Time and place… Time. And. Place.

Donald Trump will never win an award for being a silver-tongued orator.  It’s his willingness to say what he thinks, however, that endears him to many of his supporters.  In Monday’s press conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump disappointed many when he declined to press Putin publicly on the accusation of cyberspace meddling in the 2016 election.  This resulted in shrieks of “treason” from his detractors in the U.S. (note to these: take a tranquilizer and calm down; your constant Chicken Little hysterics are embarrassing).  Being civil with Putin, however, doesn’t mean being in his pocket:

[Trump] is, as Greg Gutfeld noted on The Five, his own good cop and bad cop all rolled into one.  The good cop part is what we saw with Kim Jong-un and now with Putin — complimenting tyrants to an almost uncomfortable degree.  It’s oddly a Christian love-the-sinner-but-hate-the-sin kind of thing.

The bad cop part is what Trump actually does concretely — and, as Putin certainly knows, this is far more important than photo ops and press conferences with all the attendant words.  Trump’s actions vis-a-vis Russia have been considerably more stringent than his predecessor’s — opening the energy spigots, increasing sanctions, arming the Ukrainians, ejecting 60 Russian agents, etc.  As Walter Russell Mead pointed out, if Trump is in Putin’s pocket, he’s doing a terrible job of it.

Barack Obama — although the New York Times would burn down its own building rather than admit it — did an abysmal job with Putin and was indeed the one who was truly “owned” by the Russian.  And it wasn’t just the silly reset button and the embarrassing video of Barack whispering into Medvedev’s ear to tell Vlad he — Barack — would be more flexible on missiles after the election.  (What a toady!)  Even worse, in his Chamberlainesque ardor to make a deal with Iran’s mullahs, Obama let Putin play him in Syria, agreeing not to honor his redline against Assad’s use of chemical weapons in order not to endanger the  deal.  Trump never did anything nearly that pathetic.

Too many in our government find purpose only in confronting adversaries, whether it’s Russia, Iran, Syria or North Korea (or for warmonger John McCain — who still hasn’t resigned his Senate seat despite terminal cancer that allegedly prevents his being in D.C. — all of the above).  If things are too calm they’ll create the next Hitler of convenience (see: Slobodan Milosevic, Muammar Ghaddafi).  Keeping these pots on a low boil is useful to the ruling class; when people start catching on to Uncle Sam’s misdeeds, they simply turn up the heat on one of the burners as a “rally ’round the flag” distraction.

If the various “Q”-related rumors are true, the administration is about to unmask considerable — possibly unprecedented — malfeasance within our own country’s leadership.  In such a case it would be prudent to wall off any potential foreign distractions, which may underpin Trump’s focused efforts with North Korea and Russia these days.  Putin’s revelation that Hillary Clinton received $400 million in questionable campaign funds from Russian sources, and Trump’s comments at the press conference about the missing DNC computer server and other unresolved scandals serve to underscore what fights our president has chosen to pursue at this time.  Regardless what success he has on that front, Trump is absolutely right in responding to those who urged him to cross swords with Putin or refuse to meet him at all:

“I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace, than to risk peace in pursuit of politics.”

Trump’s foes have consistently underestimated both him and his base of support.  This tends to downplay in my mind all the pundits who claim Trump is either coopted or naïve about Putin.  They may find he was simply ensuring a fight on only one front at a time, fully aware that he still needs to keep Putin under a watchful eye.  “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer,” as the saying goes.

Such wisdom is to be desired in a chief executive.

Advertisements

Is this the week?

There are loud whisperings from various quarters that this is the week the Department of Justice’s Inspector General releases his report on various alleged shenanigans within our government during the last election cycle.  If so, it’s been a long time coming, and without much fanfare until recent weeks.  I hope that’s an indication of a professionally run, thorough investigation that produces airtight evidence and leads to justice and accountability — not just for small-fry scapegoats, but also for heavy hitters who knowingly put their thumbs on the scales.

While I’ve not discussed Q much on this site (only mentioning the source recently for the first time), it will be interesting to see where this week goes.  You see, Q (which appears to be a group working together) put down a marker for Wednesday, May 23, as being a good day to watch the news.  Q has hinted quite strongly that recent statements by the administration were preparatory to the report coming out… and that many of the targets of that report are already spinning madly to try to get in front of it.  I did not realize until recently that the draft IG report was circulated not just within the department but also to those it targets.  If so, it would explain a lot of the heated rhetoric over the weekend from people like John Brennan.

Something else about Q’s recent posts drew my interest.  Here are a couple from Thursday, May 17th:

Q recent

As someone who has professional experience in media relations, I can say that driving news cycles is a key part of controlling the national discussion.  If something bad is about to break, industry practice is to time it for a Friday afternoon, so that if anyone bothers pays attention after the weekend it’s dismissed as “old news.”  Another is to time the release so a more prominent event draws off the focus.  Such is the sad commentary on our short-attention-span society.  There were hints the past couple weeks the Trump administration was ready to let some shoes drop.  So what happened the next day after the posts above (Friday the 18th)?

Santa Fe high school

This is not the first time Q has implied some of these events are deliberately designed, either to further an agenda or to suck the media oxygen out of the room and suffocate potentially damaging news about the shadow government (or Deep State as some refer to it).  One of Q’s constant remarks is “this is not a game.”  Sadly, as I’ve already confessed, such an accusation seems increasingly plausible to me.  Here’s were it gets more interesting (note the dates):

Thought wrong

“Follow the pen” refers to a posted photo that seemed to show a signed Executive Order about to drop.  The implication was that Trump was about to order up some answers.  Notably, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on Sunday ordered the DOJ to look into the allegations highlighted by Trump.  The “NowC@mesTheP@ain—23!!!” line was an exposure of Q’s password before changing it and the passcode ID that verifies who’s posting.  Q claimed this to be a deliberate move.  It had been some time since Q’s last passcode change, so the implication is Q knew/knows something about May 23rd.  By Wednesday, not only will the initial furor over the school shooting be (sadly) past, so will the hoopla over the weekend’s royal wedding.

In other words, no distractions for dropping shoes.  Finally, Q did something unusual Sunday, worth noting here:

Q Armor of God

Q posts have alluded in the past to a spiritual battle going on, but this is the first direct Bible quote I’ve seen.  Such a post seems to indicate whatever maneuvering has been going on behind the scenes is about to break into the spotlight.  As frustrating as it’s been to see people like Her Hillariness seem to avoid consequences, there’s reason to believe justice has only been delayed, not denied.

The only proper response to Q’s Bible quote is to pray.  Pray hard for our nation.  Pray for those in authority.  Pray for those patriots working to restore good governance.  And pray our people have discernment, to tell truth from falsehood.

With that accomplished, let justice be served.  May this be a week for the history books.

Do they even listen to themselves?

Showtime’s “Homeland” series takes a few swipes at the Trump administration in an interview with ITK, as reported by The Hill.  In the process, they show either an inability to connect the dots, or a belief the rubes in the heartland can’t:

Each year, the team behind “Homeland” takes a weeklong research field trip to Washington to prep for the espionage thriller’s upcoming season. But this time around, when Showtime’s crew touched down in D.C. two months after President Trump’s inauguration, the mood was different…

In preparation for production, the “Homeland” team started asking what recourse intelligence officers and National Security Agency workers had if “they see an administration going off the rails.”

Gansa says he found “there was a strange sort of new alliance that was taking place between the intelligence community and the fourth estate, which we found interesting.”

After admitting they wouldn’t be pursuing a storyline about a ‘paranoid president’ had Her Hillariness been installed in 2016, they then backtrack on what they’ve just said:

Asked what Trump might take away from this season, Gansa replies, “I doubt he’d learn one thing. I think he might be amused just to watch an administration convinced that there was something called the ‘deep state’ aligned against her. Clearly that’s a fear that the Trump administration feels every day.”

Well gosh, when the stars of a hit TV series are deliberately pushing the message the President is paranoid, while noting in the real world there’s “a strange sort of new alliance… between the intelligence community and the fourth estate (the media),” I can’t imagine why the Trump administration might be concerned about a Deep State working against him.

Can you?