Saturday, July 22, 2017, 1:32pm

Trump had a little Twitter tantrum this morning.

Trump had a little Twitter tantrum this morning and that’s not unusual, but I did want to point out a few things here.

Trump’s talking about this article in the Washington Post: “Sessions discussed Trump campaign-related matters with Russian ambassador, U.S. intelligence intercepts show.”

According to the article, Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak had conversations with Jeff Sessions where, according to Kislyak, “he discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow, with Jeff Sessions during the 2016 presidential race.”

This is an issue because of Sessions maybe perjuring himself, Sessions insisting again and again in public that he had nothing to do with this Russia business, the fact that he was working for the campaign and this points to more collusiony-looking stuff, things like that.

We know these conversations took place because we picked up them up in intercepts while listening in to what Russians were chatting about.

There’s a school of thought that maintains Trump or his surrogates leaked this story to the Post themselves because they want AG Sessions out so they can replace him with an attorney general who isn’t recused from the Russia investigations. That way the Trump crew can regain control of the investigations. That might sound a little tinfoil-hattish but Trump does have a history of seeding stories to the press. It’s not completely outside the realm of possibility.

Also, it’s the “Amazon Washington Post” because Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, bought the Washington Post back in 2013, basically saving it from closing. I’m not 100% clear on why that would be a bad thing.

(I didn’t include a tweet about a commissioning ceremony for the USS Gerald R. Ford that appeared in between these two because it was probably just a pre-scheduled tweet that fired off during Trump’s rant. At least, I sure hope that’s what happened, because otherwise this man’s thought patterns are a hot, terrifying mess.)

For the record, the New York Times is not failing, so far as anyone can tell (source 1, source 2). It’s not doing spectacularly, but no newspaper is right now. The Times’ stocks are booming and their digital subscriptions are going through the roof. Overall, they’re doing great in their digital product, not great in print (but no one is, really), and Wall Street seems optimistic about them. So there’s that.

Trump appears to be referring to this 2015 article, “A Raid on ISIS Yields a Trove of Intelligence,” which Fox News just reported on yesterday on their site, and then talked about this morning on TV, laying the blame for the escape of al Baghdadi entirely at the feet of the New York Time’s reporting.

About 20 minutes after this image –


– was on his TV screen, Trump was tweeting about it. 🙄

Did the Times actually spoil a raid that would have taken out ISIS leader al Baghdadi by printing leaked information? Eh, one general thinks so. But that article was printed in 2015, and no one said a peep about it at the time, nor has anyone brought it up in the two years since, until now.

Trump lost his train of thought over the New York Times’ “sick agenda over National Security” and picked back up with the news that Trump was asking around about pardons. The Washington Post broke this story Thursday evening,”Trump team seeks to control, block Mueller’s Russia investigation,” reporting that “Trump has asked his advisers about his power to pardon aides, family members and even himself in connection with the probe, according to one of those people. A second person said Trump’s lawyers have been discussing the president’s pardoning powers among themselves.”

Trump’s asking why he’d be thinking about pardoning anyone when the only crime that’s been committed (according to him) is newspapers reporting leaked information. So, for your information, it’s not illegal to report on leaked information.

Reputable newspapers follow a fairly rigorous process when they’re reporting on leaks. There are tons of lawyers involved to make sure no one’s breaking any laws regarding how information was received and how it’s used. Newspapers usually clear really sensitive stuff through appropriate government channels before printing it, to make sure they’re not getting anyone killed or revealing things that could hurt important military operations and whatnot. There are processes to vet information, confirm sources, confirm information received anonymously, the whole nine yards.

It’s not like some newshound overhears two randos on the subway bickering about something and then sprints straight to their computer to dash it off to the front page. There is an extensive process involved if the newshound is working for a paper like the New York Times or the Washington Post.

In fact, Rachel Maddow just did a whole thing about verifying news items that touches on the complicated process news goes through before it’s printed (or broadcast on her show).

In case you missed it, Donald Trump is president of the United States, and it is entirely within his abilities to have Hillary Clinton investigated and indicted over the “crimes” he seems to think have been committed. He has not. Because there’s nothing left to investigate.

Hillary Clinton has already been investigated, thoroughly, for these “crimes,” and nobody found shit. This woman has been investigated to goddamn death, people, for thirty years and more. And – important point here – she’s not in jail.

At this point it is safe to say that she’s either innocent of all these right-wing conspiracy theories, or she is some kind of Lex Luthor evil genius mastermind. And if she were a Lex Luthor evil genius mastermind, she’d be president right now.

They’re not jeans, Donald. No one “acid washes” emails.

Trump Jr. didn’t freely release those emails where he basically admitted the campaign colluded with the Russians. The New York Times called him up and said “Hey, we have those emails and we’re releasing them now. Wanna make a statement?” and he said “No,” and tweeted the emails in a (deeply misguided) attempt to get ahead of the story.

The “acid washed emails” thing Trump is referring to is the fact that after Clinton’s personal emails were deleted from that private server, one of her tech people ran a program called BleachBit on the server. BleachBit is a relatively common utility used to scour private information off a hard drive.

When you delete something on a computer, bad news, it’s not actually deleted. It’s just marked as “rewritable,” which means that the computer is allowed to save over that information, when it wasn’t before. Important point – it’s perfectly possible to retrieve that private information, sometimes even after it’s been written over a few times.

If you’re getting rid of a computer, or, say for example, repurposing a server to be used for work after being used for personal email, it’s not a bad idea to use something like BleachBit to remove all your personal information. Otherwise it’s perfectly possible for someone to get into that server and get your personal information. It’s not, like, easy, but it’s definitely not impossible.

Running a program like Bleachbit on an old computer or a repurposed server isn’t nefarious. It’s what I would call “basic information security.”

Okay, it’s Saturday morning and I just crapped out 1,500 words on how full of shit Donald Trump is on Twitter, so I’m gonna go play Sims now. But I just want to leave you with this thought: Donald Trump goes on these little Twitter rants because he’s scared and confused. He doesn’t know how he got where he is right now, and he doesn’t know how to get out of it.

We’re approaching the end of the beginning. Things are going to start ramping up to a head, now. Get ready.

But wait, where do I comment? No comments, sorry. Talk to me on Facebook or Twitter, instead.

You may also like...