Abuse and Power by Carter Page

[honorentheos]

Here's my deal, ajax. You read/listen to Peter Zeihan's The End of the World is Just the Beginning, and I'll read Page's book. Deal?

[Gadianton]

My guess is perhaps stupidity? People don't realize the FBI is out to make cases and are extremely aggressive.

Carter said he had a naïve view of the FBI and thought it was all just a big misunderstanding.

Oh good heavens. I totally agree with Dr. Exiled's statement as written. Unfortunately, out of all the material Ajax could have taken pains to type out to sell Page's book, he typed out Page's unhinged, right-wing rant about the deep state and interminable corruption of the legal profession, as if that would give a career legal mind like Res's something to really think about.

And so there are one of two possibilities now about the rant: 1) long after the fact, Page is still patting himself on the back for not getting a lawyer because lawyers are all in on the deep-state take, and his rant reflects his present feelings at the time. 2) the rant is part of his story -- he's detailing the reasoning of his former self -- his former naïve self that didn't appreciate the dead seriousness of the FBI.

Ajax's agreement with Dr. Exiled switches the rant to category 2, where Page is shooting himself in the foot with naïve cynicism rather than taking the FBI seriously and getting a good lawyer. In this case, Ajax is moving the goal posts and now there is no reason for him to have typed up that rant in the first place, because all it's doing is showing how "stupid" Page was.

[honorentheos]

My impression is ajax is tapping into the narrative that is big among the right wing now regarding the justice department, FBI, NSA, and any number of other agencies being "weaponized" against Trump and what he represents. In the decision to share that selection, I suspect ajax wanted to highlight what he sees as the complete corruption of the system - from agencies to judges to lawyers all tied up together. Remember that a chunk of the quote claimed the reason no lawyer would give Page the defense he deserved was any lawyer good enough was in too deep to be willing to expose the corruption they rely on for profit.

It's not exactly the same as agreeing that people should lawyer up even if sure of their own innocence because the other side is looking for blood not justice.

[Gadianton]

I agree that honerentheos, who is doing the real work here, should be the one to choose the book Ajax has to read. Peter's book is surely the better choice to try and get Ajax to broaden his perspective of the world and how it works.

My reasoning for recommending Cohen's book is that it's nearly the mirror image of the kind of stuff Ajax is selectively reading to educate himself on a subject he otherwise has no knowledge of. I enjoy listening to Cohen go off on Trump on MeidasTouch, he cracks me up, but I wouldn't take his book as the entry point to uncover the history of law and politics in the United States. If I were to take it as an entry point, it would be with the intent of doing a whole lot of follow-up work on footnotes and eventually, expanding into literature outside the scope of autobiography and shock journalism. In dealing with Cohen, Ajax would try to puncture through Cohen's self-defenses and plea-bargain narrative, and then realize that he has to do the same for his own sources. He'd realize how easy it is for the other side to tell a convincing opposing story.

But yes, H's recommendation is ultimately better because it would do more good for Ajax to try to learn something about the world outside the arena of political gang fighting.

[Res Ipsa]

None of the above is relevant. Someone in an email calling Joe Biden the big guy doesn't mean Joe Biden was in on a deal with Chinese business. You know better, lawyer.

Worthy of further investigation, wouldn't you say? Mr. Bobulinski claims big guy Joe Biden used his office to get 10% from a Chinese deal. I wonder if the deal would have gone through had the big guy not been involved?

No one, Trump, Biden, McConnell, Pelosi, should be above reproach. Our beloved Harry Reid went to Washington poor and left worth around $100 Million. I wonder how that happened?

My father knew some in the most beloved Gipper administration and they made $millions off of insider information.

Should this be allowed? Should team politics prevail over truth? If Trump had liaisons with underage girls on Epstein Island, I'd like to know and perhaps he should be charged? Clinton?

Anyway, yes, at this point we are dealing with conjecture against a beloved president who may have benefitted from corruption. Let's see and not dismiss it based on nonsense Russia hysteria.

Mr. Bobulinsky also said he delivered "proof" to the Senate Committee, except... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/25/us/p ... china.html

But "worthy of investigating" is your go to phrase when you've latched onto some fringe theory.

[Res Ipsa]

My impression is ajax is tapping into the narrative that is big among the right wing now regarding the justice department, FBI, NSA, and any number of other agencies being "weaponized" against Trump and what he represents. In the decision to share that selection, I suspect ajax wanted to highlight what he sees as the complete corruption of the system - from agencies to judges to lawyers all tied up together. Remember that a chunk of the quote claimed the reason no lawyer would give Page the defense he deserved was any lawyer good enough was in too deep to be willing to expose the corruption they rely on for profit.

It's not exactly the same as agreeing that people should lawyer up even if sure of their own innocence because the other side is looking for blood not justice.

Anyone who actually knows anything about lawyers knows that Page's claims of intimidation are nonsense. He either didn't take the questioning seriously out of hubris or knew that his expectations of a lawyer would require serious breaches of ethical duties. (And the latter doesn't stop all all lawyers anyway.)

[honorentheos]

My impression is ajax is tapping into the narrative that is big among the right wing now regarding the justice department, FBI, NSA, and any number of other agencies being "weaponized" against Trump and what he represents. In the decision to share that selection, I suspect ajax wanted to highlight what he sees as the complete corruption of the system - from agencies to judges to lawyers all tied up together. Remember that a chunk of the quote claimed the reason no lawyer would give Page the defense he deserved was any lawyer good enough was in too deep to be willing to expose the corruption they rely on for profit.

It's not exactly the same as agreeing that people should lawyer up even if sure of their own innocence because the other side is looking for blood not justice.

Anyone who actually knows anything about lawyers knows that Page's claims of intimidation are nonsense. He either didn't take the questioning seriously out of hubris or knew that his expectations of a lawyer would require serious breaches of ethical duties. (And the latter doesn't stop all all lawyers anyway.)

For sure. Plus, I think he was in tune with the narrative needed to sell to his most likely audience which is why the book spills do much ink. The idea of a swamp, witch-hunts against Trump, elite conspiracies were baked in before votes were counted in 2016.

It seems column A was the bigger influence, plus the reality of his being cut loose from the Trump admin and disavowed likely left him considering the financial aspect of hiring a lawyer where no award was on the table. I subscribe to the theory of lowest motive, and being cash strapped is a good, low motive combined with a belief he didn't actually do anything wrong giving him confidence he didn't need one.

[Gadianton]

Plus, I think he was in tune with the narrative needed to sell to his most likely audience

Right. that's where I'd put my money. This is after-the-fact embellishment. He probably didn't take a committee appearance very seriously, didn't apparently have much to hide, and most importantly, didn't want to spend the money.

When the outcome ended up favorable, he could work in all the personal heroics he could imagine.

If he had a similar rant before his testimony I'd give him a little more credit. A guy from my home ward went to prison for 10 years on insurance fraud. He represented himself and got his ass kicked. He was one of the most self-righteous delusional persons I've ever known and had unhinged libertarian views (even though I was very young at the time and my interaction limited; was semi-involved in scouting, and I'm going off of stories about him I heard by adults in the ward mostly prior to his downfall). So it *does* happen, it's just not my first guess.

[Res Ipsa]

Plus, I think he was in tune with the narrative needed to sell to his most likely audience

Right. that's where I'd put my money. This is after-the-fact embellishment. He probably didn't take a committee appearance very seriously, didn't apparently have much to hide, and most importantly, didn't want to spend the money.

When the outcome ended up favorable, he could work in all the personal heroics he could imagine.

If he had a similar rant before his testimony I'd give him a little more credit. A guy from my home ward went to prison for 10 years on insurance fraud. He represented himself and got his ass kicked. He was one of the most self-righteous delusional persons I've ever known and had unhinged libertarian views (even though I was very young at the time and my interaction limited; was semi-involved in scouting, and I'm going off of stories about him I heard by adults in the ward mostly prior to his downfall). So it *does* happen, it's just not my first guess.

I spent several years assisting insurance companies in investigating suspected fraud cases. If you make an insurance claim and receive in response a letter requesting an Examination Under Oath and a crap ton of documents, run don't walk to hire an attorney with experience in defending allegedly fraudulent insurance claims. The old saying about the person who represents himself having a fool for a client goes double in cases of suspected insurance fraud.

[ajax18]

I'd appreciate the global politics selection.

I'm often more interested in Republican or Democrat primaries. The general election talking points are so redundant and predictable. Any nuanced policies are buried.

I do get a little insight in the Russian side given I'm married to a Russian woman and speak broken Russian. I guess the NSA heard thst.