some praise for her work ethic and demonstrated knowledge of national security topics however. That girl is just plain nasty based on your “evidence” I guess...

How about some others you’ve given names and said literally mean things about like Nicole Wallace for example?

PoInt is you corn down here and cut down people you don’t know because they hurt the effort your trying to support which despite your protests otherwise is everything inherent in the Trump presidency. Service my, very young (and frankly, green, hard working, if not experienced) women. Experts in fields etc. it’s just to lay waste to anyone who hurts your cause and doesn’t even provide a legitimate counter argument. It’s rape victim shamin gm at its finest and it’s pathetic.