Lion of the Blogosphere

Paul Manafort

I think this deserves a separate post.

Manafort was never anything other than a slimy political insider, but Trump needed the services of that type of person during the primaries when it looked like Ted Cruz was going to steal the nomination through sneaky delegate shenanigans. Hiring Manafort was an excellent idea at the time. Trump needed slime to fight against slime. Manafort was then replaced by Steven Bannon for the next stage of the campaign which needed a media expert and not a slimy political insider.

It seems to me that Manafort is in big trouble, because the MSM is out to punish everyone who helped Trump rise to power, and all of Manafort’s sliminess is going to bite him. Meanwhile, the equal or even greater sliminess of other political insider and lobbyist types from both parties will continue to be ignored, because they weren’t involved with Trump.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

March 23, 2017 at 1:00 pm

Posted in Politics

51 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. If he’s as slimy as you say maybe he’ll rollover onto other Trump campaign figures to save his skin. And they’ll rollover…

    Isn’t that what a lot of prosecutors do?

    Dave

    March 23, 2017 at 1:09 pm

    • Keep dreaming, hilbot

      driveallnight

      March 23, 2017 at 11:15 pm

  2. When you post something like this, you should mention the specific issues you’re talking about, or at least provide a link to a news article, rather than making your readers go Googling “Paul Manafort” to see if/why he’s been in the news lately in an effort to figure out what you’re talking about.

    Hermes

    March 23, 2017 at 1:39 pm

  3. Manafort looks to be in a heap of trouble. It has been known for a long time that he worked for Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian Ukrainian president. There were accusations back when he was running Trump campaign that he was secretly paid $12 million for his work, which he denied, but then he resigned.

    Now AP got a hold of a 2005 strategy plan Manafort wrote and pitched to Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch with close ties to Putin. This document propose that Manafort would promote Russian interests in Eastern Europe, Western Europe and the USA. There are records of millions of dollars transferred from Deripaska to Manafort and Manafort now has said he worked for Deripaska but not to promote Russian interests.

    Manafort worked as Trump’s campaign manager for free. People are asking does that mean he was being paid by Deripaska or some other Russian oligarch for his work on the Trump campaign.

    Manafort never register as a foreign lobbyist, so if he was promoting Russian interests in the USA, as he proposed in his plan, that was illegal.

    At best, hiring Manafort shows poor judgement on Trump’s part, as does hiring Flynn.

    Mike CA

    March 23, 2017 at 2:03 pm

    • Flynn was always whacky.

      Manafort was not whacky, he was good at his job, he got Trump the nomination, and since he worked for free a real bargain.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      March 23, 2017 at 3:21 pm

      • But who works for free? WTH?

        Jesse

        March 24, 2017 at 6:34 am

      • Who works for free? Anyone who wants a good relationship with the president and his administration. It’s worth working for free for a couple of months to be able to call the president and discuss issues on behalf of whoever he’s lobbying for. Now, that doesn’t guarantee the president will do what he wants. Just that the president would take his call. It’s not even about working for free. It’s about the relationship one builds from having worked together.

        destructure

        March 24, 2017 at 4:01 pm

      • Liberals instinctively believe everyone should work for free for the common good. Except themselves. Their own self should be paid a million dollars a year. They are verminous degenerates.

        Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

        March 24, 2017 at 4:12 pm

      • Now AP got a hold of a 2005 strategy plan Manafort wrote and pitched to Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch with close ties to Putin. This document propose that Manafort would promote Russian interests in Eastern Europe, Western Europe and the USA. There are records of millions of dollars transferred from Deripaska to Manafort and Manafort now has said he worked for Deripaska but not to promote Russian interests.

        It’s not illegal to lobby for the Russian government, especially in 2005 when our relations with Russia were better and there were no American sanctions imposed on their companies.

        Or, if what Manafort did for Russia was illegal you haven’t shown what Federal law it would have violated.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        March 24, 2017 at 6:21 pm

    • Bang away on that Russia drum, Mike. Never stop.

      Andrew E.

      March 23, 2017 at 3:35 pm

    • “Manafort never register (sic) as a foreign lobbyist, so if he was promoting Russian interests in the USA, as he proposed in his plan, that was illegal.”

      Let’s take a closer look at this assertion, as it seems overly broad to me. First, Politico reported last year that Manafort was registered as a lobbyist for the Marcos regime back in 1985. Once registered, do you have to re-register for each new regime for which you do PR work? Second, what if the “Russian interest” he was promoting was merely, say, repelling the advnce of international faggotry, which we all know is the chief basis on which Clintonistas opposed Russia in the first place? If all he was dcoing was trying to dig up dirt on Pussy Riot would he have to register for that?

      Tiny Blades

      March 23, 2017 at 8:35 pm

      • Foreign Agents Registration Act requires regular registration and disclosure of financial arrangements. Enforcement has been spotty.

        The plan the AP got a hold of was a proposal Manafort made to Deripaska. We do not know if Deripaska approved that plan. We do know Deripaska hired Manafort and paid him millions of dollars, but both Manafort and Deripaska deny it was for what was in the plan.

        The act was narrowed to specify that it applied to people trying to influence political decisions in the USA. I’m sure Manafort would claim he never tried to do that. Working as campaign chairmen for Trump though is clearly trying to influence political decisions so if he was paid by one of his Russian friends for that, it would raise a lot of questions.

        mikeca

        March 23, 2017 at 10:34 pm

      • If you are going to make fun of people’s IQs, learn the spell the word “transitioned.”

        gothamette

        March 24, 2017 at 2:29 pm

      • Mike CA — The alleged payments were years before Trump ever announced he was running. So clearly whatever it was had nothing to do with Trump. And if there was any reason to suspect Manafort was doing something illegal then why didn’t Bush or Obama prosecute him years ago? And why should Trump suspect wrongdoing for something Manafort was never accused of until much later? It seems it’s only an issue now is because it’s politically convenient to make it an issue.

        destructure

        March 24, 2017 at 4:44 pm

    • Anyone taking the Russia stuff seriously has a verbal IQ < 120.

      Its patently stupid.

      The establishment is angry that Trump won. The more obvious explanation is that they dislike Trump and Putin because they are both white naitionalists.

      That should be another clue.

      The Philosopher Fully Transistioned

      March 24, 2017 at 6:03 am

      • If Putin were a “white nationalist,” he wouldn’t be A: maintaining thousands of ICBMs for the military contingency of obliterating the entirety of white civilization, B: letting in enormous numbers of Muslim immigrants from Central Asia and Azerbaijan, who’ve gone from like 2% to 10% of the population under him, and C: killing lots of very pallid Ukrainians and Dutchmen, on the alleged basis that they’re “Nazis.”

        snorlax

        March 24, 2017 at 10:22 am

      • Correction, CIA Ukrainians.

        The Philosopher Fully Transistioned

        March 24, 2017 at 11:32 am

      • Let’s see. Among voters with High School or less, Trump won 51-45. With some college Trump won 52-43. Among college graduates Trump lost 45-49. Among people with Post Graduate Study Trump lost 37-58.

        Can’t find a poll on Trump support among graduates of Trump University (TU), but I hear that TU is offering advanced degrees in bullshit philosophy.

        mikeca

        March 24, 2017 at 10:22 am

      • Part of the brainwashing of TU was to convince the students how great TU was (even though it was actually a scam), so probably they mostly supported Trump.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        March 24, 2017 at 10:45 am

      • Most hillary supporters are minorities. Wanna guess what the av IQ of them is?

        The Philosopher Fully Transistioned

        March 24, 2017 at 11:31 am

      • People who actively support Hillary have higher IQs compared to the larger number of people who just show up to vote. Being interested in politics is a sign of higher IQ.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        March 24, 2017 at 12:20 pm

      • Mike CA — Liberals love pointing out that more people with a master’s vote Dem. And I love pointing out what those degrees are in. It’s a pretty safe bet that while Dems have more master’s they’re also much more likely to have them in fields like Education, Humanities and Social Science not STEM. And as you can clearly see, most master’s degrees are in non STEM fields. I don’t want to knock business too much because it’s a legitimate field. But it’s also one of the less liberal fields.

        destructure

        March 24, 2017 at 12:28 pm

      • “Liberals love pointing out that more people with a master’s vote Dem. And I love pointing out what those degrees are in.”

        I believe there a lot more advanced degrees in education and business than other subjects. I happen to have an advanced degree in a STEM field and I work in STEM. I’m not a Trump supporter and I don’t know many people who are outside of some religious people who were told by their minister to vote for Trump.

        As Lion frequently has pointed out, Trump talks and acts prole. That style of speaking and behavior does not really appeal to highly educated people. It is not what highly educated people think is appropriate for the president of the US.

        mikeca

        March 24, 2017 at 2:08 pm

      • “As Lion frequently has pointed out, Trump talks and acts prole. That style of speaking and behavior does not really appeal to highly educated people. It is not what highly educated people think is appropriate for the president of the US.”

        I agree with you 100%.

        Furthermore, educated people are far more likely to buy into gay rights/global warming stuff making them lean Democratic, except with respect to taxes.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        March 24, 2017 at 3:45 pm

      • Educated people are too neutered and civilized to understand fundamental laws of animals. They will be outbread and sent to the dustbin of history where they can preen queitly in hell.

        Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

        March 24, 2017 at 4:16 pm

      • “As Lion frequently has pointed out, Trump talks and acts prole. That style of speaking and behavior does not really appeal to highly educated people. It is not what highly educated people think is appropriate for the president of the US.”

        I find it interesting that high IQ people place a much higher value in style over substance.

        Mike Street Station

        March 25, 2017 at 8:09 am

      • “I happen to have an advanced degree in a STEM field and I work in STEM.”

        I have a couple of advanced degrees myself. But I saw no reason to whip mine out.

        “I’m not a Trump supporter and I don’t know many people who are outside of some religious people”

        Thanks for that anecdotal evidence. But I think that has more to do with your living in California. I worked in California for a while myself. And I wouldn’t consider those people representative of anything except the kind of people who live in California.

        “As Lion frequently has pointed out, Trump talks and acts prole. That style of speaking and behavior does not really appeal to highly educated people.”

        Highly educated people assume that since they’re smarter than most that their views and opinions must be right. The problem is that while most academic and professional endeavors are rooted in logic and reason, most people’s views on social, economic and political issues are not. Rather one’s views on those issues are largely the result of values and emotion. Education and intelligence have little to do with it. In fact, I suspect that wealthier, more intelligent people are actually more likely to be wrong on some of those due to environmental effects.
        *
        As for whether Trump’s style of speech appeals to the highly educated, it supports my premise that views and opinions on social and political issues are more a result of values and emotions than logic and reason. Otherwise, they wouldn’t care what one’s style of speech is.

        destructure

        March 25, 2017 at 10:41 pm

  4. Manafort was useful in securing the delegates for the nomination, but that was it. Now, he’ provided nothing but Russia fodder to the Dem/MSM. Meanwhile, no one seems worried about Ukrainian attempts to sabotage our elections. http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

    Mike Street Station

    March 23, 2017 at 3:04 pm

    • How could Trump have known about this Russian BS back then?

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      March 23, 2017 at 3:22 pm

      • Exactly. Also note that Russia is the largest country in Europe. The number of people in government who have “ties” to Russia is endless. As Roger Stone just pointed out, Podesta actually had stronger ties to Russians than Manafort. So the entire discussion is silly. Even if Manafort had nothing to do with Russia, the Dems would have just gone down the line till they found somebody that did. There are going to be hundreds of people with “ties” to Russia in any reasonably competent and experienced Administration.

        The USA is not North Korea. Our businessmen, lobbyists, lawyers, intellectuals, and foreign policy analysts interact with the rest of the world, and Russia is one of the biggest and most important nations out there.

        PerezHBD

        March 23, 2017 at 5:43 pm

      • He couldn’t obviously. But unlike the Democra’ts Russia conspiracy theory, The Ukraine really did try to interfere with our elections, and no one cares.

        Mike Street Station

        March 23, 2017 at 6:15 pm

  5. What the heck is it with the Dims and Russia? I get that they’re looking for something to throw at Trump. But they also seem to be targeting Russia. They don’t seem very concerned with China which strikes me as 10X the threat Russia is. They couldn’t care less if the ChiComms donated millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation.

    destructure

    March 23, 2017 at 7:01 pm

    • I would agree that over the long term, China is a much greater threat, but China didn’t pass an anti gay law so…that’s what’s really important.

      Mike Street Station

      March 25, 2017 at 8:10 am

  6. Marty

    March 23, 2017 at 8:44 pm

  7. At what point after the Cold War ended did Russia again become so completely evil that anybody who has so much as spoken to a Russian is called a traitor?

    Stealth

    March 23, 2017 at 8:57 pm

    • Perhaps it was in 2014 when Russia enacted an adoption ban on countries which have gay marriage? I remember that at the time, a lot of Leftists were pretty upset about this.

      sabril

      March 24, 2017 at 4:58 am

    • 10 months ago.

      Before that it was fine that Russia funded Democrat agitation groups such as ANSWER.

      It was NBD in 2006 that Russia was funding efforts to undermine the US interests since that that benefited the Pelosi and the Democrats in the mid terms.

      The hypocrisy of the press!

      Lion of the Turambar

      March 24, 2017 at 10:03 am

    • Moderate liberals turned on Russia after the 2013 “gay propaganda” law, but far-leftists like The Nation didn’t until after election day 2016.

      snorlax

      March 24, 2017 at 10:26 am

  8. There hasn’t been any new Russian revelations in months. The only thing that is even being investigated are ties between members of the Trump campaign team and various Russian officials.

    What we’ve seen so far is what we are going to get. It isn’t effecting public opinion so who cares?

    It is Ryancare that is a real concern right now. The sooner it fails, the better.

    Otis the Sweaty

    March 23, 2017 at 11:20 pm

    • It is Ryancare that is a real concern right now. The sooner it fails, the better.

      Why is Trump supporting it?

      Why is Trump so submissive to Paul Ryan? The bill is not what Trump ran on and most Americans and his base hate it!!

      What’s Trump’s agenda?

      Rifleman

      March 24, 2017 at 8:41 am

      • I think it makes sense. Trump gave Ryan all the rope he needed to hang himself. Ryan is now completely discredited and Trump has the moral authority to say, “from now on, we do things my way”.

        PerezHBD

        March 24, 2017 at 10:20 am

      • Right, why is Trump supporting it? The “all the rope” argument is bullshit. In politics there is only winning and losing and losing (which I want to happen) is losing. He will look weak and stupid.

        I don’t know what Trump’s agenda is, except maybe he’s in over his head and he’s being blackmailed.

        gothamette

        March 24, 2017 at 2:32 pm

      • Trump and weak sound silly in the same sentence…

        Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

        March 24, 2017 at 4:20 pm

  9. The media mind control power is greatly weakened by Trump. The fact the president is calling the media charade (they are all the same people) out and that the allegations are retarded or don’t stick/debunked (remember the 10 women that accused Trumpy of rape anyone?) shows the media is going to immolate itself trying to stop nationalism.

    Why?

    Because the media does not represent the people.

    It represents a group of people that know no borders.

    Do you say it in your sleep?

    Do you see it in the subway advertisements?

    Do you see it in your child’s textbooks?

    Who is the Wizard of Oz?

    Where did it come from?

    The Philosopher Fully Transistioned

    March 24, 2017 at 6:06 am

  10. Trump smartly cutting his losses on Obamacare, although it was a mistake to get into in the first place.

    snorlax

    March 24, 2017 at 10:28 am

    • You cannot have a private system that covers everyone and keeps preexisting conditions and lowers drig costs.

      Its ridiculous.

      Neoliberals know that. They just want a clean repeal.

      The us health system is the worst in the developed world. Only the top 5% benefit from it. The us education system is another racket.

      Most americans are much poorer than europeans factoring in personal debt and how healthcare/edication/public transport is held off balance sheet.

      Neoliberals also know that. All you need is a spreadsheet.

      The Philosopher Fully Transistioned

      March 24, 2017 at 3:16 pm

      • Held off b/s for euros and canadians i mean.

        If america never had slavery, america would have canadas economic policies.

        The Philosopher Fully Transistioned

        March 24, 2017 at 3:17 pm

  11. The MSM’s willingness to punish conservative slime, and not liberal slime, puts conservatives at a distinct political disadvantage. This frames another great reason as to why the press, as it exists, needs to be dismantled and rebuilt to be less political. Though, I’m unsure what that process would look like.

    Dave

    March 24, 2017 at 10:51 am

    • To change the cultural landscape more conservatives have to make careers in academia, the media and the arts and produce conservative scholarship, conservative journalism, conservative fine art and conservative pop culture. It won’t be easy, but there is no other way.

      Gozo

      March 24, 2017 at 2:19 pm

      • That won’t happen. Conservative academics are deliberately discriminated against. Liberals actually work together to block them from getting tenure. I read a survey of professors a few years ago where the majority of them admitted they do that. Conservatives generally don’t discriminate against liberals. Which explains how liberals are able to get and maintain a monopoly.

        destructure

        March 24, 2017 at 4:08 pm

      • Academia is handled with price controls and discharging student loans in bankruptcy. The credit holder can claw their losses back with university property.

        map

        March 24, 2017 at 11:18 pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: