Trump news, March 2 2017

1. The Russia witch hunters are now after Jeff Sessions.

It was my belief that Trump let Flynn go not because of the bullshit Russia stuff, but because Flynn was a bozo. (Now people may say that Trump is also a bozo, but it’s a typical power move that the man in charge can act in ways that subordinates are not allowed to.)

Jeff Sessions is definitely not a bozo. He’s a key part of the Trump administration, and we know he has the full support of two of his most important advisors, Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon. (I don’t know what his other two most important advisors, Jared Kushner and Ivanka, think about Sessions.)

We know that Trump is able to stand up to the mainstream media and not concede any ground to them when he wants to, and we have to believe he will take that approach with Sessions.

Those who said it was a bad idea to get rid of Flynn, even if Trump didn’t like the job he was doing, because it would give the anti-Trump MSM a victory that would empower them to do more damage may have been right about that.

By the way, the accusations against Sessions are ridiculous. He was said to have had nefarious contacts with the Russians because on one occasion he gave a speech to a gathering of many ambassadors, and later he exchanged pleasantries with the Russian ambassador in public view.

Besides that, there was only one other occasion where he talked to the Russian ambassador, as part of his normal duties as a Senator which brought him in contact with many ambassadors.

2. According to a key New York Times article, there was a conspiracy by the Obama administration to spread innuendo about Russia and Trump as widely as possible in order to sabotage President Trump’s administration. I’ve told you before that Obama is an evil genius when it comes to these underhanded tactics.

The spin of the article, however, is that all of these actions were justified because, you know, Trump is Hitler and must be stopped at all costs. Most liberal reporters have actually convinced themselves that this Russia stuff is real. There’s a very strong cognitive bias to believe in anything that will bring down your enemies.

The article also has more information about what Flynn discussed with the Russian ambassador, and it’s exactly as I previously hypothesized. This is what I wrote:

I suspect the true intent of the phone call was for Flynn to convey to the Russian ambassador, “when Trump takes over in a month we want better relations, so don’t do anything rash in retaliation for what Obama has done that would poison the possibility of future reconciliation.”

That sounds reasonable to me. Does it technically violate the Logan Act, an act under which no one has ever been prosecuted and has never been considered by U.S. Courts, so we don’t really know for certain what the Act allows and doesn’t allow?

This is what the NY Times article says:

On Jan. 2, administration officials learned that Mr. Kislyak — after leaving the State Department meeting — called Mr. Flynn, and that the two talked multiple times in the 36 hours that followed. American intelligence agencies routinely wiretap the phones of Russian diplomats, and transcripts of the calls showed that Mr. Flynn urged the Russians not to respond, saying relations would improve once Mr. Trump was in office, according to multiple current and former officials.

Yep, sounds reasonable to me. Obama was trying to sabotage Trump’s foreign policy and it made sense for Flynn to try to stop that sabotage from happening. However, because Obama is an evil genius, Flynn’s success in preventing the Russians from retaliating against Obama was used to remove Flynn from his job.