Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)

[SimonNZ]

Flashback: from the Watergate Articles Of Impeachment:

"Approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counselling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings
Interfering or endeavouring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,

Approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payment of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses

Making or causing to be made false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation had been conducted

Endeavouring to cause prospective defendants, and individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favoured treatment and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.

Failing to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close subordinates endeavoured to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by duly constituted executive, judicial and legislative entities."

[SimonNZ]

Lawfare:

Notes on the Mueller Report: A Reading Diary

[...]

"On the Russian hacking itself, the report contains a lot of new detail but not a lot that fundamentally changes our understanding of the Russian operation. And yes, Mueller does not appear to have developed evidence that anyone associated with the Trump campaign was involved in the hacking operation itself.

But here's the thing: it wasn't for lack of trying. Indeed, the Mueller report makes clear that Trump personally ordered an attempt to obtain Hillary Clinton's emails; and people associated with the campaign pursued this believing they were dealing with Russian hackers. Trump also personally engaged in discussions about coordinating public relations strategy around WikiLeaks releases of hacked emails. At least one person associated with the campaign was in touch directly with the Guccifer 2.0 persona of the GRU. And Donald Trump, Jr. was directly in touch with WikiLeaks itself—from whom he obtained a password to a hacked database. There are reasons none of these incidents amount to crimes—good reasons, in my view, in most cases, viable judgment calls in others. But the picture it all paints of the president's conduct is anything but exonerating.

This was not "no collusion." It was Keystone Kollusion—and the incompetence of it is likely the reason no crime was committed.

The first important point here is that the GRU and the Trump campaign—including Trump himself—were not operating in parallel worlds but in interative interaction with one another. On July 27, 2016, Trump in a speech publicly called for Russia to release Hillary Clinton's missing server emails: "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing." The reference here was not to the hacking the GRU had done over the past few months but to the hypothesized compromise of Clinton's private email server some time earlier—an event which there is no particular reason to believe took place at all.

The GRU, like many Trump supporters, took Trump seriously, but not literally. "Within approximately five hours of Trump's announcement," Mueller writes, "GRU officers targeted for the first time Clinton's personal office." In other words, the GRU appears to have responded to Trump's call for Russia to release a set of Clinton's emails the Russians likely never hacked and thus did not have by launching a new wave of attacks aimed at other materials.

Trump has since insisted that he was joking in that speech. But the public comments mirrored private orders. After the speech, "Trump asked individuals affiliated with his Campaign to find the deleted Clinton emails," the report states. "Michael Flynn . . . recalled that Trump made this request repeatedly, and Flynn subsequently contacted multiple people in an effort to obtain the emails."

Oh.

Two of the people contacted by Flynn were Barbara Ledeen and Peter Smith. Ledeen had been working on recoving the emails for a while already, Mueller reports. Smith, only weeks after Trump's speech, sprang into action himself on the subject. The result was the operation about which Matt Tait wrote a first-hand account on Lawfare. "The investigation established that Smith communicated with at least [campaign officials] Flynn and [Sam] Clovis about his search for the deleted Clintoin emails," Mueller writes, though "the Office did not identify evidence that any of the listed individuals initiated or directed Smith's efforts." Ledeen obtained emails that proved to be not authentic. Smith, for his part, "drafted multiple emails stating or intimating that he was in contact with Russian hackers"—though Mueller notes that the investigation "did not establish that Smith was in contact with Russian hackers or that Smith, Ledeen, or other individuals in touch with the Trump Campaign utlimately obtained the deleted Clinton emails."

In other words, it wasn't that Trump was above dealing with Russian hackers to get Hillary Clinton's emails. He not only called publicly on the Russians to deliver the goods on his opponent, he privately ordered his campaign to seek the material out. He did this knowing himself—clear from his public statements and very clear from the actions of those who acted on his request—that Russia would or might be the source.

The reason there's no foul here is only that the whole thing was a wild conspiracy theory. The idea that the missing 30,000 emails had been retrieved was never more than conjecture, after all. The idea that they would be easily retrievable from the "dark web" was a kind of fantasy. In other words, even as a real hacking operation was going on, Trump personally, his campaign, and his campaign followers were actively attempting to collude with a fake hacking operation that wasn't going on.

It is not illegal to imagine stolen emails and try to retrieve them from imagined hackers. But it's morally little different from being spoon-fed information by Russian intelligence. The Trump campaign was seeking exactly the spoon-feeding it was accused of taking; it just couldn't manage to find the right spoon, and it kept missing when it tried to put any spoons in its mouth.

As to the real hacking operation, that one didn't need Trump's help. The Guccifer 2.0 persona had direct contact with Roger Stone (whose name is redacted in the description in the report) in August and September of 2016, Mueller reports. But the GRU had its own distribution mechanisms and didn't need to engage directly with the Trump campaign or its surrogates. As the operation progressed, Wikileaks handled the distribution, and both the campaign and the GRU dealt with WikiLeaks—and thus didn't have to deal directly with one another.

The full parameters of the relationship between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks, as described by the report, remain obscure because of redactions. The redacted material involves the activities of Roger Stone, whose case is pending and who purported to serve as the intermediary between the campaign and WikiLeaks. That said, words readable between redactions make clear that:

- "by late summer of 2016, the Trump Campaign was planning a press strategy, a communications campaign, and messaging based on the possible release of Clinton emails by WikiLeaks."

- "While Trump and Gates were driving to LaGuardia Airport," there was a phone call of some kind, and "shortly after the call candidate Trump told Gates that more release of damaging information would be coming"; and

- Donald Trump Jr. had direct communications with WikiLeaks, which gave him the password to the website of an anti-Trump PAC and suggested social media material to promote.

In short, while this section does not describe Trump campaign conspiracy in the Russian hacks, it does describe direct engagement between the GRU and Stone; it describes both the campaign and the GRU seeking to coordinate with WikiLeaks on the release of information; and it describes the campaign being eager to retrieve what turned out to be fictitious emails and its agents being willing to deal with Russian hackers to get them. The president personally was involved in these latter two episodes, Mueller reports.

It's a remarkable story, and it's not a flattering one. If nobody ran afoul of the law, the likiest explanation is the dumbest of dumb luck.

[SimonNZ]

David Rothkopf twitter thread unrolled:

"In today's America, the president and those who work for him are above the law. The president can't be indicted for crimes he commits. A majority in the Congress believe holding him accountable for his crimes is too politically divisive for justice to be done.

Trump has already be cited for violating campaign finance laws with no effect. Mueller has showed conclusively he has obstructed justice and no consequences are likely. The Treasury Sec and head of the IRS have broken the law--likely with the WH advice--without consequences.

The Commerce Sec has lied to the Congress and nothing is done. The president's son and other chief advisors have done so as well, and nothing is done. Subpoenas are ignored without consequence. Rules are broken--from the Constitution's emoluments clause to the guidelines...

that protect our national security information--and it does not seem to matter. Those who seek to guide the White House to follow the law--like senior employees at the Department of Homeland Security--are fired for upholding their oaths.

Not only does the president lie serially to his employers, us, but those who are on the government payroll to provide transparency in the government--like the WH press secretary--lie as well with complete impunity.

The attorney general, supposedly the nation's top law enforcement official, acts instead as the president's private attorney, lying and twisting the law to suit his personal ends. His predecessor, the acting attorney general, did likewise, also misleading Congress repeatedly.

Illegal laws are promulgated. Funds are allocated contrary to the wishes of the Congress--and thus in violation of Constitutionally mandated processes and roles. Treaties are attacked and their abrogation is threatened. A foreign enemy attacked us during the last presidential...

election and helped elected an unfit and illegitimate candidate and while there is no doubt this is precisely what the founders meant when they spoke of high crimes, it seems the treasonous will not only go unpunished but they will be rewarded with more power...

...including perversely, the power to obstruct justice without consequence and thus make it impossible for prosecutors to prove crimes of conspiracy were committed. (As Mueller implied was happening in the report thanks to Trump team lies, destroyed evidence, etc.)

The president is a serial sex abuser. So what? The president paid off his mistresses to help win an election. So what? The president gave the Russians classified information, met in secret with Russian leaders, changed US policies to aid his Russian sponsors. So what?

The president has committed tax fraud for years. So what? His sister, a federal judge, had to step down to quash an investigation into her implication in those crimes. So what? Money laundering? So what? Rampant corruption? So what?

This is where we are America. We have found a loophole in our Constitution that lets presidents and their families and their cabinet secretaries and their cronies in business or in Congress trample our laws, disregard ethical guidelines, make a mockery of our system.

All it takes is a majority in the Senate and a corrupt Senate Majority leader. For two years it was helped by partisan and corrupt GOP leadership in the House. They are immoral and disgusting, but don't fault them alone. They are after all, living the American Dream.

They are playing hardball. They are getting everything they can get away with. They are hard-boiled realists who are assessing the weaknesses of the system and of their opponents and perhaps rightly concluding, "It's open season for criminal government in the US, boys and girls."

And they have great allies. They have Americans who do not read or understand. They have party loyalists who do not care. And they have opponents who are afraid to act, to step up, to challenge their power. They have opponents who fear defeat...

...more than they are committed to doing what is right. They have opponents who value caution above their constitutional obligations, the sanctity of our system, the long term consequences of their enabling behavior.

Those consequences should not be downplayed. If Trump goes this far, how far will his heirs in criminality, venality, lack of morality go? How bad can it get?

We must wonder now if we have passed a tipping point. Is this system too far gone to be saved?

Or will a courageous few step up to use the courts to successfully challenge these miscreants? Will members of the Democratic leadership start to actively and aggressively seek enforcement of subpoenas and punishment for those who violate the law?

Most importantly, will enough of the leadership come around to realize that impeachment hearings are vital to the health and future of the country, they are critical to the preservation of our rule of law, they are what the founders require...

...in the wake of the stomach turning wrong-doing revealed by Mueller and that is compounded daily before our eyes. They must start to realize that regardless of what might or might not happen in the Senate, successful impeachment hearings will at the very least reveal the truth.

Successful impeachment hearings will make the case to the American public that crimes have been committed. Perhaps that case, well made, can turn the Senate however unlikely that may seem. But if it does not, but it is solid and true, it will reveal the Senate for what it is.

And then, it may serve two more purposes. It will send the message to the American electorate that Trump's criminal enterprise and those like McConnell who support must be brought down. And it will send a message to the leaders of tomorrow.

That message is that we are a nation of laws founded on the principle that no man or woman among is, can or should be above the law...and that there will always be those who, regardless of the odds, will respect and honor that principle and dare to do what is right.

Right now, our system is dying before our eyes. Failure to act will lead to further, perhaps irreversible decay. This is not a situation that offers the luxury of further musing, of waiting until tomorrow. American democracy has entered the intensive care ward.

It is up to us to act now to save it or to reconcile ourselves to begin the process of mourning for what was lost, of mourning for a tragic end to the great American experiment in giving power to the people and denying it to those who would exploit us like tyrants past."

[SimonNZ]

Not The Onion:

Trump Touts Border Wall to Group of Children at Easter Egg Roll

"President Donald Trump used the opportunity of the White House Easter Egg Roll to address some of his youngest supporters about one of his signature policy initiatives: building a wall on the southern U.S. border.

"Oh it's happening, it's being built now," Trump told a group of children as he colored pictures with them on Monday in celebration of Easter on the White House's South Lawn.

"Here's a young guy just said 'keep building that wall.' Do you believe it? He's going to be a conservative someday," the president said."

[SimonNZ]

Trump sues in bid to block congressional subpoena of financial records

"President Trump sued his own accounting firm and the Democratic chairman of the House Oversight Committee at the same time on Monday — trying an unusual tactic to stop the firm from giving the committee details about Trump's past financial dealings.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in the District of Columbia, seeks a court order to block a subpoena issued last week by the committee to Mazars USA.

It amounts to Trump — the leader of the executive branch of government — asking the judicial branch to stop the legislative branch from investigating his past.

To do so, Trump wants the court to negate an idea that has guided Congress for decades: that the legislature's investigative power isn't just meant to research possible legislation."

[SimonNZ]

Trump Fed pick Stephen Moore called it a 'travesty' that women 'feel free' to play sports with men

"One of President Donald Trump's picks to serve on the Federal Reserve Board has written that women should be banned from refereeing, announcing or beer vending at men's college basketball games, asking if there was any area in life "where men can take vacation from women."

Stephen Moore, an economic commentator and former Trump campaign adviser, made those and similar comments in several columns reviewed by CNN's KFile that were published on the website of the conservative National Review magazine in 2001, twice in 2002 and 2003.

In a 2000 column, Moore complained about his wife voting for Democrats, writing, "Women are sooo malleable! No wonder there's a gender gap." In another column in 2000, Moore criticized female athletes advocating for pay equality, writing that they wanted "equal pay for inferior work."

[BasilValentine]

Where's zb these days? One of her favorite conspiracy theories, that nonsense about Seth Rich being the source of stolen emails and then being murdered for it by the Clintons? She should be happy to know the Mueller investigation cracked the case wide open. On pages 48-49, Volume I of the Mueller Report, he traces the fabricated story to Wikileaks. Zb has been spouting Russia disinformation all along, proving that the Russians saw her coming a mile off.

[SimonNZ]

US threatens to veto UN resolution on rape as weapon of war, officials say

The US is threatening to veto a United Nations resolution on combatting the use of rape as a weapon of war because of its language on reproductive and sexual health, according to a senior UN official and European diplomats.

The German mission hopes the resolution will be adopted at a special UN security council session on Tuesday on sexual violence in conflict.

But the draft resolution has already been stripped of one of its most important elements, the establishment of a formal mechanism to monitor and report atrocities, because of opposition from the US, Russia and China, which opposed creating a new monitoring body.

Even after the formal monitoring mechanism was stripped from the resolution, the US was still threatening to veto the watered-down version, because it includes language on victims' support from family planning clinics. In recent months, the Trump administration has taken a hard line, refusing to agree to any UN documents that refer to sexual or reproductive health, on grounds that such language implies support for abortions. It has also opposed the use of the word "gender", seeing it as a cover for liberal promotion of transgender rights."

[SimonNZ]

Trump throws an early morning tantrum for two hours straight

"Trump was very busy running the country Tuesday morning. And by running the country, we mean rage tweeting.

Being leader of the free world is a big job, as you are responsible for the needs of nearly 330 million people, help oversee one of the most important economies in the world, and also deal with foreign threats and other world crises.

Yet, despite all of that, Trump found two hours Tuesday morning to air his grievances with the media, congressional Democrats, Twitter, and the European Union in a series of unhinged tweets that are sure to kick off yet another round of speculation about Trump's mental state.

The tweets began at 5:59 a.m. Eastern with a hate tweet against New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. Trump appeared to be angry with Krugman's Monday column in which Krugman accuses Republicans of being a "party that no longer believes in American values."

"Paul Krugman, of the Fake News New York Times, has lost all credibility, as has the Times itself, with his false and highly inaccurate writings on me," Trump tweeted. "He is obsessed with hatred, just as others are obsessed with how stupid he is."

Melania Trump's "Be Best" anti-bullying campaign has clearly yet to have a positive impact on her husband.

The tweets only got more unhinged from there.

In a subsequent tweet, Trump again falsely claimed that the New York Times apologized to him for its 2016 coverage (that didn't happen), and wondered if he Times would apologize to him again.

"But this one will have to be a far bigger & better apology," Trump tweeted. "On this one they will have to get down on their knees & beg for forgiveness-they are truly the Enemy of the People!"

Yes, Trump actually tweeted that.

Trump then announced a Saturday night campaign rally in Wisconsin, which he'll use to counter-program the White House Correspondents' Association dinner. Given Trump's tweetstorm, that rally is sure to be as off the rails as ever.

And he then accused Democrats of being "totally insane" — which given Trump's bonkers tweet storm is one serious example of projection.

But wait, there's more!

Trump then claimed that because the economy is doing well, that means he should be "immune from criticism."

"In the 'old days' if you were President and you had a good economy, you were basically immune from criticism," Trump tweeted. "Remember, 'It's the economy stupid.' Today I have, as President, perhaps the greatest economy in history...and to the Mainstream Media, it means NOTHING. But it will!"

Maybe Trump should have a conversation with Bill Clinton, whom Republicans relentlessly targeted and even impeached for an affair. Of course, not only has Trump had an affair, which got him implicated in an illegal campaign finance scheme, but special counsel Robert Mueller detailed multiple instances in which Trump tried to obstruct justice in the Russia probe.

Trump the media critic then returned, as he praised "Fox & Friends" for being the best morning show and attacked MSNBC's "Morning Joe" for being "Dumb and Sick" — capitalization Trump's. The difference between the two shows? The latter criticizes Trump's out of control conduct, while the former has on guests who heap praise on Trump when no praise is warranted.

Trump then took Twitter to task, criticizing it for being "hard for people to sign on" to and "constantly taking people off list." It appears someone needs to help teach Trump how to remember his username and password."

-

I bolded the "constantly taking people off list." thing, because i think he's referring to this:

Some exclusive news: Twitter banned over 5,000 bot accounts this weekend tweeting about how "Russiagate" is a hoax.

[SimonNZ]

seen elsewhere:

FUN IMPEACHMENT FACTS:

Nixon before Watergate hearings
Approval: 48%
Americans favoring impeachment: 19%

Trump (today) before Obstruction hearings
Approval: 37%
Americans favoring impeachment: 34%

-

also:

I will name a Golan town after Trump, says Israel's Netanyahu


Pro-Trump Sinclair Media Poised for National Expansion by 2020


Militia leader arrested by FBI says he's known Trump since Vegas casino days, says he has received intelligence about the border from Trump

[SimonNZ]

Trump's Treasury Secretary was just hit with major lawsuit over multibillion dollar fraud


Six Trump Interior appointees are being investigated for possible ethical misconduct


Trump met with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey — and complained about his follower count

[SimonNZ]

White House plans to fight House subpoena of former counsel Donald McGahn for testimony on Mueller report


Chairman Nadler Statement on Reports that the White House Will Stop Don McGahn from Testifying


Kamala Harris Calls for Trump to Be Impeached

[JBS]

Kamala Harris Calls for Trump to Be Impeached

It is to be presumed that any of the candidates for the Democratic nomination who calls for impeachment now or in the near future is simply trying to curry favor with the party base.  Any attempt to impeach Trump would founder on GOP acquittal votes in the Senate, and work in Trump's favor, no matter how substantial the evidence against him.

[Karl Henning]

It is to be presumed that any of the candidates for the Democratic nomination who calls for impeachment now or in the near future is simply trying to curry favor with the party base.  Any attempt to impeach Trump would founder on GOP acquittal votes in the Senate, and work in Trump's favor, no matter how substantial the evidence against him.

Verily

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

seen elsewhere:

FUN IMPEACHMENT FACTS:

Nixon before Watergate hearings
Approval: 48%
Americans favoring impeachment: 19%

Trump (today) before Obstruction hearings
Approval: 37%
Americans favoring impeachment: 34%

There is a difference. Before the Nixon impeachment hearings the tapes had not been revealed, the bombshell revelation was yet to land. We already have the Mueller report, and the steady stream of revelations of Trump's malfeasance has desensitized the public. Where will the Trump bombshell come from?

[drogulus]

It is to be presumed that any of the candidates for the Democratic nomination who calls for impeachment now or in the near future is simply trying to curry favor with the party base.  Any attempt to impeach Trump would founder on GOP acquittal votes in the Senate, and work in Trump's favor, no matter how substantial the evidence against him.

     The state of available evidence will require an impeachment, no matter what anyone simply tries. Mueller produced an impeachment referral. If you can't indict, you must impeach. Pelosi is correct that impeachment must be a forced move, not something Congress should be glad to do. It entails risk, and it should. Whether Repubs go along or not can't be the standard. What standard of ethics and responsibility are they setting now?

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

It seems clear enough to me. Trump finds out that Russian Interference in the election will be investigated by a special council. He says, "that's the end of my presidency, I'm f***ed." Then he takes numerous actions, some behind the scenes, some in plain sight, to put a stop to the investigation, to fire Mueller, etc. Some of his underlings advise him that the action he has ordered is illegal, they refuse to carry out his orders for fear of exposing themselves to criminal charges. Can there be a more obvious case of obstruction of justice, trying to fire the cop who is investigating you? The fact that he announced on television, in twitter, in a meeting with the Russian envoy, that he intended to obstruct justice is simply surreal. Perhaps in some people's minds it shows he had no idea he was committing a crime.

[SimonNZ]

Impeachment would involve further discovery wouldn't it? Including bringing to light the fourteen cases that Mueller reffered out and from all of this creating a full narrative and clear picture. And I'd imagine they'd be at least a few bombshells in those twelve cases that are unknown.

True, if there was a vote today the Republican Senate would be kept in line, but I'd imagine the are at least some former Never-Trumpers who would be wishing for the political cover of free-falling approval numbers and ever-widening scandal that even Fox has to cover to finally be able to break ranks - especially if the end result is president Pence (who, I notice, has been keeping very quiet).

[SimonNZ]

Iowa's longest-serving GOP lawmaker joins the Democrats because of Trump

"Iowa's longest-serving Republican state lawmaker is ditching the party in a protest of what he called President Donald Trump's "unacceptable behavior" and is joining the Democrats.

State Rep. Andy McKean, a moderate from eastern Iowa whose 29 years in the legislature include stints in the House and Senate, announced his party switch at a news conference Tuesday. He called Trump "a poor example for the nation and particularly for our children" and said he'll seek re-election in 2020 as a Democrat.

"With the 2020 president election looming on the horizon, I feel as a Republican that I need to be able to support the standard bearer of our party. Unfortunately, that is not something I am able to do," McKean said Tuesday of Trump.

"He sets, in my opinion, a poor example for the nation and particularly for our children by personally insulting -- often in a crude and juvenile fashion -- those who disagree with him, being a bully at a time when we are attempting to discourage bullying, his frequent disregard for the truth and his willingness to ridicule or marginalize people for their appearance, ethnicity or disability," he said."

[SimonNZ]

In Push for 2020 Election Security, Top Official Was Warned: Don't Tell Trump

"In the months before Kirstjen Nielsen was forced to resign, she tried to focus the White House on one of her highest priorities as homeland security secretary: preparing for new and different Russian forms of interference in the 2020 election.

President Trump's chief of staff told her not to bring it up in front of the president.

Ms. Nielsen left the Department of Homeland Security early this month after a tumultuous 16-month tenure and tensions with the White House. Officials said she had become increasingly concerned about Russia's continued activity in the United States during and after the 2018 midterm elections — ranging from its search for new techniques to divide Americans using social media, to experiments by hackers, to rerouting internet traffic and infiltrating power grids.

But in a meeting this year, Mick Mulvaney, the White House chief of staff, made it clear that Mr. Trump still equated any public discussion of malign Russian election activity with questions about the legitimacy of his victory. According to one senior administration official, Mr. Mulvaney said it "wasn't a great subject and should be kept below his level."

Even though the Department of Homeland Security has primary responsibility for civilian cyberdefense, Ms. Nielsen eventually gave up on her effort to organize a White House meeting of cabinet secretaries to coordinate a strategy to protect next year's elections.

As a result, the issue did not gain the urgency or widespread attention that a president can command. And it meant that many Americans remain unaware of the latest versions of Russian interference."