Here is the president of the United States of America’s official statement on his former chief advisor:
Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party. Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn’t as easy as I make it look.
Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country. Yet Steve had everything to do with the loss of a Senate seat in Alabama held for more than thirty years by Republicans. Steve doesn’t represent my base-he’s only in it for himself.
Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well.
Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books. We have many great Republican members of the Make America Great Again agenda. Like me, they love the United States of America and are helping to finally take our country back and build it up, rather than simply seeking to burn it all down.
What the president did not say:
1. that Bannon “had blood coming out of his eyes, blood coming out of his wherever.”
2. that Bannon was “bleeding badly from a face-lift.”
3. that Bannon was wrong when he said the chance that “Don. Jr did not walk [the Russians he met with in Trump Tower] up to his father’s office on the 26th floor is zero.”
4. that Bannon was wrong when he said that the campaign should have called the FBI rather than hold a meeting with Kremlin-connected Russians peddling illegally obtained dirt on Hillary Clinton.
5. that Bannon was wrong when he said that holding the meeting was “treasonous.”
6. that Bannon was wrong when he said that holding the meeting was “unpatriotic.”
7. that Bannon was wrong when he said that holding the meeting was “bad shit.”
8. that Bannon was wrong when he mocked the “brain trust” that decided to meet with the Russians with no lawyers present.
9. that Bannon was a “coffee boy.”
I don’t know how well the president will do in deflecting these criticisms with this stupid press release but if this is the kind of criminal defense he and his family are hoping to offer, he’s really going to wish he never became president.
Here I am yet again with the same question: Can anyone even imagine Barack Obama ever posting a statement like that?
I just read an excerpt from Michael Wolff’s tell-all book about the election and first months of the disastrous Trump reign of terror. I take it with a grain of salt, but there are bits of info that frame Trump’s inability to function as a world leader. It’s disgusting.
Trump loyalists embrace his vulgarities and his ridiculous statements and tweets. They like a man who fights back. If he hasn’t been abandoned by his fans by now, he never will be.
I am just hoping Mueller continues to dig and process facts about the Russians and Trump’s interference. Please let him get all the dirt he can use to bring these fuckers down.
Trump’s best move would have been to ignore the provocation. He has just put Bannon on his own level. I have to disagree that it would have been wise of him to deny the substance regarding the meeting. Discussing it at all, even acknowledging it, without getting himself in further trouble requires more subtlety than he can muster. For once he acted, probably accidentally, with regard for his own limitations.
Trump didn’t write that. It’s far too coherent. Not any of the PR folks either; they’d have been a little more diplomatic. Who did? Stephen Miller?
I agree. It had to be one of the people who fought with Bannon. My bet is Kushner, not Miller. Or Evanka.
.
Oops, `I’, not `E’.
Ivanka
.
Milller is too sad. This has a bunch of verve, reminding me of Scaramucci (and evoking his picture of Bannon as “trying to suck his own cock). But it seems that Hope Hicks had a lot to do with it (via Steve M, but somewhere on Twitter).
I’m still intrigued by the revelation that last week’s NYT interview that happened apparently without knowledge of aides and lawyers, was set up by the head of NewsMax.
Then Wolff releases this book and it not only has explosive quotes from Bannon that take Trump to the woodshed but the book largely relies on information from Rupert Murdoch.
The heads of state of fake news join in to expose Trump? I didn’t see that one coming.
Next, we’ll hear that Bannon and Preibus were both flipped by the FBI early on and were wearing wires during their daily duties.
Oh, and the Manafort suing the DoJ and Mueller. Good luck with that one.
What’s the problem?
One shithead dissing another shithead.
Revenge of the cucks?
Pow-pow-pow. Finally something amusing out of this administration. (And that was so before Trump’s return volley (not good enough to call it an overhead slam).
Note — this book would have been put to bed a few weeks ago and Bannon talking when he was feeling his oats. After his first foray into electoral politics without Trump’s MAGA cover and against Javanka (who Bannon lost out to in the battle to serve as Trump’s brain) fully covered by MAGA. Bannon beat them and left Trump to furiously back-pedal and ultimately defending a serial sexual assaulter. (Something that Bannon doesn’t mind doing but Trump less so because it draws attention to his own alleged past behavior.) Then pow — Bannon’s guy lost what should have been the most secure GOP Senate seat.
Side note and more amusement: Mrs. Moore’s defense on the charge of being anti-Semitic by pointing out that their lawyer is a Jew took another hit. It is a lawyer they hired for their kid (iirc a drug bust) and the lawyer voted for Jones.
To me, the fact itself of an outbreak of open war between Trump and Bannon is more interesting than the self-serving and evasive content of the statement (what else would you expect?). And of course it wasn’t mysoginistic, since Bannon isn’t a woman. He couldn’t portray Bannon as a “coffee boy” because that’s not remotely plausible. I also agree with the commenter who said that the statement is far too coherent to have been written by Trump himself, though it clearly reflects his feelings.
The points Trump failed to deny are significant and suggest that Bannon can do him tremendous damage. But Trump’s vulnerabilities to Bannon are not only legal, they are also political. Because since Bannon represents much of Trump’s right-populist support, I can’t see how the base can remain intact from here on.
I didn’t see this coming, and I’m curious about what exactly provoked it. I see where some commentators think it is a delayed payback for Trump’s firing of Bannon, but I find that unconvincing. At the time, Bannon seemed unperturbed about it, saying he could continue doing everything he was doing and not have to worry any further about WH infighting, and I thought he was sincere.
Some have spoken of a long-simmering feud with Trump, but I don’t think it’s Trump, I think it’s Kushner. In the early days Kushner and Bannon were one of the oddest couples imaginable, but they appeared to get along fine. But the truth is, they have little in common, and Kushner’s economic goals are utterly at odds with Bannon’s.
Bannon was forced out of the WH by Kushner, but I don’t think he cared that much because it wouldn’t put a crimp in what he wanted to do. But Kushner’s policies have won out. Here’s what I think it’s really about.
Bannon cares and it was no secret from the moment the stature of Bannon and Kushner was elevated that there was no love lost between the two.
Trump and Bannon are like two peas in a pod, but Javanka is family and those two want to be seen as the crème de la crème and more sophisticated and respectable than their fathers. Bannon is a rightwing crazy, but he has more smarts than the other three and knows it. Nobody takes well being passed over or fired in favor of the boss’s dumb kid(s). (Only dumb bosses, who unfortunately tend to predominate in those ranks, favor his/her dumb kids.)
It’s that, but it’s not only that. It’s also that Bannon cannot further his populist agenda with Trump even though it was that populism that got Trump elected. The fascinating thing is that Bannon can, if he wants to, and I think he does want to, destroy Trump and the whole GOP, because Trump without Bannon is truly an empty shell, even politically. For a while Trump will be like the Road Runner that’s run off the cliff but hasn’t fallen yet. There’s also the Mueller investigation, remember. I believe Trump AND what’s left of the GOP are toast.
Purely anecdotal but Bannon has lost some Breitbart readers since his comments hit the news reports.
What Bannon wants (and I have close to zero insight on men like him) and what he can get likely differ widely.
I think we should be careful not to over-rate the populism in the Trump campaign. It was more of an emotional appeal employing a grab-bag of familiar themes that have in the past appealed to certain segments of the population, principally Perot. Looks far more like a on-off when the components became perfectly aligned for a moment than any sort of shake-up in the electorate. More like Jones defeating Moore. Much of it for Trump based on nothing other than “if Obama was for it; I’m against it.” Anti-NAFTA and anti-TPP may have been his margin of victory.
I can see 2016 Trump as RACISM-populism and an inverse of 1932 (POPULISM-racism). So, even though the south has become rigidly Republican, racism isn’t the exclusive domain of the south and RACISM-populism echoed something good from long ago. However and unlike ’32, there’s no substance to the populism. And back then that populism was significant, real, and being pushed forward by southern Democrats. The agenda of Trump and the GOP congress dominated by southerners is mostly what Republicans stood for in the 20th century after Teddy Roosevelt — let business/corporations do their thing and not pay their fair share. The add-ons – Christianity and anti-abortion – are merely how the GOP has remained viable for the past few decades, and in the age of Trump is farcical as he doesn’t have a Christian cell in his entire body.
Bannon may want to destroy Trump and the GOP, but that’s a lower priority to destroying Democrats and liberals (who he mockingly refers to as snowflakes). His power base is minuscule and there’s lots of competition for the racists and fundies. Even a coalition of all those factions isn’t enough as the traditional Republican base hasn’t disappeared. Most of whom sucked it up for Trump but a sizeable number moved to Johnson and some to Clinton. The new, casual, and intermittent Trump voters will be fewer in number in 2020 should Trump run again.
Sorry to pick nits, but it’s Coyote, not Road Runner who perennially gets suckered into running off the cliff and suffers the “oh shit” moment that’s funnier/more pathetic than the impending fall itself.
Thanks for seeing what I really meant through my fog of my confusion, thereby setting the record straight.
Also note from The Guardian that’s similar to my take on this point:
I’m surprised at you, BooMan. As if it would have been any different with Hillary and the permagov?
What about what he DID say? Are we forgetting that so soon?
Wake up, sheeple!
We’ve been here since at least Timothy Leary, if not Eugene Debs.
“Who watches the Watchmen,” indeed.
(How about, “Who watches Booman?”)
HIM?
I think not. Pot, meet kettle (or, bear! Russian bear!)
Forgotten by some, that is. Bannon is the smart one…until he’s not. (Mysteriously shifting alliances are the hallmark of great internet comments!)
I’m the only one who understands what’s going on here.
I’ll take mine with sugar.
Like dat.
Bet on it.
JO
A single pebble on a beach is heavier than an entire handful of grass plucked from a field –Bankei Yōtaku
P. S. Today I’ll be working an underpaid local gig which makes me unimpeachable; a simple man of the soil. And fixing my computer again.
Nice. Fooled me.
He has the form…kinda…
But not the content.
No rhythm, either.
Lame.
AG
That’s a gracious and classy response, Arthur. Well done. Happy New Year!
Thank you.
May we all have a Happy New Year…sans PermaGov bullshit, on every level possible.
AG
Spot-on parody, but it’s still trolling.
You write:
You tone deaf.
No surprise…
AG
And to think I almost skipped over this. Definitely earned a few chuckles.
Bannon wants to rule.
He thought he could use Trump to do it…he thought that he could be the power behind the throne, the Cardinal Richelieu of his time.
It didn’t work out.
But he still wants to rule, any which way he can.
I think that he thinks he’s going to run for president in 2020, thus the public break with Trump.
Will it work?
I doubt it, but then again…if someone had told me that Donald Trump had a chance to win the presidency in say early 2014 I would have doubted that as well.
May we all be born(e) into interesting times.
AG
P.S. Apparently Bannon has lost his primary financial patron, Rebekah Mercer. Has he become sufficiently famous…or infamous (They are much the same thing these days.)…to run on his sheer clickbait draw?
Could be…
Toast
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-wolff-my-insane-year-inside-trumps-white-house-107150
4
fixed link