********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.

I don't know that Comey was quite as important a figure in the resistance to Trump's changes to U.S. policy as Carl describes ... I tend to think not. But that was a part of it.

But mainly Trump fired him, I think, for exactly the reasons Trump said, showboating, grandstanding, and for being a loose cannon.

Of course those things precisely made Comey useful to opponents of Trump's policies, but this firing wasn't driven by some desperate need to thwart the investigation or the political opposition. On the investigation, I don't believe there was anything concrete to be thwarted, nothing to be covered up in relation to the elections.

That's different from Nixon. Behind the Saturday night massacre there were very specific, concrete things he was trying to hide.

No one has yet to articulate just *what* is being investigated. Collusion between team Trump and team Putin. But collusion to do what? Stuff ballot boxes? Rig voting machines? Use RT's massive influence over Americans to get them to vote for Trump?

I don't think this is about a cover-up. Instead, and above all, Trump wants people in top government positions loyal to him, investigation or no investigation, it doesn't matter. He is clearly a bonapartist figure, and he simply has to have it.

He made it explicit as hell in his "fuck you" letter to Comey. He said, I know you promised not to cross me by repeatedly saying I wasn't under investigation [basically, telling Comey that he, Trump, understood that thereby Comey had compromised himself and made himself vulnerable to Trump], but that's not good enough. Today Trump tripled underlined the message with his tweet about tapes.

The *WAY* Comey was fired was a very important part of the message. It was vindictive and as humiliating as could be to Comey. I joked on the radio show I do (www.radioinformacion.org) that Comey got to find out via CNN while giving a talk to FBI agents because Francis Ford Coppola wasn't available to direct the putting of the head of a decapitated horse in Comey's bed. And he got really lucky that they didn't have a fish handy to wrap in a bullet-proof vest.

That said, I think Mark is way off. On the overall political framework Carl is right, I believe. Trump came in projecting a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy. Whether the until-now dominant wing of the "national security state" or "political class" or "military industrial complex" or however you want to conceive of it has completely derailed or even convinced Trump to reverse course is another matter.

An additional factor in it all is that the Democrat nomenklatura needs the Russian plot and Comey sabotage to explain away Clinton's loss to Trump.

And --this is important-- she did lose. Factoring out California, Clinton lost in the rest of the country by a million votes. Take out New York also and her 48-state deficit was three million votes. Sure, if Comey hadn't back-stabbed her she would have squeaked through. But she should have won by a landslide.

But that aside, it has been obvious to me from the outset that Russiagate is largely a dispute about the direction of U.S. foreign policy. Trump came in wanting a sharper, more demanding stance towards "our" traditional allies because they are in fact "our" main competitors. And all the stuff a bout collusion and so on is just total bullshit. I've written a series of blog posts going over this so I won't repeat all the arguments here:

The Russian White House Coup ... and what Karl Marx has to do with it

The Russian election hack: bullshit

Behind the Russia hysteria: a major dispute over foreign policy

'No evidence' means that we didn't mean to wiretap Trump's people ...

The NY Times channels Joe McCarthy


On 5/12/2017 10:33 AM, Mark Lause via Marxism wrote:

There's absolutely no evidence for this . . . no more than for the idea
that it's all about who gets to control the captured UFOs . . . .

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Carl G. Estabrook via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

The White House fired Comey because he was the point-man in the campaign
of the US political establishment (Democrats-neocons-spooks etc.) to
prevent Trump from carrying out his campaign promises of rapprochement with

Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 

Reply via email to