I doubt that Trump and his henchmen only had "contacts" with the Russians. First of all, they wouldn't be so stupid to have "contact" if there was nothing going on. Let's see how that would go otherwise, "Hmmm, hey guys, I know everyone is trying to associate Russia with our man Trump, why don't we go and talk to the Russians - that would give us cover - no one would think badly if they found out we were secretly meeting with the Russians"
Seems to fall in line with the discussion over post-Truthiness. The author of the op/ed used to be a speechwriter for Bush Jr. The fact that he had to fall back on disgraced president Dick Nixon a few times to normalize Trump says a plenty, though I agree with his final point. (The 10k word limit made me butcher the article) Donald Trump Is More Normal Than You Think A historical reality check. By MATT LATIMER March 14, 2017 There he is, wheeling and dealing with Capitol Hill, cajoling wayward legislators and tangling with members of the opposing party. All this to sell his first major piece of legislation, a House plan to replace Obamacare. “It’s a big, fat, beautiful negotiation,” he says. It’s almost like Donald Trump is a normal president. He’s not, of course. He gets in Twitter feuds with Arnold Schwarzenegger, he offends world leaders and publicly insults members of his own party, his agenda is occasionally diverted by a segment that’s caught his eye on cable news, and some of his campaign staffers are the subject of an FBI investigation. But all that tumult sometimes blinds observers to the fact that many of Trump’s actions, including those that have caused red-alert panic among the intelligentsia on America’s coastlines, actually have a number of precedents in history. Indeed, a closer look at the president’s record reveals he is far more normal than you might think. With the aim of putting things into proper perspective, a historical reality check: ... Alleged Abnormal Trump Action No. 3: Employing/Relying on Children in the White House Presidential Precedents: Rutherford B. Hayes, Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, George H.W. Bush, cont. Trump has received frequent criticism for employing his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, as a White House adviser and for including his daughter, Ivanka Trump, in various meetings and calls with foreign leaders. Numerous outlets have questioned the propriety of these interactions while government watchdogs have warned of “potential” conflicts of interest. The tangling of the Trump presidency with his family business interests poses ethical challenges, to be sure, but other presidents have relied on family members for advice and assistance. Rutherford B. Hayes enlisted his son, Webb, as his secretary in the White House. Franklin Roosevelt’s son, James, had various and controversial business interests while serving as his father’s political right-hand man and later as his presidential secretary. James’ influence was thought so great that at one point, he was dubbed “assistant president.” For a number of years, FDR’s daughter, Anna, frequently stood in for her mother, Eleanor, in the role of confidante to the president and first lady. Dwight Eisenhower’s son, John, worked as a White House assistant, advising his father on national security issues. And it was well-known that George H.W. Bush had his son, George W., to serve as an unofficial (and it should be pointed out unpaid) political consigliere, reaching out on his father’s behalf to conservatives and at one point reportedly taking a role in the removal of his father’s chief of staff. Verdict: FAIRLY NORMAL .... Lessons From the Fake News Pandemic of 1942 Alleged Abnormal Trump Action No. 6: POTUS controlled by mysterious shadow figure/evil genius Presidential Precedents: Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama Much of the anguish about the Trump administration’s actions has centered on two figures who have been granted magical superpowers by pundits and the media: presidential advisers Steve Bannon and, to a slightly lesser extent, Stephen Miller. Both men, raised in the notorious alt-right stomping grounds known as Goldman Sachs and the halls of Congress, respectively, have been characterized as having outsized control over the president, a sinister agenda and radical intentions. This is a common phenomenon. Nearly every one of Trump’s immediate predecessors was alleged to have been manipulated by various mysterious operatives and advisers. Many on the right, for example, believed Obama to be controlled by senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, who was supposedly a sort of shadow president. The allegedly dim-witted George W. Bush was famously said to have been managed by “Darth Vader” Dick Cheney and the evil “mastermind” Karl Rove. His father was “run” by political adviser Lee Atwater. Bill Clinton was either controlled by Hillary or Dick Morris, or both, while Ronald Reagan was portrayed as the robotic masterwork of either presidential adviser Mike Deaver or his wife, Nancy. In each case, of course, the president himself would beg to differ. VERDICT: VERY NORMAL This list could go on and on. Did you know, for example, that before they were presidents, John F. Kennedy and Gerald Ford expressed support for the “America First Committee”? Or that before deportation became a dirty word, President Barack Obama was known as the “deporter-in-chief,” deporting more people than any other president in American history? Or that Harry Truman also had a “Southern White House” in Florida, spending a cumulative six months there during his time in office? Or that Warren G. Harding was denounced for his grammar and spelling, with H. L. Mencken once noting, “He writes the worst English I have ever encountered. It reminds me of a string of wet sponges; it reminds me of tattered washing on the line; it reminds me of stale bean soup, of college yells, of dogs barking idiotically through endless nights.” Even Trump’s accusation that Obama wiretapped him has presidential precedents. As the Washington Post reported, Richard Nixon was convinced that his predecessor, Lyndon Johnson, had bugged his campaign plane in the final days of the 1968 race. Nixon, the newspaper reported, “also was convinced that if he could get hard evidence of that, he could blunt and perhaps undermine the Senate Watergate hearings before they got started in the spring of 1973.” And don’t forget that Reagan, Clinton, Bush and Obama all replaced U.S. attorneys appointed by their predecessors, though less abruptly than did Trump. The point is there’s very little Donald Trump has done that hasn’t been done, in some form or another, by others before him. Perhaps no other president has done all these things at the same time. But still, let’s not be too quick to the panic button. The hysteria over everything Trump does have the potential to obscure what may be genuine causes for concern.
What is the relevance of all this stuff I did not mention? Times are different. Are you seriously claiming that the internet has not revolutionized media and communications? Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Youtube, etc. have not had revolutionary impacts on the way society reacts to media? I don't believe you.
The Trayvon Martin story wasn't instantaneous, despite the internet. Some of the other stories mentioned were instant...despite the internet. I didn't claim that. I'm just debunking the notion that the internet is the new root cause behind your (and the media's) claim of a "Post-Truth Society". There were people who lamented the same thing with the advent of tabloid newspapers, trash radio, several different cable news channels, etc...
The media and democrats are making themselves look like complete morons over this. They are going to be very disappointed when they find nothing.but I do have to admit I find the outright hysteria extremely comical.
I'm still waiting on you to answer the question about why Trump's picks and campaign staff keep lying about their contacts with Russians? It may well be nothing at all was wrong with their actions. But the question remains, why lie about it over and over? Why are they acting guilty?
Sorry there is nothing NORMAL about Trump and his presidency and no amount of propaganda is going to make it so. He is not a normal man, he is not a normal President, no matter how some reporters may cherry pick things and try to make it seem so, he is a terrible human being. DD
Good lord. Pick up a history book. Franklin Roosevelt had a **** ton of advisers in his 3+ terms, but to state that his crew was in any way like trumps cabal of white supremacists, family clowns, and hangers on in any fashion is hysterically negligent. It approaches "but Hilary emails" level of false equivalency. They couldn't carry Harry Hopkins jock with a forklift.
I didn't answer because it is a dumb question. Sessions was a Senator at the time he talked to the ambassador. Flynn talked to him and did not inform Trump and was fired. There is no proof either talked about the election. Flynn was fired solely for not letting Trump and the Vice President know he talked to him which caused Pence to make a statement that was untrue. If talking to the Russian ambassador makes you a Russian sympathizer or whatever you would call it then there are a lot of people in Washington on both sides of the aisle that need to be investigated. Considering the Democrats and the media completely dismissed everything Hillary did, I find this whole witch hunt rather amusing. In the end, it is nothing more than a distraction and a way to keep the base riled up. That appears to be working based on the way you and others on here are acting about it. I have a question for you, does it bother you that people in the government are leaking classified information to the press? Given that is happening, don't you think they would have already leaked the "smoking gun" if they had it?
So you answered for Flynn with only part of the story. Trump and Pence found out about what Flynn discussed with the Russians weeks before they actually fired him. It isn't as if they found and then decided to fire him. They knew about it and did nothing until the story broke and that was when they fired him. You told what Sessions did and why it might be okay for him to have met with the Russians, but you never explained why he lied about it, and tried to hide it. You also didn't mention Manafort and his lies about the Russians. You also didn't mention Paige and his lies about meeting with the Russians, you also didn't mention JD Gordon and his lies about the Russians and the changes to the Republican platform. It isn't just the two you mentioned that lied about it, it's all of those people that lied about it. You can think that's a "dumb" question if you want, but many Republicans and I believe it is a very sensible question. As far as the leaks go, yes it is wrong to leak sensitive insider information. If Trump were willing to not lie so much, believe crap from Breitbart, and govern more reasonably, I bet those leaks would slow if not stop all together. It would be a very effective tool in stopping the leaks. But I know that Trump himself had previously said that he loves leaks. So apparently that's just another area where he's a lying hypocrite.
