Strictly they're DoJ, not FBI, and the ringleader is some guy called Mueller.
Didn't Fox quickly drop all mention of the "Secret Society" when it became obvious that it was a joke. At least that's what I gleaned from Joshua Marshall's twitter feed but I can't quite believe that would stop Fox News.
The whole thing is infuriating. It is very clear that a significant plurality of the Republican Party has decided that if they can't govern*, they will do their best to undermine the government and civic society. And anything done to stop it is further evidence for their conspiracy, so I guess it's a good strategy in that regard.
* Which they can't, even with the White House, the Senate, and the House because they have no possible agenda that is both agreed upon by their members and sufficiently grounded in reality as to be possible.
3: And we can't even say "this is a new low!" because then everyone gently corrects that you are naive, it was always thus, why are you still getting shocked.
"John Marshall has made his blog, now let him claim it."
It is "interesting" to see so may different Republican politicians step up to take their turn as lead on the pure crazy. Ron Johnson was not one I was necessarily expecting.
Peloton du mal dérangé,
Mueller has clearly demonstrated the ability to properly investigate, and he's clearly dug up plenty too; at this point my main worry is that he turns out the kind of orderist who fears it would traumatize the country (or some shit like that) to make everything public, and he uses his considerable accumulated credit toward a whitewashing. Either way, it's November 2018 I'm working toward. (In particular, going after the nearest House GOPer to me, Denham.)
The longer the Republicans and media have to poison the public discourse and empower the partisans in the FBI the likelier that is, IMO. I'm also worried that even if we win in 2018 the Democrats will also make the orderly choice. Honest question: have elected Democrats been calling out Nunes et al for covering for treason? I haven't heard any but I get what little news I consume filtered through NPR, who've gone full Pravda.
6: In some senses the Republican party has been this bad definitely since Reagan, probably Nixon, and maybe earlier. The barely veiled racism, the contempt for science and truth, and naked pursuit of power have been part of their platform for a long time.
But some stuff is newer. The epistemic closure and incompetence are. And some changes aren't within the Republican Party so much as elsewhere. 40 years ago racism was a more bipartisan thing, or broke along regional lines rather than partisan lines. The Northeastern Republicans and Southern Democrats switched, got primaried, or died of old age. This doesn't mean anything about the state of the soul or reliability of a Republican from today vs. a Republican from 40 years ago, but it affects what they're capable of getting done.
12
Honest question: have elected Democrats been calling out Nunes et al for covering for treason?
I think the most radical action by Democrats in Congress at the moment is this.
How have NPR gone full Pravda? I haven't listened for a while.
This is the "secret society" of a single sarcastic SMS exchange about bad calendaring, right?
Drip drip: Trump tried to fire Mueller last summer but McGahn dissuaded him by threatening to quit. (Although that story has the feel of McGahn trying to cover his ass, which itself suggests things are at a new level of disturbing. )
16: GIVE ME A HUNDRED AND FORTY CHARACTERS FROM THE PHONE OF AN INNOCENT MAN, AND I WILL FIND SOMETHING IN THEM WITH WHICH TO HANG HIM.
17 last points to a problem I've long had with journalism. There's a decent argument to be made that the newsworthiness of the content (McGahn saved Mueller last June) is overwhelmed by the newsworthiness of the current story (someone wants this story out now for their own purposes). I know that smart journalists understand this, and yet we rarely get even the smallest public hint that they're even thinking about it, and the implications for what they do for a living.
Well Fox News has the real newsworthy item- a photo of Barack the Islamic Shock SuperAllah Hussein Obama and Farrakhan that was taken in 2005 and was hidden from the public by the Secret Society.
This isn't some caller into CSPAN. This is a United States Senator.
Well, that's because CSPAN has a person screening the callers.
19: There's a paradox at work here. The ones that think about that sort of issue tend to not be the ones who break those kind of stories. Worrying about being used tends to make a journalist resistant to being used -- so somebody who doesn't mind the manipulation gets the scoop.
I have never been much of a fan of Michael Wolff, but he really gets this dynamic, and manages to use it in his favor. A lot of the tut-tutting you see from his critics in the media amounts to: "Once you agree to promote your sources' interests, it's dishonorable to tell the truth instead."
19: This. The potentially encouraging part of this is some inner circle folks starting to distance themselves*. Can't find the tweet but Haberman claims the WH folks were better at lying to them than they thought. And last June 12th April Ryan reported she had a source saying the West Wing was in "mass hysteria" about Trump wanting to fire Mueller.
*But vast majority of Republican electeds won't do anything so not sure what it really matters in the pre-election time period.
23 I'm still not expecting removal, but there are a bunch of people who can be indicted, and those should be.
I recall reading somewhere, I think about the Rwandan genocide, about how they made people who weren't pro-genocide take part in the killings so as to make sure they all had a reason to stick together against the Tutsi. I wonder about that strategy in the current context.
Can't Mueller indict Trump?
Why are we ruled by Germans in 2018?
Imagine a world where Clinton keeps his pants zipped in 1995/96.
28: That's hard. What would Ken Starr have come up with instead? There was no way he was going to end his investigation by exonerating Clinton.
Why are we ruled by Germans in 2018?
Lax immigration policies?
I don't see why you want to blame one particular airport, especially one on the wrong side of the continent for Germans.
Hey! I had an Icelandic Nobelist in here a minute ago! Why do people keep allowing him to sneak out into the passageway?
-- because of hall door laxness.
Lawyers involved with Mueller's investigation viewed the report as a potentially ominous sign.
"It's one more brick in the wall," said a Washington lawyer representing another senior Trump aide in the Russia probe who added that the most interesting aspect of the Trump-Mueller story to him was that "people are leaking this shit."
"That is a sign to me people perceive this ship has sprung a leak and it's time to make themselves look good," the attorney said. "To some extent I think the fact of the leaking is almost the most significant, that we've reached an inflection point where people at the center of things feel the need to redeem themselves at the expense of the president."
Someone needs to confess to 32 and face the firing squad.
Fuckin Germans and their sexual assault enabling shepards:
Beyond this incident, dozens of people The Wall Street Journal interviewed who have worked at Mr. Wynn's casinos told of behavior that cumulatively would amount to a decades-long pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Wynn....Some said that feeling was heightened at times by the presence in a confined office space of one or more of his German shepherds, trained to respond to commands in German.
They were only following orders.
That woof sounded better in the original German.
It would be so gratifying to see monstrous person Steve Wynn go down. I am pessimistic that will happen but it would be so great if it did.
I couldn't put a face to that name until I googled just now. He's only four years older than Trump, but looks 500% more like death with bad hair dye.
I'm not sure what would constitute "going down" in this case, but the charges seem pretty convincing and the defense ("my ex-wife did it") seems pathetic. Being forced out as RNC finance chair probably doesn't count as an actual punishment (more free time, less pressure to give away money), but I would bet that happens. Maybe he'll be pushed out of control of his hotels.
42: Forced to change his name to Steve Lose.
Writing that it struck me how weird it is that lose doesn't rhyme with hose, rose, nose, pose etc. What a ridiculous language!
I wish "going down" meant "going to jail" more often. I read about how these men have had their lives destroyed, but in practice, that mostly seems to mean that they have lost their work. They haven't even lost their fortunes! It isn't like Bill O'Reilly lost his housing and all his money, and now begs for money on the street. That'd be a lot more satisfying.
45: That would be kind of cool if Bill O'Reilly was panhandling at the corner I walk by on my way to work. I'd probably hang on to my pennies so I could give him one now and then.
Maybe he'll be pushed out of control of his hotel
That's what I mean. I bet all things considered he'd rather not be RNC finance chair anyway, but it would be nice if it hurt his finances/business control/ability to get funding. Prison is more of a true pipe dream.
When I saw his picture, my first thought was "Now I know what happened to Arlen Specter's hairdresser."
Love child of Curious George and Cosmo Kramer.
45: Roger Ailes at least had the decency to die.
It was a far, far better thing, than he have ever done before.
Being punished by being made legit poor seems like more of a punishment than being sent to prison for those kind of rich creeps. I'm not sure why.