Posted on 01/06/2018 12:15:52 PM PST by Sean_Anthony
The biggest loser is Steve Bannon, who has not only lost friends and influence, but he has also been exposed and it’s not a pretty sight to see
“They smile in your face, All the time they want to take your place…” The Ojay’s “Back Stabbers”
The Dow just reached 25,000, the economy is booming, and ISIS has been decimated, so of course the news media is talking about none of these stories. The latest political frenzy surrounds the new book, Fire and Fury, by controversial author Michael Wolff. It is basically a nasty, full-frontal attack on Donald Trump.
Bannon lost the Mercers’ backing in part by expressing presidential aspirations of his own. That is a documented fact.
Fwiw.
Probably partying with Al Franken, Bill Maher, and the other lefties she likes to bed.
What troubles me is the trust Trump placed in Bannon. Reagan placed his trust in Ollie North. Big difference.
Prior to his mental meltdown, had Bannon given any indication that he was an accident waiting to happen?
I don’t know. Personally, I wouldn’t have trusted him but not for any objective reason, just a gut response, but the older I get, the more I trust my instincts.
She was on Lou Dobbs last night eviscerating Bannon, the GOPe amnesty cucks, and reminding Trump of his Number One campaign promise:
The Wall. The Wall. The Wall.
Yup. You summarize it well.
Agree with you completely. However, the Mercers had trusted and supported Bannon for years. That had to be a resume enhancer.
As I understand it this guy interviewed people early last year. If quoted correctly, Bannon was sayi g this stuff early in the Trump presidency. I can’t reconcile that eith support for Trump. I just can’t make it make sense.
If Bannon agreed to the interviews - he’s stupid, particularly if that fleabag author has him on tape.
If he’s a leaker, he’s an idiot
Even if he only betrayed Ivanka and Jared he’s unspeakably slimy- handing a sword to our President’s enemies.
It all went to his head.
There is a context for all this. The narrative about Trump was that he could never possibly win the GOP nomination; he was a joke.
After Trump became the candidate, the narrative became Hillary’s inevitability. No way on earth could Trump beat her; on the eve of the election some were still giving her a 98% chance of winning.
When Trump prevailed, many, MANY drew the wrong conclusion. Rather than acknowledging that Trump had [with God’s help] pulled off two monumental upsets, the accepted wisdom in many circles was, if Trump can do it, anybody can do it; it must not be that hard after all.
We know Bannon fell into this category bc he told multiple people that if he ran for POTUS the Mercers would back him. If you view Bannon’s WH tenure as preparation for a run himself, it all makes sense. Very little else explains it, imo.
I am glad we are done with Bannon. He didn’t care about winning as he only wanted to feel powerful by influencing nominees. He was the leaker from the White House. Good riddance.
The only mitigating factor is the naivete of the brothers. And I think that was the point Bannon was trying to make about them. He's not saying Trump's an ill-intentioned, bad guy.
I don't find this criticism all that damning, either of critic or subject. Heck, look what he said about Breitbart.
"The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor – with no lawyers. They didn't have any lawyers," Bannon said. "Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad s***, and I happen to think it's all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately."
Bannon went on to talk about what he thinks they should have done instead, which would have been to have the campaign's lawyers meet with the Russians and let the material be "dumped" to Breitbart or "maybe some other more legitimate publication." With that approach, "You never see it, you never know it, because you don't need to … But that's the brain trust that they had," Bannon added.
That would bring it together. Trump was always a stepping stone for him. That would require a bit of blindness to how barely logical that is. Conceit can do that, I suppose.
He began his own public executuin, imho, when he hung on to Roy Moore after Moore admitted on Hannity to dating teens. Not criminal but in this culture I’d rather not be defending that in my candidate. I’d prefer the other guy having to defend that in his candidate.
I was wrong about Moore. Trump’s instincts were right.
So, Trump prevailed over Bannon in that, his insight did. And then he tried to pull Moore and Bannon out of the fire but couldn’t.
Boils down to Bannon having poor judgment which aligns with your theory.
With friends like you, Trump needs no enemies. Putting the worst possible construction on an excruciatingly minor event is what Trump-haters do.
I didn't put the "worst possible construction" on it, I said it was "not all that damning".
Good analysis. Btw, I totally backed Moore. What I had no clue about was that Moore had lost two state-wide elections prior to the accusations. For some reason that fact never gained much traction. But it couldn’t have been much more significant. Live and learn, I guess.
‘Trump has no incentive to govern as a conservative.’
Sorry, not true under any circumstances. Trump made a deal with his supporters: elect me and I will keep my promises. Trump honors his deals—that is his motivation.
Yes, you certainly put the worst possible construction on the short, insignificant meeting that Bannon used to taint Trump and his family with the tar-brush of treason. That’s exactly what Trump-haters do.
I suspect they did consult some kind of legal assistance, because meeting with foreigners is not illegal. At the same time they rejected going overseas to meet with popadopoulos’ professor. Why the difference? They controlled Trump Tower.
Mueller now wants to know what pleasantries Ivanka said to the Russians when they got off the elevator. Sounds to me like he got nothing and is scraping dirt to catch someone in a lie.
So, if it’s not illegal, then it cannot be treasonous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.