Trump is giving another lesson in Negotiation 101, a class for Freshmen who want to sit back and observe how it is done.
Trump is making Democrats (and Senators Graham and McCain) start by proving they aren't enemies of the United States.
An attorney friend told me that in negotiating a settlement he learned that one needs to set the stage by forcing the other side to fight for everything. You don't start with "reasonable" and then work out the details. You start with a demand that forces the opponent to give up things and fight just to get to the starting blocks.
We are watching this happen now with the controversy over the news that the CIA determined the Russians hacked the election and intentionally manipulated leaks in order to help Donald Trump win the election. American democracy was subject to attack by a foreign power. It is more consequential to the integrity of our country than 9-11. America survived the murder of 3,100 people and several billion dollars of property with our republic intact. Corrupting our election steals the legitimacy of our republic.
Donald Trump was the beneficiary of the hack. Let's observe what Donald Trump has done.
1. He denies the validity of the information by our CIA and other intelligence agencies because they are incompetent. (They have been wrong before, e.g. saying Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.)
2. He denies the validity of the information saying they are a biased source. (The intelligence community is part of the Obama administration.)
3. He attacks the relevance of their data. (I won the election and we should all "move on."
4. He says that proof is impossible because the source of the hack are inevitably unknowable. (It could be Russia, China, or someone else.)
5. He and his people dispute the facts. (The FBi is unwilling to say for sure the RNC itself was hacked.)
6. He mocked the effort to determine the hack. (I could be just a 400 pound man in New Jersey. "I think it's ridiculous. It just think it's another excuse. I don't believe it.")
7. Create a new story with an exaggerated premise. ("We had a massive landslide victory as you know in the electoral college.)
 |
| Bolton: The Democrats hacked themselves. |
8. Demonstrate your bellicosity and willingness to escalate the fight. (Appoint Michael Flynn to be National Security Advisor and John Bolton to be his assistant. Both make virulent attacks on Obama and Clinton's competency and values.)
9. Accuse the opponent of the guilty act. (John Bolton, on Fox, says that he believes the attack was actually done by the Democrats in a sophisticated "false flag." They hacked themselves and leaked the news so they could accuse Trump of the act. The video is fascinating in how extreme Bolton is in his charge, but also in the fact that the Fox News interviewer Eric Shawn persisted in pushing back. Click Here. Even Fox was skeptical of Bolton's charge.
10. Reverse the burden of proof onto the opponent. (Bolton says "the whole thing is called into question" and Democrats must show why the Russians "left fingerprints" of hacking. Minute 3:50 in video.)
11. Accuse opponents of lack of patriotism. (Kellyanne Conway says the very question undercuts the "peaceful transition."
12. Accuse opponents of ignoring facts. (Conway said critics are simply "nay-sayers" and "election deniers."
13. Mock opponents using surrogates. (Conway said critics are "laughable and ridiculous."
Negotiation 101
Starting Point: our country's trusted, non-political source of intelligence announces that a foreign country attacked our bedrock institution of government, and succeeded in corrupting our election to benefit their favored candidate who won a very close election, thus undermining his credibility as president and bringing question to the legitimacy of his office.
Trump's opening offer: The charge is unfounded and untrue, issued by a corrupt incompetent entity and is laughable and irrelevant anyway. You Democrats need to prove that you did not in fact hack yourself to try to blame it on us, you unpatriotic ignoramuses and sore losers. Prove you aren't guilty and then we can start talking.
# # # #
Wait! There is even more. Thad Guyer, an attorney representing whistleblowers, and I discuss the transition. Sit back and hear us talk about the optics of the transition and how Trump is handling the media. Peter says he is "winning" the little battles where the media objects to his conflicts of interests and the numbers of the Carrier jobs saved. Guyer reviews the new personnel in detail.
Click Here for the New Podcast
# # # #
Wait! There is even more. Thad Guyer, an attorney representing whistleblowers, and I discuss the transition. Sit back and hear us talk about the optics of the transition and how Trump is handling the media. Peter says he is "winning" the little battles where the media objects to his conflicts of interests and the numbers of the Carrier jobs saved. Guyer reviews the new personnel in detail.Click Here for the New Podcast
4 comments:
Mr Sage, I would have emailed you this piece if I had your email address, but will leave the link here since I don't. It's about the state rather than the legitimacy of our republic. Not a fast read.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2014-08-18/america-decay
Anyone who wishes to email me directly off-line is welcome to do it: peter.w.sage@gmail.com. I am easily searchable by Google: petersage.net My address and phone and darned near anything anyone cares to know is there. I grow melons and I have a family: www.youtube/peterwsage
I learned you grew melons when a few years ago my husband ran into you in a parking lot somewhere, as I recall, and you generously gave him some. They were wonderful.
“Criminal Prosecution of Obama Era FBI and CIA Officials in Our Future?”
On August 8, 2016, every media outlet led the news with headlines like these: “50 GOP national security experts oppose Trump” (CNN, https://goo.gl/RbVR1i), and “50 G.O.P. Officials Warn Donald Trump Would Put Nation’s Security ‘at Risk” (NY Times, https://goo.gl/jFhTWv). That a contingent of the national security establishment has politicized its disaffection with Trump is not even debatable. The question now is how far that politicizing of national intelligence issues has gone in the present “Russian helped Trump get elected” conspiracy allegations.
Investigations of Russian interference obviously must and will go forward. Obama has already ordered it. Congressional leaders have announced it as well. But those investigations should and are going to spiral into much broader inquiries as to the role and motives of the national security establishment in the whole affair. The “50 GOP national security experts” politicizing the anti-Trump national security view, and the FBI press statements that hurt Clinton, guarantee a very broad and politically charged scope of investigation. It will not be a scandal of the Trump administration. It will be yet another scandal of the Obama administration, far bigger and sensational than Benghazi and the State Department, and Secretary Clinton’s email abuses. Three branches of Republican government will be investigating the past Democratic administration.
Here are three questions that are going to investigated:
(1) Was it the Russian Government? There is a fundamental difference between politically or technically powerful hackers and governmental action. Edward Snowden was a contractor employee for the NSA. Yet his acts were not those of the NSA. The legitimacy of this Russian “governmental” speculation will be investigated, and if confirmed, the question will be “how did Obama and Democrats allow the DNC hack to happen?”
(2) Did Russia Have the RNC Emails to Release? Thus far, other than media statements, no evidence has been released showing the RNC was hacked. To the contrary, two days after the DNC was hacked, the RNC requested FBI review of its systems. The RNC stated then, and states now, that the FBI informed it that the security review found no evidence of a breach, but only of unsuccessful efforts. If this is true, the entire theory of Russia trying to help Trump is hobbled. That theory explicitly relies on the Russians having RNC emails of both parties, but releasing only those of the DNC. If Russia failed to get the RNC’s emails, then the Trump preference theory is fake news. The source and veracity of the claims that the RNC was successfully hacked will be investigated. Also asked will be “why did Obama officials, Democrats and disloyal #neverTrumpers put out this fake news?”
(3) If Wikileaks Had RNC Emails, Did it Withhold Them? Perhaps the most unsubstantiated speculation to date is that if Wikileaks had RNC email, then it would have timely published them. Like the alleged RNC hacking, the entire theory of Russian preference assumes objectivity by Wikileaks. Yet, Wikileaks is strongly anti-Obama/Clinton, and regards the Obama intelligence sector as an anti-democratic cyber criminal enterprise. Why would American intelligence base an election fraud theory on the fairness of its arch-enemy Wikileaks. This will be investigated, and “why would Obama, Democrats and disloyal #neverTrumpers publish a theory that relied on Wikileaks having revealed all it had gotten from the Russians?”
Commander in chief Trump will review the investigation reports, order more investigations, and decides what punishment will be sought against whom. Prepare to see an Obama era FBI and CIA house cleaning, and perhaps criminal prosecutions. But count on immense damage to the Democratic Party from the investigations, and American public opinion questioning our loyalty and consorting with #neverTrumper former intelligence officials.
Post a Comment