|
|
Post by cjm on Aug 14, 2017 8:02:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Trog on Aug 16, 2017 6:11:49 GMT
I really think that Bannon should just leave, reset, and focus on cultivating the next president. Trump is too poor a vehicle and maybe even did a lot of harm. On the other hand, certain breaches have been created, US politics has been irrevocably changed, and quite probably someone of greater perspicacity will be found to step into the void. Even should the Trump presidency end tomorrow, it will reverberate through the next century at least, and that because of Bannon, not Trump.
But I suspect that Bannon would prefer to be fired, rather than to resign. If he resigns, he would be bound in terms of decency to maintain a cordial image of Trump. Whereas, should he be fired, he'd be free to unleash at will, with, I suspect, significant consequences.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trog on Aug 17, 2017 6:18:17 GMT
Steve Bannon just gave his own unsolicited interviewIn part, I suspect that Bannon is playing another (one of many) little game of brinkmanship; this one with Trump - i.e. saying "Fire me if you dare". But the reporting around this just seems to me a reflection on how journalists just totally not get Bannon. They had set up some sort of straw-man Bannon and they are firing all over the place, hitting nothing of consequence. He is always about 8 moves ahead of them. To me, the fact of the interview in itself, and what was said during it, comes across as having been calculated with great care.
|
|
|
|
Post by cjm on Aug 18, 2017 6:46:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Trog on Aug 18, 2017 10:21:01 GMT
It ‘Drew Fire Away’ From POTUS Hmmm, yes. It did a lot more than that, though. Effectively, if Trump does NOT fire Bannon after this, it sends a massive message to people such as McMaster and Cohn, and perhaps make their continued presence in the Whitehouse untenable. It will also bring a much sharper focus to Trump's mind w.r.t. his relationship with Bannon. |
|
|
|
Post by cjm on Aug 18, 2017 11:45:09 GMT
It ‘Drew Fire Away’ From POTUS Hmmm, yes. It did a lot more than that, though. Effectively, if Trump does NOT fire Bannon after this, it sends a massive message to people such as McMaster and Cohn, and perhaps make their continued presence in the Whitehouse untenable. It will also bring a much sharper focus to Trump's mind w.r.t. his relationship with Bannon. As you pointed out a post or so ago, it was a very provocative act by Bannon. By selecting a small, left-wing news outleft, I imagine the disclosures were much wider read and disseminated, than if it came from Breitbart (for example). It is similar in strategy to the interview Trump had with the NYT. Allowing these outlets to have a scoop of sorts, also opens up (I would suggest), a communication channel. |
|
|
|
Post by cjm on Aug 19, 2017 5:46:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Trog on Aug 19, 2017 8:11:41 GMT
I think this makes things rather more interesting. At the very least, it will remove from Trump's mind the notion that he is Bannon's boss. Anyway, other than what happened to others who left the White House, I'm sure that Bannon will not fade from view. Quite the opposite, in fact. |
|
|
|
Post by Trog on Aug 19, 2017 10:56:53 GMT
The day after Bannon gave this interview - The American Prospect, he met with Robert Mercer: Business InsiderI reckon that both Bannon and Mercer had already decided before the interview that Bannon will leave the White House on Friday. If this is true, Bannon gave the interview knowing full well that he will no longer be Trump's chief strategist by then. This creates an entirely different context for statements he made during the interview: He could very well have meant this as working from outside the administration. I suspect some sort of mega-media enterprise from Bannon and Mercer. And although Bannon has stated that he is behind Trump all the way, I think he means it metaphorically, and that an item high on his and Mercer's list will be to find a Trump replacement. One with more than half a brain. Trump Patron’s Fund Bought Millions Worth Of Shares In Time, Inc. |
|
|
|
Post by cjm on Aug 20, 2017 17:06:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by cjm on Aug 21, 2017 5:42:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by cjm on Aug 22, 2017 7:27:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Trog on Aug 22, 2017 11:22:33 GMT
In retrospect, it was perhaps a mistake to try to destroy the GOP from within the GOP. Amongst other things, every representative elected to the GOP probably feels himself obliged to conform to the overall GOP policy.
I'm wondering if there is not a new political party in the making?
|
|
