Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Ultros

SeamusFX wrote: »

Instead of quoting Russian propaganda and talking about the parts of the Dossier that haven’t been proven, maybe you should look at all the parts that have been proven or the few, if any parts that have been disproven.

Pasting the individual accusations from a Russian dossier that you're adamant is mostly true is "Russian propaganda" is it?

Mueller and his team are doing exactly what you want done, let's see what they come up with.

duploelabs

Ultros wrote: »

Pasting the individual accusations from a Russian dossier that you're adamant is mostly true is "Russian propaganda" is it?

Mueller and his team are doing exactly what you want done, let's see what they come up with.

Back to original question, do you believe all of Cohen's testomy? Yes or no

mcmoustache

This nonsense about unproven things in the dossier is a red herring. That's how all allegations start out before they are well, proven or disproven. Unproven is meaningless. A proper measure of its veracity would be a comparison between what has been proven and disproven.

I'm sure the Russians and The Daily Caller's staff are aware of this but they know that their audience is easily bamboozled.

Igotadose

Ultros wrote: »

I'll wait for Mueller's report to make a final judgement. I've said since day one I don't believe there was a coordinating effort between both parties to hack and then strategically leak emails and that there was an agreement in place or quid pro quo, what's been said about "collusion" over the past two years boils down to that point. It doesn't surprise me people connected to the campaign had contacts with foreign lobbyists or people representative of the Russia government - put any presidential campaign under the spotlight and you'll find the same whether that's the Chinese, the Ukrainians or whoever else. Steele alleges Russia had been grooming Trump for 5 years and that years before the election they were exchanging Intel on Clinton and others.

Where in the dossier does it say 'grooming?' Yes, contacts. Yes, attracting Trump via real-estate deals, which in Russia are controlled by the oligarchs reporting to Putin. But, "grooming" is another dailycaller dogwhistle.

At the end of the day, unless there's evidence that there was coordination between the campaign and the Russian government hacking and disseminating

Why is George Papadopolous in jail again? What were those indictments of the Russian operatives by Mueller about?

those emails online everything else will fall flat on it's head. It wasn't Trump who came up with the term collusion, it was the Democrats and their loyalists in the media.

And now, the proper legal term being used, is 'conspiracy.' Shout 'no collusion' all you want, since it's a vague legal term (this was brought up almost immediately by that horrid MSM when it first came about. Note that it's the Trump mob that keep shouting it. It's conspiracy is what you want to use.)

If Trump *conspired with a foreign power* to gain information about an opponent, is that sufficient for him to be impeached, in your view?

If not, what would be. I believe conspiring to rig an election with a foreign power is clearly a 'high crime' and worthy of impeachment.

I also don't think he'll be impeached, the political calculus is the GOP will be swept out along with Trump, which is what the Democrats want. They'll have control of all 3 branches of the government again at least for 2 years if not longer, as the spectre of Trump will hang over the GOP for some time.

Gbear

I saw in passing that Trump mumbled something about golf the other day on Twitter, but I just shrugged it off as his usual guff and didn't pay it too much heed.

https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1102218594094473216?s=19

So this explains Trump's golf course tweet yesterday. He was threatening the UK government with harm to the US-UK relationship if he is forced to pay the Scottish government's legal costs in litigation Trump started & lost

-David Frum, a conservative former speech-writer for George W Bush and vocal critic of Trump from the right.


There's going to have to be a total re-assessment of how presidents are expected to behave post-Trump. The norms that established how elected officials were expected to behave have no hold on people utterly without shame and catering to a base on the basis of demagoguery.
They will need to be replaced with cast-iron rules that actually have penalties for committing crimes, gross negligence or corruption.

No previous president would've been stupid enough to be this openly corrupt. They wouldn't have advertised that they're a crook and stealing from their own people, or sabotaging their country, its standing and its trade relationships for personal gain, and if they were caught, they probably would've been forced to resign if they didn't leg it for a pardon.

Water John

It will be also a key part of the function of whoever is elected in 2020, other than Trump to rest the norms, decorum and standing of the Office.

mcmoustache

Water John wrote: »

It will be also a key part of the function of whoever is elected in 2020, other than Trump to rest the norms, decorum and standing of the Office.

A declowning of the office, if you will.

everlast75

I don't wish to branch into conspiracy theories, but after watching this clip, it lends credence to some of those saying he is on something...



https://twitter.com/bobcesca_go/status/1102002322694160386?s=19

KyussB

oscarBravo wrote: »

RIGOLO, you might have missed this question the first two times I asked it:

oscarBravo wrote:

The deficit is $985bn, up from $665bn in 2017. The national debt is $22tn, up from $20tn in 2017.

Are these increases good or bad?

You might have noticed lately that MMT hit mainstream in the US, and has become a lens through which to legitimately view and analyse economic conditions and potential for the country - with mainstream politicians like Sanders and AOC doing precisely this (I'll be very interested to see if people still end up getting targeted for discussion of it...).

When applied as a lens to view the US's deficit and debt levels, it is neutral on them - deficits/debts aren't an explicitly 'good' or 'bad' thing - in fact, if the US economy is below Full Output GDP-wise (which can indirectly be determined as being below Full Employment - which people who promote the Job Guarantee, like Sanders, for near-eliminating unemployment, would class as going at least below 2% unemployment, if not lower), then continuing to expand the deficit/debt until Full Output is reached, is considered a good thing.

At present, the US is below Full Output, and is below the above-described measure of Full Employment - it is also nowhere near a troublesome level of inflation - so (at present...) continuing to expand the deficit seems like a definitely good thing, which would boost the US economy towards Full Output.

prawnsambo

Gbear wrote: »

I saw in passing that Trump mumbled something about golf the other day on Twitter, but I just shrugged it off as his usual guff and didn't pay it too much heed.

https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1102218594094473216?s=19



-David Frum, a conservative former speech-writer for George W Bush and vocal critic of Trump from the right.


There's going to have to be a total re-assessment of how presidents are expected to behave post-Trump. The norms that established how elected officials were expected to behave have no hold on people utterly without shame and catering to a base on the basis of demagoguery.
They will need to be replaced with cast-iron rules that actually have penalties for committing crimes, gross negligence or corruption.

No previous president would've been stupid enough to be this openly corrupt. They wouldn't have advertised that they're a crook and stealing from their own people, or sabotaging their country, its standing and its trade relationships for personal gain, and if they were caught, they probably would've been forced to resign if they didn't leg it for a pardon.

Quite simply, if he had been forced (as in legally) to divest himself of all his business interests instead of the wishy-washy 'expectation' that he would, this would never have been an issue. In fact it might have stopped him running in the first place had this been the case.

pixelburp

He's a terrible speaker really. I know that's preaching to the choir on a subject already long found out, but witnessing some of his 2 hour (two hours, dear god) speech and ... he's barely coherent. It's that guy in the local pub who'll waffle the ear off ye if you engage.

And yes, snarky folk in the back, Obama had speech writers, and his smooth words couldn't cover his faults - and arguably it was not sounding like a politician that ramped Trump into the limelight - but when you sit back and take in his words, divorced of the politics of the now? Donald Trump spouts a tremendous, baffling and alarming amount of boll1cks.

It's no wonder his supporters grip tightly to GDPs and other statistics - you'd be hard pressed to admire his ability to communicate. No wonder his negotiations constantly flatline. And given the 11 times it took the Germans to explain that they can't do a deal directly with the US, he doesn't listen either.

Igotadose

Interesting. States banding together to award their electoral votes to the overall popular vote winner, regardless of how their state voted.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/432061-dem-states-move-to-bypass-electoral-college

Not sure this'll withstand eventual lawsuits. IANAL but the electors do have a lot of leeway - they didn't *have* to vote for Trump in 2016 after all (nor would they have had to vote for Clinton.) Comes down to the less popular candidate winning, people don't like that. Then 2 years of Trump rubbing it in hasn't helped, of course.

What'd be even more interesting is if in fact this effort rounds up 270 votes and whether those votes 'stick' after the election. The gnashing of teeth will be epic then.

The counter-argument is strong, though. A small state in terms of population can rightfully complain its impact on the president election is controlled by states with larger populations. That was what the electoral college was designed to prevent.

Igotadose

Igotadose wrote: »

Interesting. States banding together to award their electoral votes to the overall popular vote winner, regardless of how their state voted.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/432061-dem-states-move-to-bypass-electoral-college

Not sure this'll withstand eventual lawsuits. IANAL but the electors do have a lot of leeway - they didn't *have* to vote for Trump in 2016 after all (nor would they have had to vote for Clinton.) Comes down to the less popular candidate winning, people don't like that. Then 2 years of Trump rubbing it in hasn't helped, of course.

What'd be even more interesting is if in fact this effort rounds up 270 votes and whether those votes 'stick' after the election. The gnashing of teeth will be epic then.

The counter-argument is strong, though. A small state in terms of population can rightfully complain its impact on the president election is controlled by states with larger populations. That was what the electoral college was designed to prevent.

No red states will support it. Neither will the purple ones. It's a long way off.

Stallingrad

Saw some of his latest speech. Hugging the flag while attacking the FBI, his former AG, the Dems "hate America" and so on.

Such incendiary and dangerous imagery and rhetoric. If any foreign power wanted to tear the US apart from within they could not do a better job. It's astonishing to see it happening before our eyes.

duploelabs

Stallingrad wrote: »

Saw some of his latest speech. Hugging the flag while attacking the FBI, his former AG, the Dems "hate America" and so on.

Such incendiary and dangerous imagery and rhetoric. If any foreign power wanted to tear the US apart from within they could not do a better job. It's astonishing to see it happening before our eyes.

Irregardless of proof of conspiracy, someone in the GRU can play that speech and collect their bonus cheque

Leroy42

For all those that continue to claim that they are awaiting Mueller report etc before making any decision on collusion, we already know that Manafort gave polling data to the Russians during the campaign and Stone dealt directly with Wikileaks in respect of the release stolen e-mails. We also know that Trump Junior tried to get information for Russians he knew we connected to Putin, all that is left to prove is what he did with the info, but the attempt is well known.

So at this point I think it is pertinent to ask exactly what would have to be in the report for those people to change their current thinking on Trump?

RIGOLO

Brian? wrote: »

The Obama recovery delivers again. He really does deserve an awful lot more credit than he gets for handing over such a buoyant economy.

So the WALL STREET JOURNAL has finally debunked the myth about this being Obamas economy. Feb 28th .

Hopefully once and for all .

A Wall Street Journal Editiorial Opinion piece

Thank You, Tax Reform

https://www.wsj.com/articles/thank-you-tax-reform-11551399901

"It’s clearer than ever that business investment has rescued the U.S. economy by shifting into a higher gear. Tax reform and deregulation, take a bow.”

If your not past the paywall, you can watch the WSJ video on the link.

Heres some takeaways

Chief White House economist Kevin Hassett was right about growth in 2018. Former Obama and Clinton adviser Larry Summers wasn’t.

As chief White House economist Kevin Hassett predicted before a Joint Commitee on the Economy in Oct 25 2017 , going from Obamas laggard less than 2% (1.9%) growth rate , to a 3.1% growth rate..

Larry Summers (Former Obama and Clinton adviser) attacked him relentlessly at the time and wrote

TAX REFORM WOULD MAKE NO DIFFERENCE UNLESS YOU BELIEVE IN TOOTH FAIRIES AND LUDICROUS SUPPLLY SIDE ECONOMICS

I AM PROUBDLY GUILTY OF ASSERTING THAT HASSETSS ANALYSIS OF TRUMP TAX PLAN IS SOME COMBINATION OF DISHONEST INCOMPETENT AND ABSURD

And as the Article outlines Trump Administration was right , Kevin Hassett was right , and Larry was wrong.

And for all those anti-Trumpers who love to put up CBO (Congressional Budget Office) figures at any chance to knock the Trump Administration
Like Ive said consistently the CBO is always getting it wrong , especially under Trump and has even issued reports on HOW WRONG they get it .

And this article also confirms how wrong the CBO were on nonresidential fixed investments as well. With this metric contributing over 0.69% to growth.
Thats huge , it reflects American businesses investing in America.

Its over folks Trump Administration has won the economic battle. They move onto other battles.
Perhaps Larry Summers (Obamas Economic advisor and anti-Trumper) and Paul Krugman (Nobel winning anti-Trump economist who said the market would never recover from Trump appointment ) should go away to a corner and find a new career.

I guess the anti-Trumpers will always have their 'Jeff Bezos' Washington Post articles on TRumps economy, whilst the Trump Administration can refer to The Wall Street journal as confirmation of the net positive effect of their policies.

PVNevin

SNIP. No more text dumps please.

DrumSteve

RIGOLO wrote: »

So the WALL STREET JOURNAL has finally debunked the myth about this being Obamas economy. Feb 28th .

Hopefully once and for all .

A Wall Street Journal Editiorial Opinion piece

https://www.wsj.com/articles/thank-you-tax-reform-11551399901



If your not past the paywall, you can watch the WSJ video on the link.

Heres some takeaways

Chief White House economist Kevin Hassett was right about growth in 2018. Former Obama and Clinton adviser Larry Summers wasn’t.

As chief White House economist Kevin Hassett predicted before a Joint Commitee on the Economy in Oct 25 2017 , going from Obamas laggard less than 2% (1.9%) growth rate , to a 3.1% growth rate..

Larry Summers (Former Obama and Clinton adviser) attacked him relentlessly at the time and wrote

And as the Article outlines Trump Administration was right , Kevin Hassett was right , and Larry was wrong.

And for all those anti-Trumpers who love to put up CBO (Congressional Budget Office) figures at any chance to knock the Trump Administration
Like Ive said consistently the CBO is always getting it wrong , especially under Trump and has even issued reports on HOW WRONG they get it .

And this article also confirms how wrong the CBO were on nonresidential fixed investments as well. With this metric contributing over 0.69% to growth.
Thats huge , it reflects American businesses investing in America.

Its over folks Trump Administration has won the economic battle. They move onto other battles.
Perhaps Larry Summers (Obamas Economic advisor and anti-Trumper) and Paul Krugman (Nobel winning anti-Trump economist who said the market would never recover from Trump appointment ) should go away to a corner and find a new career.

I guess the anti-Trumpers will always have their 'Jeff Bezos' Washington Post articles on TRumps economy, whilst the Trump Administration can refer to The Wall Street journal as confirmation of the net positive effect of their policies.

Didn't Mark Meadows tell Obama to go back to Kenya?

Professor Moriarty

RIGOLO wrote: »

So the WALL STREET JOURNAL has finally debunked the myth about this being Obamas economy. Feb 28th .

Hopefully once and for all .

A Wall Street Journal Editiorial Opinion piece

https://www.wsj.com/articles/thank-you-tax-reform-11551399901



If your not past the paywall, you can watch the WSJ video on the link.

Heres some takeaways

Chief White House economist Kevin Hassett was right about growth in 2018. Former Obama and Clinton adviser Larry Summers wasn’t.

As chief White House economist Kevin Hassett predicted before a Joint Commitee on the Economy in Oct 25 2017 , going from Obamas laggard less than 2% (1.9%) growth rate , to a 3.1% growth rate..

Larry Summers (Former Obama and Clinton adviser) attacked him relentlessly at the time and wrote

And as the Article outlines Trump Administration was right , Kevin Hassett was right , and Larry was wrong.

And for all those anti-Trumpers who love to put up CBO (Congressional Budget Office) figures at any chance to knock the Trump Administration
Like Ive said consistently the CBO is always getting it wrong , especially under Trump and has even issued reports on HOW WRONG they get it .

And this article also confirms how wrong the CBO were on nonresidential fixed investments as well. With this metric contributing over 0.69% to growth.
Thats huge , it reflects American businesses investing in America.

Its over folks Trump Administration has won the economic battle. They move onto other battles.
Perhaps Larry Summers (Obamas Economic advisor and anti-Trumper) and Paul Krugman (Nobel winning anti-Trump economist who said the market would never recover from Trump appointment ) should go away to a corner and find a new career.

I guess the anti-Trumpers will always have their 'Jeff Bezos' Washington Post articles on TRumps economy, whilst the Trump Administration can refer to The Wall Street journal as confirmation of the net positive effect of their policies.

Can you please put this in the context of the USA's deficit? Otherwise, this information provides no political defence of Trump.

RIGOLO

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Can you please put this in the context of the USA's deficit? Otherwise, this information provides no political defence of Trump.

Thats the same thing Larry Summers was saying 18 months ago , Kevin Hassets (Trump economic advisor) and the WSJ and latest numbers (ACTUAL numbers not projections) of the Bureau of Economic Affairs has just blown that out of the water .

3.1% GDP for a 12 month period
0.69% growth in non-residential fixed investment .. in a 20 Trillion dollar economy.
and the anti-Trumpers claim its no defence.

Growth in government spending in the recent stellar GDP numbers was negligible, thats a sure sign its not a deficit led boom but a fixed investment boom.

Its okay the anti-Trumpers have their Bezos WAPO articles, and 1.9% GDP in a 15 trillion economy (circa 2010), whilst adding 9 trillion to the debt.

The TRump Administration has 3.1% GDP in a 20 Trillion dollar economy , with 0.69% of that buisness investment, whilst adding a fraction of POTUS 44 to the debt , and all getting endorsed by the Wall Streeet journal ..

It’s clearer than ever that business investment has rescued the U.S. economy by shifting into a higher gear. Tax reform and deregulation, take a bow.

I know which side of those numbers Im on.

DrumSteve

RIGOLO wrote: »

Thats the same thing Larry Summers was saying 18 months ago , Kevin Hassets (Trump economic advisor) and the WSJ and latest numbers (ACTUAL numbers not projections) of the Bureau of Economic Affairs has just blown that out of the water .

3.1% GDP for a 12 month period
0.69% growth in non-residential fixed investment .. in a 20 Trillion dollar economy.
and the anti-Trumpers claim its no defence.

Growth in government spending in the recent stellar GDP numbers was negligible, thats a sure sign its not a deficit led boom but a fixed investment boom.

Its okay the anti-Trumpers have their Bezos WAPO articles, and 1.9% GDP in a 15 trillion economy (circa 2010), whilst adding 9 trillion to the debt.

The TRump Administration has 3.1% GDP in a 20 Trillion dollar economy , with 0.69% of that buisness investment, whilst adding a fraction of POTUS 44 to the debt , and all getting endorsed by the Wall Streeet journal ..



I know which side of those numbers Im on.

Do you think Mark Meadows is a racist for telling Obama to go back to Kenya?

Professor Moriarty

RIGOLO wrote: »

Thats the same thing Larry Summers was saying 18 months ago , Kevin Hassets (Trump economic advisor) and the WSJ and latest numbers (ACTUAL numbers not projections) of the Bureau of Economic Affairs has just blown that out of the water .

3.1% GDP for a 12 month period
0.69% growth in non-residential fixed investment .. in a 20 Trillion dollar economy.
and the anti-Trumpers claim its no defence.

Growth in government spending in the recent stellar GDP numbers was negligible, thats a sure sign its not a deficit led boom but a fixed investment boom.

Its okay the anti-Trumpers have their Bezos WAPO articles, and 1.9% GDP in a 15 trillion economy (circa 2010), whilst adding 9 trillion to the debt.

The TRump Administration has 3.1% GDP in a 20 Trillion dollar economy , with 0.69% of that buisness investment, whilst adding a fraction of POTUS 44 to the debt , and all getting endorsed by the Wall Streeet journal ..



I know which side of those numbers Im on.

Here's Reuters' opinion. I'm sure you accept their reporting is unbiased:

U.S. economic growth will slow this year to 2.3 percent from 3.1 percent in 2018, as the stimulative effects of President Donald Trump’s tax cuts wane and the federal budget deficit climbs to nearly $900 billion, congressional researchers said on Monday.

In its latest 10-year budget and economic outlook, the Congressional Budget Office said 2019 economic growth will also be affected by a projected slowdown in federal government purchases in the fourth quarter of 2019.


Just in case you don't believe Reuters, how about Fox News? I know The Donald believes their word to be gospel. Here's their take on the impact of the deficit:

The U.S. deficit -- which is already at a six-year high and a nearly 17 percent increase from the year-ago period -- could climb as high as $1 trillion by the end of 2019, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget Opens a New Window. (CRFB).

In October, the U.S. Treasury Department released the nation’s monthly bank statement, revealing a deficit of $779 million. But unless spending Opens a New Window. cuts are made and lawmakers “extend the costly tax cuts,” it’s likely to keep ballooning, according to the CRFB.

Last year, Republicans passed the largest tax overhaul since President Ronald Reagan occupied the Oval Office, permanently slashing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent and temporarily reducing individual taxes. If the cuts remain in place, the deficit could climb above $2 trillion within the next decade, the CRFB noted.


So, The Donald isn't draining the swamp. He's making the swamp dwellers richer by flushing the future and ordinary workers' pensions and health services down the toilet. He's a snake oil salesman

Franz Von Peppercorn

Igotadose wrote: »

Interesting. States banding together to award their electoral votes to the overall popular vote winner, regardless of how their state voted.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/432061-dem-states-move-to-bypass-electoral-college

Not sure this'll withstand eventual lawsuits. IANAL but the electors do have a lot of leeway - they didn't *have* to vote for Trump in 2016 after all (nor would they have had to vote for Clinton.) Comes down to the less popular candidate winning, people don't like that. Then 2 years of Trump rubbing it in hasn't helped, of course.

What'd be even more interesting is if in fact this effort rounds up 270 votes and whether those votes 'stick' after the election. The gnashing of teeth will be epic then.

The counter-argument is strong, though. A small state in terms of population can rightfully complain its impact on the president election is controlled by states with larger populations. That was what the electoral college was designed to prevent.

The electors don’t have to vote for the candidate who wins the election in their State but they ethically should (or it should be proportionate).

Be funny if trump won the popular vote and got these democratic electors.

Franz Von Peppercorn

As for the deficit if the democrats are running on MMT that’s not a very likely vector of attack.

The problem for the democrats is they are very widely split and split on fundamental divisions - corporate, social democrat, identity politics.

Pro war and anti war not so much. Not since the recent anti Russian sentiment.

I can actually see a fairly big split looming on reparations, for instance.

everlast75

story breaking about a(nother) scandal. Time to throw it on the stockpile already in existence.

Tweet with link to story along with KAC's husband's take below

https://twitter.com/gtconway3d/status/1102544748886310913

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

story breaking about a(nother) scandal. Time to throw it on the stockpile already in existence.

Tweet with link to story along with KAC's husband's take below

https://twitter.com/gtconway3d/status/1102544748886310913

Another story breaking now that Fox News knew about the Stormy Daniels affair before the election, but the reporter who discovered it, after bringing it to several editors, was told Rupert Murdoch wanted Trump to win so to let it go. They investigated further and even found out about the 'catch and kill' aspect with AMI, and was again told to drop it.

Reporter sued and as part of their settlement had to sign a Non-disclosure agreement about what they found out about Trump (Trump would have been President by this point I think).

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/432430-fox-killed-stormy-daniels-hush-money-report-before-election-new-yorker

prawnsambo

Penn wrote: »

Another story breaking now that Fox News knew about the Stormy Daniels affair before the election, but the reporter who discovered it, after bringing it to several editors, was told Rupert Murdoch wanted Trump to win so to let it go. They investigated further and even found out about the 'catch and kill' aspect with AMI, and was again told to drop it.

Reporter sued and as part of their settlement had to sign a Non-disclosure agreement about what they found out about Trump (Trump would have been President by this point I think).

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/432430-fox-killed-stormy-daniels-hush-money-report-before-election-new-yorker

Inerestingly, the Fox News Twitter accounts are still silent after last tweeting on November 8th last year. I'm still trying to get my head around what could possibly have precipitated this, and although the above is interesting, I'm not sure it ticks the box. It seems to me that (possibly) Mueller asked for the keys and has locked it down for investigative purposes. It's very strange.

https://twitter.com/FoxNews

https://twitter.com/foxnewspolitics

PropJoe10

prawnsambo wrote: »

Inerestingly, the Fox News Twitter accounts are still silent after last tweeting on November 8th last year. I'm still trying to get my head around what could possibly have precipitated this, and although the above is interesting, I'm not sure it ticks the box. It seems to me that (possibly) Mueller asked for the keys and has locked it down for investigative purposes. It's very strange.

https://twitter.com/FoxNews

https://twitter.com/foxnewspolitics

I had no idea they were totally inactive on Twitter, and yeah that's definitely intriguing. Got a feeling that Mueller's report might shed some light on that!

prawnsambo

PropJoe10 wrote: »

I had no idea they were totally inactive on Twitter, and yeah that's definitely intriguing. Got a feeling that Mueller's report might shed some light on that!

Yeah. It looks to me like the passwords were handed over and then changed. No further activity on very active accounts.