Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder
Nope. Putin, at minimum, can prove that Trump has continually lied about his relationship with Russia. That is materially different than being able to take his money and back another candidate.
|
That's one distinction, and a thin one. The similarities between Putin's leverage and the leverage lobbyists and big donors can apply, OTOH, are numerous.
I also don't know, nor do you, that Trump lied about his involvement with Russia in a setting in which it would have consequences. As I recall it, Cohen was the stooge tasked with that job. I could be wrong, but I think Trump only lied to the media about the Russian tower, and his connections with Russia. (If he'd lied to Mueller, we'd know, because that lie would have conflicted with Cohen's testimony, and that conflicting interrogatory answer would have been cited by Mueller. Indeed, it would be criminal conduct which Mueller could not ignore, and most certainly included in his list of possibly criminal actions undertaken by Trump.)
Your "leverage" here would be Trump's fear that Putin would out him as a man who lies to the press. Trump does not care about that. He does that every day. Putin's real leverage is that Trump owes banks and people over which Putin has some control a shit ton of money. Like that corporate donor who paid Marco Rubio's wife a ton of money which helped Rubio get out of debt, Putin is most likely using the power of the purse. Which is how business is done in Washington.
I think you are trying to distinguish between Putin and K Street and Corporate America because:
1. It shows Putin's actions are actually pedestrian in terms of arm-twisting politicians; and,
2. Such an argument indicts our political system more generally, which makes Trump look less unique than you want him to be.
