March 1, 2017

Rachel Maddow: To Diagnose the Russian Problem And To Fix It Is Not The Same Thing.

This is too relevant to not bear repeating, because its conflict of interest ethics and U.S. national security implications seem complicated.

Maddow provides background on how and why the Trump administration might give Putin parts of the Ukraine and stop being mad about his invasions of old U.S.S.R. lands.

Maddow summarizes the ducking and dodging and lying historical context that keeps a potential evidence trail from being complete in making a case for treason against Trump or his "associates."

She asks, after this recount: Why is the president's personal lawyer involved in these proceedings? And why is ex-felon Sater working in the White House for Trump, after all his previous Russian business dealings?

I still don't know what the Austrian court's ruling was on Dmitri Furtash.

GOP non-support for this inquiry reports through mainstream media that there's nothing to see, and ultimately that Congressional investigations won't turn up anything. So Sessions won't have anything to recuse himself about.

By even the "appearance" of any standard of ethics and leadership conduct, we need to press for this to go as far as the law allows for the sake of our national security.

February 28, 2017

The New Yorker: "Trump, Putin and The New Cold War"

This comes out March 6 but is already getting criticism from Glenn Greenwald and others who want to get out in front of the Left's historical memory and intellectual power.

Because I want my party to win again, I'd be on the lookout for our party's tendencies to liberal bias confirmation. I want honest scrutiny and reality to guide this party.

The article probably wouldn't exist if Clinton were president. If it did, it would likely be a response to some Republican-led House investigation (about "Russian hackery" during the election) which wouldn't get media traction because they'd be so "BENGHAZI!" in their approach and method.

We need peace-driven more than conflict-driven geopolitics, which is why this informs.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/06/trump-putin-and-the-new-cold-war

February 17, 2017

Andrew Sullivan: The White House Mole

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/02/andrew-sullivan-the-white-house-mole.html?mid=facebook_nymag

There's a clarity here that's helpful to everyone.

Andrew Sullivan -- a fine writer and fine human -- has lately presented one perspective on Trump, Trump supporters and -- in the context of the power contests -- the mentality of that world that opponents in media and around here call chaotic and mentally unstable. This article is particularly worth a read because of the compassion that all of us can feel toward those dealing with global dynamics of energy, politics, law and the controlling of masses of humans.

I like Sullivan's look at how religious world views posed in HBO's The Young Pope -- I'm one atheist who totally 'gets' that show -- also inform us about the depth of believers' instinct to stay loyal to this president until the furor (in contrast to seeing just fuhrer) of his constructing of his administration becomes clearer.