No Hope

Wow. Work (of a sort) kept me away from the internet on one of the biggest news days of the year. Where to start?

The biggest news concerns Trump's closest confidante, Hope Hicks. She quit the White House less than a day after a congressional committee grilled her for nine hours. She kept mum, refusing to answer most questions. In any other administration, such behavior would have resulted in contempt charges.

We've been told that her exit has no direct relationship with her testimony. Bullshit, sayeth I.

Although I'm no longer so quick as I once was to dismiss "coincidence theories," the likelihood of coincidence in this instance seems remote. The congressional ordeal and the decision to ankle must have had a cause and effect relationship; no-one will easily convince me otherwise.

Those nine hours cannot have been pleasant. Even though contempt charges did not arrive, they were deserved, and Hicks knows it. That fact must weigh on her conscience like a lead overcoat.

Yes, I used the C word. There is no reason to presume that Hicks shares the pathologies of her boss. This woman is a former fashion model, not a career criminal. Trump demands loyalty from his associates and they pledge it, not realizing that his definition of loyalty is "die for me." Hicks is young, attractive and smart. She doesn't need this shit.

Drugs. On first brush, the controversy over her "white lies" remark seemed overblown. Then this tweet from Kurt Eichenwald arrived, indicating that some "white" lies are really closer to Payne's Grey.

White lies: when I asked hope Hicks about trumps use of amphetamine derivatives in 1982, she said he took them for a few days. When I said medical records I had showed he used them till 1990 - or 8 years when 25 days is max before addiction - she called me liberal & hung up.

....for those wondering, the amphetamine derivatives are known as “chalkies” or “tombstones” when sold on street. Trump had a second doctor he never disclosed who was exposed for providing these to famous people. Trump needed help to kick them. Why have you never heard this?.....

Eichenwald does not identify this Doctor Feelgood. In a previous post, I argued that Dr. Steve Hoefflin -- Michael Jackson's plastic surgeon and friend, and the man who apparently put Trump's hairdo on the road to glory -- deserves greater attention. Although I've seen nothing to link Hoefflin to "chalkies," he did have many famous clients, and one of his nurses said that "medical-strength cocaine was constantly going missing during her time at the clinic."

(I am not accusing Hoefflin of being the doctor referenced by Eichenwald, nor do I have any independent evidence to support Eichenwald's report.)

Back to Hicks. She told those congressfolk that she did not lie about Russia-related matters. Perhaps so, but there is a difference between not lying and refusing to disclose the truth.

As the embedded Rachel Maddow segment explicates, Mark Corallo -- the former spokesperson for Trump's legal team -- has indicated that Hope Hicks played an important role in deep-sixing the evidence concerning the Trump Tower meeting. Maddow drew from Michael Wolfe's Fire and Fury. People who don't like Wolfe will screech and bleat and make other animal noises, but what of it? Corallo has never contradicted Wolfe, and the story was largely confirmed by the NYT. It is an undeniable fact that Corallo did quit, and must have had a reason for doing so -- just as Robert Mueller must have had a reason when he called the guy in for questioning.

(Appros de rien, didja know that Corallo and Eric Prince are longtime friends? It's true.)

There's good reason to suspect that Hicks participated in a scheme to obstruct justice. She probably fell in with this plot without comprehending the ramifications. It's even possible that she did not fully understand what the term "obstruction of justice" means. But now, with the brown-and-smelly hurtling toward the sharp-and-whirly, she needs to tear herself free of Trumpworld. This is the time to ready herself for the call from Mueller.

Perhaps that call has already come. If not...soon, soon.

I'd like to take things a bit further. The Corallo/Hicks controversy concerns the cover story for the infamous Trump Tower meeting with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. (Speaking of whom, did you know about this? Another overlooked WOW story.) Team Trump originally offered a false story that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss American adoptions of Russian children, a practice which Putin ended in retaliation for sanctions. According to numerous news articles, the person who fastened upon this cover yarn -- the man who insisted that this is your story and you're gonna stick to it -- was Donald Trump himself.

But why would Putin's adoption policy even enter into Trump's thinking? Trump is an incurious man who rarely loads up on information that he doesn't really need. Russian adoption law doesn't seem to be in his wheelhouse.

Politico says that Trump and Putin discussed the adoption issue at the G20 summit. Perhaps they did -- or perhaps "adoptions" has become a code word covering more than one contingency.

I suspect that someone else suggested that "adoptions" cover story to Trump. By "someone else," I do not mean one of the advisors aboard Air Force One; I mean someone in Russia. I lean toward the theory that when Donnie learned that the Trump Tower meeting was going to become public, he asked advice from a Russian contact -- perhaps from Putin himself.

Maybe I'm wrong. I certainly can't claim to have evidence. But this much is a near-certainty: If my theory has any truth in it, Hicks would know.

She would know much else as well.

The male/female dynamic comes into play here: A man like a Trump continually stays in impress the girl mode. I'm not implying a romantic relationship between Trump and Hicks. But by instinct, by habit, by character, Trump would never miss an opportunity to demonstrate his cleverness to a pretty young female. Look at how smart I am. Look at how I out-think my enemies. Look at the strategies I employ to get ahead.

Over the years, Hicks has no doubt heard much more than she ever wanted to hear.

That's not all, folks. In a later post, I will I have much more to say about Jared, about that important testimony from Michael Rogers (who may have leaked some of the info that got Jared into trouble), and about Roger Stone (whose "time in the barrel" finally may be to hand).

We should also look at the bizarre claims from Russian "sex expert" Anastasia Vashukevich -- claims which most people would probably dismiss, but which I, foolhardy lad that I am, take at least semi-seriously. The words prostitute and yacht keep cropping up in stories about Trump-linked Russians. Moreover, Anastasia certainly looks as if she could pass as underaged -- a helpful talent if blackmail is the goal. Imagine how young she must have looked at few years ago. Try to keep an open mind as you check out the video...