4D Chess: Let me say this about that.

I remain skeptical regarding some of the more extreme claims involving Q-like meta-counter-coup planning by Trump, Sessions and the Anti-Illuminati, though OTOH the Mueller-as-white-hat-angle is in fact not yet resolved. But: >

> I find the concept entirely plausible because it is not, in fact, that far out. It is internally logical in most respects, whereas the standard alternative narrative requires faith in the notion that Trump is impotent and clueless,. This premise is not consistent >

> with what we have seen in terms of almost everything else Trump has done since getting the nomination. Indeed, one of his signal accomplishments has been demonstrating historic mastery of signal intelligence - particularly with respect to deception >

> and mastery of the media game. That Trump has absolutely rewritten the book about how to do his job -- especially as a Republican President, any one of which axiomatically is assured constant opposition from an array of institutional, cultural and political savagery -- >

-- is not debatable. He is 100 times smarter than I thought he was, and I am hardly alone. Anyone thinks he is stupid or even average is falling victim to the classic error of despising one's enemy, and deserves to pay the price for that. Even the business >

> that square old cultural conservatives such as myself found so discomfiting in the beginning -- the seemingly off-the-cuff tweeting, the "lack of Presidential gravitas," etc. -- turns out to be almost entirely an effective set of calculated distractions, part of a >

> a program, whether intuitive to Trump or finely calculated, to completely change the rules of a game which, when he walked into the casino, were profoundly stacked against him.

Whether the collateral damage that results from Trump's iconoclastic style is worth it can hardly >

> be questioned by those who are squarely honest with the potential permanent and irreversible damage a Clinton Presidency would have inflicted on us. Axiomatically therefore we exclude the remaining NeverTrump cult, whose moral failings -- masked ironically as >

> as moral superiority -- are manifest to all. Major reform was necessary, and it is happening.

To agree with all this, as many reading these words will, but to maintain that the same Donald Trump foolishly chose an ineffectual attorney general, and has kept him >

> on in the face of the obvious challenges to what would normally be understood as coming with the AG's responsibilities, seem to me to be the ones engaged in cognitive dissonance. How exactly it will play out over the next few months I can't pretend to know, but >

> the idea that we will see Trump removed by what is left of the reprehensible soft coup -- whose existence is now being proved by hard evidence -- is implausible.

I admit there are several problems with the scenarios spun by some folks. As I have said before, >

> it will take a lot of convincing to demonstrate, to me at least, that even the most dramatic vindication of the "4D Chess" concept can justify what is coming onto a year and a half of unethical non-compliance by the DOJ with basic ethical requirements and >

> and litigation norms across the many criminal and civil litigation matters in which it is involved that touch on this matter and implicating many operating units of what had been one of the prestigious departments of the federal government. The implications as well for >

> certain pockets of the judicial branch (e.g., FISA warrants, and others I cannot identify specifically because of my delicate and respectful relationship with that organ of government) raise serious questions. It is hard to see how, no matter how good the omelet we are >

> expecting to be served turns out to be, we can ever do without those eggshells we depend on to contain, um, the eggs of law, justice and government.

OK, I have gotten so purple about this that there's some kind of food on my face, but you get that point, I hope. >

> The hot-take culture of Twitter has been a huge part of this historical moment, and arguably made it possible -- mainly in a good way. But it's also generated a great deal of stupidity. I hope I have not added too much to it in this thread.

But it is because I think it is >

> well, stupid, to think -- at this point -- that Donald Trump is stupid, I think it makes sense to think the opposite: That he isn't. That, as is almost the case in policymaking, and indeed all complex endeavors, observations from the outside often suggest >

> not only an incomplete picture of the whole truth, but its very opposite. I certainly see this in my line of work. And, as in my line of work, the distortion or incompleteness inherent in matters involving very complex interconnected systems and forces is >

> further distorted by the involvement of host of actors eager to push events, or protect or further their own interests, by affirmatively misleading us about what is really going on. As I mentioned, among those doing this are the President himself, >

> as of course all Presidents have done before him in their own ways.

Not that anyone asked me. And not that I know anything special. But before I file tonight's trademark applications, I thought I'd stop briefly and put all my thinking on this subject >

> in one place. I try to be reasonable, though I have, obviously, my views and judgments which are viewed as gravely mistaken by many I consider friends.

But you are not paying me for this and, if you've read this far, I have at least entertained you a little and maybe >

> stimulated some thought and even, ideally, some SEO.

That's about all I can ask. See you later. <>

Addendum: I'm not saying Trump hasn't done or said anything that's actually stupid. But one reason he so frequently outflanks his enemies is that he's completely cool with everyone *thinking* he's stupid while he quietly gets what he wants. >

> Last POTUS who was ready to put his huge ego aside to use that very effective technique was Ike.

Nixon, craving respect, couldn't do it.

Bill Clinton, the same.

Obama was nothing but the opposite. >