Who Else Was Handling Russian Money in 2016?

By Charles Pierce, Esquire

19 January 18

The interference went well beyond the president*'s campaign.

ife is full of wonderful surprises, like this little goodie bag from the McClatchy folks.

The FBI is investigating whether a top Russian banker with ties to the Kremlin illegally funneled money to the National Rifle Association to help Donald Trump win the presidency, two sources familiar with the matter have told McClatchy. FBI counterintelligence investigators have focused on the activities of Alexander Torshin, the deputy governor of Russia’s central bank who is known for his close relationships with both Russian President Vladimir Putin and the NRA, the sources said.

It is illegal to use foreign money to influence federal elections.

So, here’s the horse, but the barn is waaaaayyyyy over there. Still, this is a fascinating development.

Disclosure of the Torshin investigation signals a new dimension in the 18-month-old FBI probe of Russia’s interference. McClatchy reported a year ago that a multi-agency U.S. law enforcement and counterintelligence investigation into Russia’s intervention, begun even before the start of the 2016 general election campaign, initially included a focus on whether the Kremlin secretly helped fund efforts to boost Trump, but little has been said about that possibility in recent months. The extent to which the FBI has evidence of money flowing from Torshin to the NRA, or of the NRA’s participation in the transfer of funds, could not be learned. However, the NRA reported spending a record $55 million on the 2016 elections, including $30 million to support Trump – triple what the group devoted to backing Republican Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential race. Most of that was money was spent by an arm of the NRA that is not required to disclose its donors.

It is a savory irony that Wayne LaPierre, the savior of all that is clean and good in America, may be tied into the Volga Bagmen. But it’s coming time to wonder how much Russian money was sloshing around the entire Republican Party in 2016, and around the conservative infrastructure generally.

We already know the winning presidential campaign was redolent of herring and vodka. There also is more than a little evidence that various Russian oligarchs and kleptocrats were generous to Republican campaigns in general. Now, it seems, the various interest groups and issue organizations may have had their hands out, too. The only thing that stops a bagman with a bag is a good guy with a bag.

Trump Believes Terrorist Attack Could Save GOP in 2018

By Matthew Yglesias, Vox

18 January 18

A Washington Post report shows again he doesn’t understand governing beyond self-interest.

s Donald Trump hoping foreign terrorists attack the United States?

That terrifying question is subtly embedded in a story this weekend reported by Michael Scherer, Josh Dawsey, and Sean Sullivan of the Washington Post on the Republican Party’s growing alarm about the upcoming 2018 midterms.

The story details GOP woes and Democratic hopes before pivoting to some more optimistic Republican voices, including a sensible point from Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX):

“Who knows what 2018 will be like? Nobody called 2016, right?” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), the second-ranking Republican in that chamber. “Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was going to get elected and that Chuck Schumer was going to be the majority leader. And none of that turned out to be true.”

Trump, though, is thinking about a different, possibly crazy, comparison:

In private conversations, Trump has told advisers that he doesn’t think the 2018 election has to be as bad as others are predicting. He has referenced the 2002 midterms, when George W. Bush and Republicans fared better after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, these people said.

I’m pretty skeptical that the political dynamics of September 2001 would be replicated today. But regardless, this is a frightening line of thought for an incumbent president and his team to be entertaining.

On the economy, conversely, pretty much everyone agrees that good economic news is better for Trump than bad news. And it’s probably not a coincidence that when it came time for Trump to fill the nation’s top economic policy job, he made a perfectly reasonable choice and picked Jerome Powell, whom even Janet Yellen’s biggest fans don’t have anything bad to say about. When presidents attempt to serve their political self-interest by generating good objective outcomes for the American people, democracy works for us all.

One would hope, by a similar token, that fear of undermining the effectiveness of important counterterrorism operations would restrain even the most shameless administration from, say, pursuing a partisan purge of the FBI and the rest of the intelligence community.

But if the president and his top staff are not so concerned with democracy but rather with purely political power, that’s a terrifying proposition. And given Trump’s willingness to put his own interests before democratic norms — from keeping his business interests to firing his FBI director to protect a friend — the absurd idea feels almost plausible.

If Trump thinks a terrorist attack would serve his political interests — either through a blind rally-’round-the-flag effect or by specifically validating anti-immigrant demagoguery or what have you — how hard is he really working to keep the country safe?