ITMFA
October 7, 2019 7:14 AM Subscribe
"It’s not a pretty picture, but in a sense, it’s Federalist 51 in action." The Washington Post offers an annotated calendar that will be updated: What’s next in the Trump impeachment inquiry, and will Trump cooperate with it? as well as ongoing reporting and analysis.
Previously, and previouslier.
Related: "Need to find different words for unprecedented."
Want to chat? MeFi Chat and the Unofficial PoliticsFilter Slack are available.
Previously, and previouslier.
Related: "Need to find different words for unprecedented."
Want to chat? MeFi Chat and the Unofficial PoliticsFilter Slack are available.
Impeach Trump, Repeatedly (Charles Blow, NYT Opinion)
posted by katra at 7:32 AM on October 7, 2019 [51 favorites]
Mod note: General reminder from your modfolk in this weird(er) busy(er) moment in US politics: there's a lot going on right now with this impeachment situation, and we don't have the resources to aggressively moderate these discussions. So expect this, like any busy MeFi thread, to be a bit bumpy and chaotic at times; it's good to flag really problematic or axe-grinding stuff but don't flag stuff just for being chatty/jokey/riffy, that's an okay part of the mix.
On the flip side, if you're tending to be really chatty, or to tend toward "here's yet another opportunity to explain my now-well-established position", try to throttle your own commenting to not take up an outsized share of space. If there's a substantial side angle to the story that bears a lot of discussion, please consider making a dedicated post for it so that that discussion can happen there and take some load off this central impeachment-focused thread.
When in doubt, drop us a line at the contact form and we can talk it out. Thanks, y'all.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:43 AM on October 7, 2019 [83 favorites]
On the flip side, if you're tending to be really chatty, or to tend toward "here's yet another opportunity to explain my now-well-established position", try to throttle your own commenting to not take up an outsized share of space. If there's a substantial side angle to the story that bears a lot of discussion, please consider making a dedicated post for it so that that discussion can happen there and take some load off this central impeachment-focused thread.
When in doubt, drop us a line at the contact form and we can talk it out. Thanks, y'all.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:43 AM on October 7, 2019 [83 favorites]
Ignore the hype — this is not an impeachment inquiry
posted by robbyrobs at 7:54 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by robbyrobs at 7:54 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
The Only Issue Left Is Trump’s ‘Absolute Right’ to Solicit Collusion (Jonathan Chait, New York)
He is announcing to every foreign state that American relations with his government — and, should he prevail, every future government — can and will be influenced by their willingness to put their judicial or quasi-judicial systems at the disposal of his reelection campaign. [...]posted by katra at 8:00 AM on October 7, 2019 [22 favorites]
Presidents don’t get to decide which American citizens are subject to criminal investigations here — why can they make such determinations for other countries’ legal systems? [...]
The pretext that somehow Trump is advancing the cause of good government by demanding international anti-corruption probes is a morbid joke. First, he is not making this demand of countries with open and fair legal systems that can be counted on to deliver reliable findings. He is not asking Canada or France. He is pressing notoriously corrupt states to deliver a predetermined outcome. For Ukraine or China to quietly investigate his charges and then announce Joe Biden did nothing wrong would be of zero or negative value to him. The favor he is bartering for is the insinuation of guilt.
[...] The clutter has been cleared away and everybody faces the brutally simple choice that Trump presents. Either they hand the president the absolute right, now and forever, to use American foreign policy as a lever to discredit their political rivals, or they vote to impeach.
Robbyrobs:
You sure you’re ready to endorse that Andrew C McCarthy think piece? The one that says Democrats don’t have a case for impeachment, so they’re determined to ram through charges anyway?
posted by argybarg at 8:09 AM on October 7, 2019 [12 favorites]
You sure you’re ready to endorse that Andrew C McCarthy think piece? The one that says Democrats don’t have a case for impeachment, so they’re determined to ram through charges anyway?
posted by argybarg at 8:09 AM on October 7, 2019 [12 favorites]
I didn't see it as an endorsement of the piece, rather a peek into the opposition's pov. (shrug) mebbe not.
posted by j_curiouser at 8:12 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by j_curiouser at 8:12 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
From robbyrobs first link:
The House has not voted as a body to authorize an impeachment inquiry.
This is a bullshit Republican talking point per leftist rag Newsweek.
posted by PMdixon at 8:15 AM on October 7, 2019 [27 favorites]
The House has not voted as a body to authorize an impeachment inquiry.
This is a bullshit Republican talking point per leftist rag Newsweek.
posted by PMdixon at 8:15 AM on October 7, 2019 [27 favorites]
Could Trump be impeached and removed from office then run again for reelection? (Debbie Lord, Cox Media Group National Content Desk/AJC)
Technically, yes.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:16 AM on October 7, 2019 [4 favorites]
Technically, yes.
Imagine Trump were to be impeached and then convicted and removed from office. Following the vote for his removal, the Senate would have one more issue to decide. It would have to determine if removal from office is a severe enough penalty for any crime Trump may have committed, or if it should ban him from ever holding office again.A Politico Op-Ed advocates this. Haven't seen this advocated anywhere else.
What does the Constitution have to say about it?
The Constitution is clear on what can be done. Article I, Section 3 says, “Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”
It does not say that both of those things must be done.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:16 AM on October 7, 2019 [4 favorites]
It does not say that both of those things must be done.
that is a very strange interpretation of the word "AND"
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 8:20 AM on October 7, 2019 [50 favorites]
that is a very strange interpretation of the word "AND"
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 8:20 AM on October 7, 2019 [50 favorites]
The Senate would vote separately, and people who were impeached and convicted have held subsequent federal office before, but it seems like a bad idea to put Mike Pence in office but let Trump run to replace him and then you potentially have to deal with him again, having kicked him out before.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 8:24 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Huffy Puffy at 8:24 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
In this particular impeachment, it's being treated as a given that few, if any, GOP senators would vote to convict, out of risk of being primaried.
Couple of ifs in a row for you...
If the trial drags on long enough that the GOP primaries are in the rearview, and if public sentiment swings heavily toward removing the president from office, could some GOP senators potentially vote to convict after all?
I'm not asking whether enough would flip to make a difference. I'm asking how many could potentially flip once their places as 2020 GOP nominees was no longer in question.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 8:29 AM on October 7, 2019 [5 favorites]
Couple of ifs in a row for you...
If the trial drags on long enough that the GOP primaries are in the rearview, and if public sentiment swings heavily toward removing the president from office, could some GOP senators potentially vote to convict after all?
I'm not asking whether enough would flip to make a difference. I'm asking how many could potentially flip once their places as 2020 GOP nominees was no longer in question.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 8:29 AM on October 7, 2019 [5 favorites]
Trump is the kid with his hand in the cookie jar – and Republicans know it (Robert Reich, Guardian Opinion)
Don’t assume the Senate won’t convict and remove a president who sees the danger and grows more desperate by the day
Don’t assume the Senate won’t convict and remove a president who sees the danger and grows more desperate by the day
Twenty-three Republicans are up for re-election next fall. Most are from red states that support Trump. But in a few months they’ll be safe from primary challenges. They’ll be free to vote him out. Others – Susan Collins of Maine, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Rob Portman of Ohio, for example – are from purple states where they’ll be challenged by a Democrat and have every incentive to vote Trump out. Trump has no leverage over long-serving senators planning to retire, such as Lamar Alexander of Tennessee.posted by katra at 8:35 AM on October 7, 2019 [10 favorites]
Meanwhile, he’s losing support among responsible Senate Republicans like Mitt Romney of Utah, who calls his actions “troubling in the extreme”, Nebraska’s Ben Sasse, who urges colleagues not to “circle the wagons”, and intelligence chair Richard Burr of North Carolina, who vows to “get to the bottom” of what happened.
Trump remains hugely popular among Republican voters but most of them care more about the economy than about Trump, and the economy is slowing – in large part because of Trump’s trade wars.
> that is a very strange interpretation of the word "AND"
There's precedent, as the Politico Op-Ed notes.
And it makes sense. The language in the Constitution is describing the maximum allowed punishment. Implementing only half of the allowed punishment is, by definition, less than the maximum.
posted by AndrewInDC at 8:37 AM on October 7, 2019 [10 favorites]
There's precedent, as the Politico Op-Ed notes.
And it makes sense. The language in the Constitution is describing the maximum allowed punishment. Implementing only half of the allowed punishment is, by definition, less than the maximum.
posted by AndrewInDC at 8:37 AM on October 7, 2019 [10 favorites]
Trump Is Begging to Be Impeached. Give Him What He Wants — Immediately.
posted by robbyrobs at 8:42 AM on October 7, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by robbyrobs at 8:42 AM on October 7, 2019 [5 favorites]
If Jeff Flake is to be believed, 36 senators would vote for impeachment if they thought they wouldn’t be punished by GOP voters.
Republicans know that they only need 50% +1 to hold office (and it is exactly how they govern). If you want to see them flip, make it clear that continuing to support Trump will get them 50% -1 votes in their next election.
As a corollary, I also think we shouldn’t rush into impeachment. Besides the obvious fact that voting now will stunt any investigations and leave potentially damning evidence unexposed, it also plays into the GOP desire to put Trump’s scandals in the rear view mirror as quickly as possible. As long as they are vulnerable to a primary from the right, they have an incentive to excuse his corrupt behavior.
I would think April of next year would be a great time to vote on articles of impeachment. The election fields For the fall will be largely set and it is close enough to November that the Democrats can keep Trump’s lawlessness front and center for the election.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 8:57 AM on October 7, 2019 [7 favorites]
Republicans know that they only need 50% +1 to hold office (and it is exactly how they govern). If you want to see them flip, make it clear that continuing to support Trump will get them 50% -1 votes in their next election.
As a corollary, I also think we shouldn’t rush into impeachment. Besides the obvious fact that voting now will stunt any investigations and leave potentially damning evidence unexposed, it also plays into the GOP desire to put Trump’s scandals in the rear view mirror as quickly as possible. As long as they are vulnerable to a primary from the right, they have an incentive to excuse his corrupt behavior.
I would think April of next year would be a great time to vote on articles of impeachment. The election fields For the fall will be largely set and it is close enough to November that the Democrats can keep Trump’s lawlessness front and center for the election.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 8:57 AM on October 7, 2019 [7 favorites]
Trump Warns Turkey Over Syria: I Will Obliterate Your Economy if You Do Anything Off Limits Haaretz, but not paywalled.
From the article, Trump (or perhaps Miller) tweets:
posted by mumimor at 8:58 AM on October 7, 2019 [23 favorites]
From the article, Trump (or perhaps Miller) tweets:
As I have stated strongly before, and just to reiterate, if Turkey does anything that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits, I will totally destroy and obliterate the Economy of Turkey (I’ve done before!). They must, with Europe and others, watch over...I don't know what anything in that tweet means, but it's strangely fascinating
posted by mumimor at 8:58 AM on October 7, 2019 [23 favorites]
In my reading of the entire last thread over the last few days, this is what I've come up with: His lawyers will win. They know how to run out the clock brilliantly. Every charge, every subpoena, every request no matter how small or insignificant will be appealed, double-appealed, challenged, reversed, ignored then appealed, and then ignored with "whuddyagunnadoboutit?". Running out the clock is already seeming like a winning strategy because no one's been so brazen and shameless to do it. I hope I'm wrong, but I also have a healthy sum on PredictIt that's backing my pessimism.
posted by Philipschall at 8:59 AM on October 7, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by Philipschall at 8:59 AM on October 7, 2019 [11 favorites]
The rest of that tweet reads:
...the captured ISIS fighters and families. The U.S. has done far more than anyone could have ever expected, including the capture of 100% of the ISIS Caliphate. It is time now for others in the region, some of great wealth, to protect their own territory. THE USA IS GREAT!
...is this a new level of unhinged? Calling himself "unmatched."? He sounds like the Wizard of OZ
posted by emjaybee at 9:00 AM on October 7, 2019 [37 favorites]
...the captured ISIS fighters and families. The U.S. has done far more than anyone could have ever expected, including the capture of 100% of the ISIS Caliphate. It is time now for others in the region, some of great wealth, to protect their own territory. THE USA IS GREAT!
...is this a new level of unhinged? Calling himself "unmatched."? He sounds like the Wizard of OZ
posted by emjaybee at 9:00 AM on October 7, 2019 [37 favorites]
... I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits ...
This is pretty wild phrasing, even for him.
posted by feloniousmonk at 9:01 AM on October 7, 2019 [63 favorites]
This is pretty wild phrasing, even for him.
posted by feloniousmonk at 9:01 AM on October 7, 2019 [63 favorites]
Yet another delay in the court process: Trump wins delay in New York court fight over producing his tax returns (NBC News)
As a result of the stay, Mazars USA, the president's tax preparer, doesn't have to hand over the documents by 1 p.m. Monday, as was required. A panel of appellate judges will hear the case on an expedited basis and then issue a ruling.posted by katra at 9:03 AM on October 7, 2019 [20 favorites]
Earlier Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Victor Marrero tossed the lawsuit Trump's legal team had brought against District Attorney Cyrus Vance arguing Vance should not receive Trump's tax returns because "'[v]irtually all legal commenters agree' that a sitting President of the United States is not 'subject to the criminal process' while he is in office.”
In a 75-page order, Marrero called the presidential immunity Trump invoked in the lawsuit to stop the production of tax documents "unqualified and boundless." "The president asserts an extraordinary claim in the dispute now before this court," the Manhattan federal court judge wrote, later adding, "This Court cannot endorse such a categorical and limitless assertion of presidential immunity from" the judicial process.
In response to Trump asserting that not only he but also his family, businesses and associates were immune from producing documents, Marrero ruled that presidents, their families and businesses were not above the law. Marrero called the president's argument "repugnant to the nation's governmental structure and constitutional values."
Those tweets about Turkey going off-limits may have something to do with this:
@LindseyGrahamSC: Just spoke to Sen @ChrisVanHollen about situation in Syria.
We will introduce bipartisan sanctions against Turkey if they invade Syria and will call for their suspension from NATO if they attack Kurdish forces who assisted the U.S. in the destruction of the ISIS Caliphate.
I could swear I saw this quoted with "VETO-proof" when I first woke up this morning, but it's not there now. Maybe it was edited, maybe that was someone else's words.
I somehow doubt Graham has found his conscience or his courage, but we have seen Trump lose votes on international issues and sanctions against his buddies before (and then ignore them). Odds are this will be the same--he gives Lindsey and other Republicans a sad, does what he wants anyway, and they never do anything more than hang their heads and get behind him. With impeachment on the horizon, I think at the very least this adds to Trump's stress and paranoia.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 9:07 AM on October 7, 2019 [9 favorites]
@LindseyGrahamSC: Just spoke to Sen @ChrisVanHollen about situation in Syria.
We will introduce bipartisan sanctions against Turkey if they invade Syria and will call for their suspension from NATO if they attack Kurdish forces who assisted the U.S. in the destruction of the ISIS Caliphate.
I could swear I saw this quoted with "VETO-proof" when I first woke up this morning, but it's not there now. Maybe it was edited, maybe that was someone else's words.
I somehow doubt Graham has found his conscience or his courage, but we have seen Trump lose votes on international issues and sanctions against his buddies before (and then ignore them). Odds are this will be the same--he gives Lindsey and other Republicans a sad, does what he wants anyway, and they never do anything more than hang their heads and get behind him. With impeachment on the horizon, I think at the very least this adds to Trump's stress and paranoia.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 9:07 AM on October 7, 2019 [9 favorites]
Do not arouse the wrath of the Great and Powerful Oz!
posted by kirkaracha at 9:08 AM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 9:08 AM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
I must say that the "unmatched wisdom" thing looks like a spoof (until proven wrong, possibly a matter of seconds).
posted by Namlit at 9:09 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Namlit at 9:09 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
Well now we have a sense of what Graham was doing during his visits with Erdogan a few weeks ago.
posted by Harry Caul at 9:10 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 9:10 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
The important thing to remember with Graham etc. is that they’re not actually cowardly, sycophantic idiots – they just play the role for their voters and the POTUS. When Trump steps outside the lines on something they genuinely care about, they’re fully capable of acting. Which just shows you how horrific the “lines” they’re working with actually are.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:11 AM on October 7, 2019 [59 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:11 AM on October 7, 2019 [59 favorites]
Graham's pivot on impeachment may be the most amazing bits about this whole thing. How some culture-jammer hasn't yet rigged up an endless loop of that on the side of the Russell Building is beyond me.
posted by jquinby at 9:15 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by jquinby at 9:15 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
katra: Yet another delay in the court process
My preferred focus was this part: In a 75-page order (embedded PDF from Washington Post), Marrero called the presidential immunity Trump invoked in the lawsuit to stop the production of tax documents "unqualified and boundless."
Destroy the idea of "presidential immunity" now, pave the way for future indictments.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:25 AM on October 7, 2019 [31 favorites]
My preferred focus was this part: In a 75-page order (embedded PDF from Washington Post), Marrero called the presidential immunity Trump invoked in the lawsuit to stop the production of tax documents "unqualified and boundless."
Destroy the idea of "presidential immunity" now, pave the way for future indictments.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:25 AM on October 7, 2019 [31 favorites]
Man, the talking heads are out in force spreading the White House's "this is an attempted coup" talking point. NPR had a White House trade negotiator on this morning to talk about the ongoing China talks and he managed to shoehorn a tirade about the"coup" into his spiel.
Then, on 1A, a listener wrote-in ranting about the Democrats' "attempted coup." There seems to be legs on this particular talking point.
When I think about "coup" becoming the official WH stance, and combine it with Trump directly calling Schiff a traitor, I start to nervously wonder if Trump and the DoJ wouldn't actually arrest and charge select House Democrats for treason. I mean...That's a step too far that even Trump would take...right? And, would Barr's DoJ go along?
posted by Thorzdad at 9:29 AM on October 7, 2019 [12 favorites]
Then, on 1A, a listener wrote-in ranting about the Democrats' "attempted coup." There seems to be legs on this particular talking point.
When I think about "coup" becoming the official WH stance, and combine it with Trump directly calling Schiff a traitor, I start to nervously wonder if Trump and the DoJ wouldn't actually arrest and charge select House Democrats for treason. I mean...That's a step too far that even Trump would take...right? And, would Barr's DoJ go along?
posted by Thorzdad at 9:29 AM on October 7, 2019 [12 favorites]
If he does it fast enough, with loyalists air-gapped from the DoJ mainstream then what would the consequences be?
Nothing from the Senate and a two year court battle with Schiff behind bars during the whole thing.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:34 AM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
Nothing from the Senate and a two year court battle with Schiff behind bars during the whole thing.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:34 AM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
DirtyOldTown I don't think after the primaries is enough to tip Republican Senators, I could be wrong but I think they think that removing Trump from office will hurt both the Party in general and their own personal re-elections more than keeping him will.
posted by sotonohito at 9:36 AM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by sotonohito at 9:36 AM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
Unmatched can be in the positive direction. It could also mean unmached LOW point. Perhaps one day there willl be briefings and someone can ask about the un-matched-ness.
If, of course, there is nothing else going on that day/week. It's up there with asking about the lack of press briefings, the number of golf-days and his mental/physical health.
posted by rough ashlar at 9:37 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
If, of course, there is nothing else going on that day/week. It's up there with asking about the lack of press briefings, the number of golf-days and his mental/physical health.
posted by rough ashlar at 9:37 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
Can we not catastrophize and fantasize? The things we are actually facing are enough without making up worse-case potential futures.
posted by rikschell at 9:38 AM on October 7, 2019 [74 favorites]
posted by rikschell at 9:38 AM on October 7, 2019 [74 favorites]
Man, the talking heads are out in force spreading the White House's "this is an attempted coup" talking point.
Impeachment tentacles spread throughout Trump’s team (Politico)
A president who loves to be in control is finding it difficult to control an investigation that’s extending far beyond his direct orbit.
Impeachment tentacles spread throughout Trump’s team (Politico)
A president who loves to be in control is finding it difficult to control an investigation that’s extending far beyond his direct orbit.
The impeachment fight under Trump is quickly surpassing the reach of the presidential impeachment battles under Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, swallowing even larger swaths of the federal government. The whistleblower complaint and the resulting investigative sprawl are making the probe harder for Trump and his White House to stamp out, with Democrats gaining new avenues to uncover damaging details that contradict Trump. [...]posted by katra at 9:43 AM on October 7, 2019 [8 favorites]
Some Trump allies believe a war room could serve as a nerve center to coordinate messaging across its administration while protecting Trump from what might be released from an agency, or a seemingly obscure official.
White House staffers remain divided on the necessity of such a centralized operation inside the West Wing to coordinate the political and press response to the impeachment inquiry. No one can decide who should run it, or how it should be structured, and the president continues to prefer to fight by leaning on his own public comments and Twitter feed. [...]
Instead, the Trump campaign and Republican National Committee have picked up the slack, putting forth a new advertisement this week that calls the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry a “coup” that liberals wanted to launch ever since Trump was elected.
While agreeing on the need not to catastrophize, I think it's worth keeping an eye on this "coup" rhetoric from a Trump's Mirror standpoint. It's pretty common for coups/seizures of power to be justified by claims of that the other side was doing the same (or was about to). And the institutional guardrails that, early on, prevented T from openly using the apparatus of the state against his political enemies have suffered quite a bit of corrosion over the past 2.75 years (~99 Scaramuccis).
posted by Not A Thing at 9:47 AM on October 7, 2019 [54 favorites]
posted by Not A Thing at 9:47 AM on October 7, 2019 [54 favorites]
NPR had a White House trade negotiator on this morning to talk about the ongoing China talks and he managed to shoehorn a tirade about the"coup" into his spiel.
That was far from the only outright lie Steve Inskeep let him get away with.
posted by Gelatin at 9:50 AM on October 7, 2019 [21 favorites]
That was far from the only outright lie Steve Inskeep let him get away with.
posted by Gelatin at 9:50 AM on October 7, 2019 [21 favorites]
(I’d be so thankful if somebody could make a Rojava/Turkey/Kurds post because I really want to discuss it but don’t wish to derail 😔 Thank you!)
posted by gucci mane at 10:01 AM on October 7, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by gucci mane at 10:01 AM on October 7, 2019 [13 favorites]
Could Warren and Sanders pardon trump should they win?
posted by growabrain at 10:49 AM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by growabrain at 10:49 AM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
Nobody can pardon him for the NY stuff.
posted by Selena777 at 10:52 AM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Selena777 at 10:52 AM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
Nobody can pardon him for the NY stuff.
Andrew Cuomo would like a word.
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 10:54 AM on October 7, 2019 [4 favorites]
Andrew Cuomo would like a word.
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 10:54 AM on October 7, 2019 [4 favorites]
From above:
Can a president or his successor issue a pardon for an impeachment conviction?posted by ZeusHumms at 10:57 AM on October 7, 2019 [9 favorites]
No. The framers of the Constitution, in Article II Section 2, specifically prohibited the president’s pardon power from reversing impeachment convictions.
9 scenarios for how the Trump-Ukraine impeachment process could end (Matthew Yglesias, Vox)
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:00 AM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:00 AM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
Thorzdad: Man, the talking heads are out in force spreading the White House's "this is an attempted coup" talking point. NPR had a White House trade negotiator on this morning to talk about the ongoing China talks and he managed to shoehorn a tirade about the"coup" into his spiel.
That's White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, heard here (official transcript forthcoming), who is spinning Trump as the Strong Man, a focused man who comes to the White House every day to create more jobs, without detailing what jobs (recent post, "Working Harder and Harder To Earn Less and Less"). But ZERO pushback on the heavy Republican party spin. Which brings me to this article --
With impeachment looming, the news media is growing a spine. It needs stiffening. (Margaret Sullivan, Washington Post, Oct. 2, 2019)
Well, that didn't last long, if NPR was ever present enough to push back on rhetoric. Can't burn those bridges with key propaganda minsters, er involved insiders.
I appreciate the breadth of topics covered by NPR, but it's pretty clear they're a platform for information distribution when it comes to having political representatives on the air.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:21 AM on October 7, 2019 [6 favorites]
That's White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, heard here (official transcript forthcoming), who is spinning Trump as the Strong Man, a focused man who comes to the White House every day to create more jobs, without detailing what jobs (recent post, "Working Harder and Harder To Earn Less and Less"). But ZERO pushback on the heavy Republican party spin. Which brings me to this article --
With impeachment looming, the news media is growing a spine. It needs stiffening. (Margaret Sullivan, Washington Post, Oct. 2, 2019)
Well, that didn't last long, if NPR was ever present enough to push back on rhetoric. Can't burn those bridges with key propaganda minsters, er involved insiders.
I appreciate the breadth of topics covered by NPR, but it's pretty clear they're a platform for information distribution when it comes to having political representatives on the air.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:21 AM on October 7, 2019 [6 favorites]
That tendentious Andrew McCarthy piece in The Hill just collapsed under this: "Seeking Ukraine Aid Records, House Subpoenas White House Budget Office and Pentagon"
posted by PhineasGage at 11:26 AM on October 7, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 11:26 AM on October 7, 2019 [13 favorites]
I noted a huge contrast in headline bias:
MSNBC "Trump wins temporary stay, does not have to produce tax documents today"
WaPo "Judge rules Trump must give tax returns to Manhattan DA", with nothing about the stay on the front page.
For once, the NYT got it about right (IMHO), noting both the decision and the stay on the front page.
But MSNBC, seriously, "Trump wins ..."?
posted by Dashy at 11:31 AM on October 7, 2019 [8 favorites]
MSNBC "Trump wins temporary stay, does not have to produce tax documents today"
WaPo "Judge rules Trump must give tax returns to Manhattan DA", with nothing about the stay on the front page.
For once, the NYT got it about right (IMHO), noting both the decision and the stay on the front page.
But MSNBC, seriously, "Trump wins ..."?
posted by Dashy at 11:31 AM on October 7, 2019 [8 favorites]
"She hands out subpoenas like they're cookies."
posted by kirkaracha at 11:35 AM on October 7, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 11:35 AM on October 7, 2019 [8 favorites]
NPR had a White House trade negotiator on this morning to talk about the ongoing China talks and he managed to shoehorn a tirade about the"coup" into his spiel.
Not a trade negotiator. That would be a civil servant and a coup talking point would be way out of line. Instead it was a sycophant: White House trade adviser Peter Navarro. Who is a nutjob.
posted by srboisvert at 11:46 AM on October 7, 2019 [17 favorites]
Not a trade negotiator. That would be a civil servant and a coup talking point would be way out of line. Instead it was a sycophant: White House trade adviser Peter Navarro. Who is a nutjob.
posted by srboisvert at 11:46 AM on October 7, 2019 [17 favorites]
Interesting, ZeusHumms. Most of the options had been laid out, but there is one that caught my eye as unique: "The Presidential Succession Act might be unconstitutional." I hadn't heard that there was any potential question about that (specifically, that the Speaker and President Pro Temp would be ineligible as they are from a different branch of government). The logic and context always had those two roles making sense to me.
(The logic: having been elected first by their constituents and then, ostensibly, by representatives of the nation at large, made them the highest-ranking elected officials outside of POTUS/VPOTUS. The context: the scenarios generally in mind were some sort of decapitating strike by an enemy with little-to-no time to sort things out rather than a relatively slow-moving scandal.)
I figured one of the reasons Trump was throwing Pence under the bus like it was the Olympic try-outs was to force loyalty in the Senate: "I'll force the Dems to impeach Pence, too, then you'll have to justify making Pelosi POTUS to your constituents." This could be the work-around. SCOTUS could declare the Presidential Succession act unconstitutional, and have a GOP appointee in the cabinet become POTUS. However, I think that throws us deep into the "no one knows what happens next, but it's bad no matter what" territory.
If I'm in line for succession, can I say "pass?" The compromise could be both Pelosi and Grassley pass, along with every cabinet member until they reach a mutually agreed successor. This allows impeachment and removal to happen while still keeping the office "in the family." Both the Republicans and Democrats can have this albatross of an issue settled before the 2020 election.
posted by MrGuilt at 11:48 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
(The logic: having been elected first by their constituents and then, ostensibly, by representatives of the nation at large, made them the highest-ranking elected officials outside of POTUS/VPOTUS. The context: the scenarios generally in mind were some sort of decapitating strike by an enemy with little-to-no time to sort things out rather than a relatively slow-moving scandal.)
I figured one of the reasons Trump was throwing Pence under the bus like it was the Olympic try-outs was to force loyalty in the Senate: "I'll force the Dems to impeach Pence, too, then you'll have to justify making Pelosi POTUS to your constituents." This could be the work-around. SCOTUS could declare the Presidential Succession act unconstitutional, and have a GOP appointee in the cabinet become POTUS. However, I think that throws us deep into the "no one knows what happens next, but it's bad no matter what" territory.
If I'm in line for succession, can I say "pass?" The compromise could be both Pelosi and Grassley pass, along with every cabinet member until they reach a mutually agreed successor. This allows impeachment and removal to happen while still keeping the office "in the family." Both the Republicans and Democrats can have this albatross of an issue settled before the 2020 election.
posted by MrGuilt at 11:48 AM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
Peter Navarro was hired when Jared Kushner searched "china" on Amazon and called the author of the book with the scariest cover. Not a joke.
posted by theodolite at 11:49 AM on October 7, 2019 [34 favorites]
posted by theodolite at 11:49 AM on October 7, 2019 [34 favorites]
There, he found a book co-written by Peter Navarro and was struck by its title, "Death by China."
...which later turned out to be a murder-mystery set around a wedding registry.
posted by MrGuilt at 11:52 AM on October 7, 2019 [15 favorites]
...which later turned out to be a murder-mystery set around a wedding registry.
posted by MrGuilt at 11:52 AM on October 7, 2019 [15 favorites]
...which later turned out to be a murder-mystery set around a wedding registry.
Y'know, for the 20th book in a series, it wasn't bad.
posted by jquinby at 11:56 AM on October 7, 2019 [11 favorites]
Y'know, for the 20th book in a series, it wasn't bad.
posted by jquinby at 11:56 AM on October 7, 2019 [11 favorites]
SCOTUS could declare the Presidential Succession act unconstitutional, and have a GOP appointee in the cabinet become POTUS.
Congress could also just pass a new succession act. But boy did that link blow up my local Indivisible Facebook Group. People HATED the idea. I suspect they did not read past the headline, because I found this argument pretty convincing...
Congress could also just pass a new succession act. But boy did that link blow up my local Indivisible Facebook Group. People HATED the idea. I suspect they did not read past the headline, because I found this argument pretty convincing...
By taking Pelosi out of the mix, Democrats wouldn’t be giving up a realistic chance of gaining the presidency, anyway. If Trump is impeached by the House and removed by the Senate, Pence will become president and nominate a new vice president. That’s the procedure set forth by the 25th Amendment and used twice since its ratification in 1965.posted by OnceUponATime at 12:00 PM on October 7, 2019 [12 favorites]
But even a little uncertainty about that outcome might be enough to push otherwise open-minded Republicans away from voting for impeachment or conviction. Removing Pelosi and the third-in-line official, Senate President Pro Tem Charles Grassley, from having any chance of becoming president would be a worthwhile gesture for Democrats to make, indicating that they accept the reality that a Republican will be president until January, 2021, no matter what happens. We can mock the idea that Republican senators care more about installing Republican judges than they do about presidential corruption, but the truth is that they were elected by voters who care deeply about retaining the power to appoint conservative judges and pass conservative laws. Even the vaguest possibility of losing that authority sets up a real conflict for them. Insure that Republicans keep the presidency, and the conflict is removed.
In other words, by passing a simple bill, Democrats would do what they can to align Republican incentives the way they want. At no cost to themselves.
[...]
This isn’t just about, or even mainly about, impeachment. The possibility that the deaths or departures of two people could award the presidency to the party that lost the most recent election is an unacceptable risk. The law also sets up a perverse incentive during times of divided government for Congress to play constitutional hardball and refuse to confirm anyone to a vice-presidential vacancy in order to leave the speaker next in line.
When I think about "coup" becoming the official WH stance, and combine it with Trump directly calling Schiff a traitor, I start to nervously wonder if Trump and the DoJ wouldn't actually arrest and charge select House Democrats for treason
I feel the "coup" talk is significantly vulnerable to a realization that it's a bit melodramatic to apply the word to an administration that is almost entirely Acting Whatevers. There simply isn't enough government there to be a coup. If it was a real government there would be more confirmed positions, and the fact that there aren't raises the question of their fundamental legitimacy and authority to be anything more than the monarchy's attendants, the peanut gallery at court.
posted by rhizome at 12:07 PM on October 7, 2019 [10 favorites]
I feel the "coup" talk is significantly vulnerable to a realization that it's a bit melodramatic to apply the word to an administration that is almost entirely Acting Whatevers. There simply isn't enough government there to be a coup. If it was a real government there would be more confirmed positions, and the fact that there aren't raises the question of their fundamental legitimacy and authority to be anything more than the monarchy's attendants, the peanut gallery at court.
posted by rhizome at 12:07 PM on October 7, 2019 [10 favorites]
Congress could also just pass a new succession act.
For values of "could" that don't include Mitch McConnell as Republican Senate Majority Leader. And if Congress did pass it, Trump would have to sign it into law, which he would never do, because it'd clearly be about making getting rid of him more palatable.
posted by Gelatin at 12:09 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
For values of "could" that don't include Mitch McConnell as Republican Senate Majority Leader. And if Congress did pass it, Trump would have to sign it into law, which he would never do, because it'd clearly be about making getting rid of him more palatable.
posted by Gelatin at 12:09 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
I feel the "coup" talk is significantly vulnerable to a realization that it's a bit melodramatic to apply the word to an administration that is almost entirely Acting Whatevers. There simply isn't enough government there to be a coup.
Impeachment is written into the Constitution. On the other hand, all the "acting whatevers" is really much more like a coup, because it robs the Senate of its Constitutional and coequal role to advise and consent, and Trump has often boasted that he likes the increased power having an acting, as opposed to permanent, figure devolves to him.
posted by Gelatin at 12:12 PM on October 7, 2019 [42 favorites]
Impeachment is written into the Constitution. On the other hand, all the "acting whatevers" is really much more like a coup, because it robs the Senate of its Constitutional and coequal role to advise and consent, and Trump has often boasted that he likes the increased power having an acting, as opposed to permanent, figure devolves to him.
posted by Gelatin at 12:12 PM on October 7, 2019 [42 favorites]
Republicans unload on Trump for Syria shift when he needs them most (Politico)
At a time when Republicans and Democrats are sharply divided over impeachment, President Donald Trump is uniting Congress — in condemnation of his Syria policies.McConnell joins other Republicans in rebuking Trump’s Syria withdrawal (WaPo)
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell publicly rebuked President Trump’s plan to withdraw U.S. troops from northeast Syria, saying that a supermajority in the Senate disagreed with the president’s abrupt announcement.posted by katra at 12:14 PM on October 7, 2019 [15 favorites]
Incidentally, depriving the Senate of their power to advise and consent (via the super sketchy Tenure in Office act) was one of the charges against Andrew Johnson.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 12:22 PM on October 7, 2019 [28 favorites]
posted by Huffy Puffy at 12:22 PM on October 7, 2019 [28 favorites]
Some dark comic dismay (Twitter): manhattan DA trying to get trump’s tax returns
posted by srboisvert at 12:24 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 12:24 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
The possibility that the deaths or departures of two people could award the presidency to the party that lost the most recent election is an unacceptable risk.
I don't know. As I observed, the Speaker and President pro Temp are both elected by their state or district, then by their respective bodies (that are made up of people elected by their constituencies). While in practice, this means it's determined by the party that holds the chamber, there is a pretty distinct line back to the electorate.
In contrast, members of the cabinet are nominated by the president, and confirmed by the Senate.
In the current state of affairs, the fact that the Speaker is of the opposite party of both POTUS and the Senate are inconvenient--it's that much more difficult to investigate and punish a scandal. However, in the common scenarios for succession to that layer (decapitating strike on the US), I feel a bit better about the degrees-removed-from-election a ranking member of congress has over a cabinet official.
On the other hand, at least once a year we risk having someone way back on the bench become president through just such circumstances, trusting national unity will get us through that time.
posted by MrGuilt at 12:25 PM on October 7, 2019
I don't know. As I observed, the Speaker and President pro Temp are both elected by their state or district, then by their respective bodies (that are made up of people elected by their constituencies). While in practice, this means it's determined by the party that holds the chamber, there is a pretty distinct line back to the electorate.
In contrast, members of the cabinet are nominated by the president, and confirmed by the Senate.
In the current state of affairs, the fact that the Speaker is of the opposite party of both POTUS and the Senate are inconvenient--it's that much more difficult to investigate and punish a scandal. However, in the common scenarios for succession to that layer (decapitating strike on the US), I feel a bit better about the degrees-removed-from-election a ranking member of congress has over a cabinet official.
On the other hand, at least once a year we risk having someone way back on the bench become president through just such circumstances, trusting national unity will get us through that time.
posted by MrGuilt at 12:25 PM on October 7, 2019
The Syria / Turkey situation is in the process of blowing up - I'm not sure how to disentangle it from the threat of impeachment, which is driving Trump to lash out.
Tweet, breaking: "BREAKING — U.S. effectively shuts down Northern Syria airspace to Turkey, according to Pentagon statement to Anadolu. Turkey has been expelled from Joint Air Operations Center, and surveillance and reconnaissance data aren’t shared with Ankara."
(That is, the Pentagon is basically doing the opposite of what Trump tweeted we were about to do.)
posted by RedOrGreen at 12:28 PM on October 7, 2019 [25 favorites]
Tweet, breaking: "BREAKING — U.S. effectively shuts down Northern Syria airspace to Turkey, according to Pentagon statement to Anadolu. Turkey has been expelled from Joint Air Operations Center, and surveillance and reconnaissance data aren’t shared with Ankara."
(That is, the Pentagon is basically doing the opposite of what Trump tweeted we were about to do.)
posted by RedOrGreen at 12:28 PM on October 7, 2019 [25 favorites]
So the army is defying the civilian commander-in-chief? That sounds like a coup.
posted by clawsoon at 12:31 PM on October 7, 2019 [35 favorites]
posted by clawsoon at 12:31 PM on October 7, 2019 [35 favorites]
is anyone working on a Syria/Turkey FPP? i'd do it myself but i'm pretty clueless about this part of the world. seems like an overview of the history along with a place for relevant news would be helpful.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 12:34 PM on October 7, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 12:34 PM on October 7, 2019 [7 favorites]
Interesting thought experiment:
With the impeachment stuff getting worse over the last few days, it was to be expected that Trump would cause a diversion.
Now, instead of it just being the Democrats who take the bait and forget all about impeachment, crying "Syria withdrawal booh", he's not only pushed some Republicans to say "booh" too, he's in fact given them an easy tool to test-run their disagreement with the president, for worse things to come. We'll see how that works on their collective courage-to-withstand.
posted by Namlit at 12:35 PM on October 7, 2019 [6 favorites]
With the impeachment stuff getting worse over the last few days, it was to be expected that Trump would cause a diversion.
Now, instead of it just being the Democrats who take the bait and forget all about impeachment, crying "Syria withdrawal booh", he's not only pushed some Republicans to say "booh" too, he's in fact given them an easy tool to test-run their disagreement with the president, for worse things to come. We'll see how that works on their collective courage-to-withstand.
posted by Namlit at 12:35 PM on October 7, 2019 [6 favorites]
Okay. What the actual fuck is going on.
posted by angrycat at 12:36 PM on October 7, 2019 [20 favorites]
posted by angrycat at 12:36 PM on October 7, 2019 [20 favorites]
Mother Jones: Reminder: Trump Has a Massive Conflict of Interest in Turkey.
Not a diversion. Not 3-D chess. It's always about the scam.
posted by JoeZydeco at 12:39 PM on October 7, 2019 [44 favorites]
Not a diversion. Not 3-D chess. It's always about the scam.
posted by JoeZydeco at 12:39 PM on October 7, 2019 [44 favorites]
... I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits ...
This is pretty wild phrasing, even for him.
It's real?!
holy shit
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 12:39 PM on October 7, 2019 [13 favorites]
is anyone working on a Syria/Turkey FPP?
it looks like a post is getting underway at the US Politics FPP Draft page at the MeFi Wiki.
posted by katra at 12:40 PM on October 7, 2019 [8 favorites]
it looks like a post is getting underway at the US Politics FPP Draft page at the MeFi Wiki.
posted by katra at 12:40 PM on October 7, 2019 [8 favorites]
I would guess Defense/Pentagon trying to give their allies/sources/intelligence in the Kurds a chance to hide/escape before whatever is going to go down, goes down.
posted by Harry Caul at 12:44 PM on October 7, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 12:44 PM on October 7, 2019 [4 favorites]
I will predict it here in writing: the House will soon impeach, and the Senate will convict.
Until now Trump was a useful idiot and helpful diversion so the Republican leadership could pursue their long-standing goals. But now, 1) he is actively working against their beliefs & interests, and 2) he is a multiplying force to get the *Democratic* base to turn out.
Mitch McConnell sees that his Senate Majority is at greater risk if Trump stays in office and continues to rile up Democratic turnout. Pence will know to be a do-nothing President through next November, and with Trump gone a big share of voters will breathe a big sigh and revel in the chance to pay less attention. Which will improve Republican changes to keep the Senate.
posted by PhineasGage at 12:59 PM on October 7, 2019 [11 favorites]
Until now Trump was a useful idiot and helpful diversion so the Republican leadership could pursue their long-standing goals. But now, 1) he is actively working against their beliefs & interests, and 2) he is a multiplying force to get the *Democratic* base to turn out.
Mitch McConnell sees that his Senate Majority is at greater risk if Trump stays in office and continues to rile up Democratic turnout. Pence will know to be a do-nothing President through next November, and with Trump gone a big share of voters will breathe a big sigh and revel in the chance to pay less attention. Which will improve Republican changes to keep the Senate.
posted by PhineasGage at 12:59 PM on October 7, 2019 [11 favorites]
Does it feel correct to think of drafting articles of impeachment as a vote of no-confidence?
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:09 PM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:09 PM on October 7, 2019 [1 favorite]
PhineasGage: I agree that Trump is starting to act contrary to the GOP's interests, and he is energizing Democratic voters. The later of the two statements has been that way pretty much since he took the Oath of Office.
I also agree that dealing with Trump now is in the GOP's best interest. Impeachment, with or without removal, subsequent to the primaries leaves the GOP with a damaged candidate heading into the general.
Mitch McConnell sees that his Senate Majority is at greater risk if Trump stays in office and continues to rile up Democratic turnout.
This is the part I'm not seeing yet. We've seen some cracks among the odd senator here and there, but there is no signs McConnell is ready to remove the president. If anything, he's looking to stop impeachment in the Senate: "The way that impeachment stops is with a Senate majority with me as majority leader."
Yes, he's broken with Trump on Turkey, but that's relatively low stakes. I think the only way the Senate votes to remove (if at all) is if Mcconnell fears he'll be voted out of his post. This could change--I didn't think Pelosi would change as she did--but I think there is a long road between here and there.
posted by MrGuilt at 1:09 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
I also agree that dealing with Trump now is in the GOP's best interest. Impeachment, with or without removal, subsequent to the primaries leaves the GOP with a damaged candidate heading into the general.
Mitch McConnell sees that his Senate Majority is at greater risk if Trump stays in office and continues to rile up Democratic turnout.
This is the part I'm not seeing yet. We've seen some cracks among the odd senator here and there, but there is no signs McConnell is ready to remove the president. If anything, he's looking to stop impeachment in the Senate: "The way that impeachment stops is with a Senate majority with me as majority leader."
Yes, he's broken with Trump on Turkey, but that's relatively low stakes. I think the only way the Senate votes to remove (if at all) is if Mcconnell fears he'll be voted out of his post. This could change--I didn't think Pelosi would change as she did--but I think there is a long road between here and there.
posted by MrGuilt at 1:09 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
If anyone's looking for the phase-transition moment when Trump ceased being President and crossed the event horizon to ignominy, it may have been when the Pentagon reversed his orders.
posted by acb at 1:14 PM on October 7, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by acb at 1:14 PM on October 7, 2019 [6 favorites]
Goddammit, this is not a coup.
A coup is when you wake up one morning, and there are armored personnel carriers on your lawn, and the radio is only playing John Philip Sousa marches.
A coup is when the presidential motorcade is diverted to the nearest army base, and the Air Force is bombing Chevy Chase for some reason.
This is a constitutionally-mandated process.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 1:15 PM on October 7, 2019 [90 favorites]
A coup is when you wake up one morning, and there are armored personnel carriers on your lawn, and the radio is only playing John Philip Sousa marches.
A coup is when the presidential motorcade is diverted to the nearest army base, and the Air Force is bombing Chevy Chase for some reason.
This is a constitutionally-mandated process.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 1:15 PM on October 7, 2019 [90 favorites]
MrGuilt, I think you are paying too much attention to public statements by McConnell et al. They ain't going to publicly telegraph their moves either to Trump nor the rest of the most fervid Fox News viewership. But I believe there is quiet understanding in the Senate that as soon as the impeachment articles arrive from the House, the Senate is ready to vote 92-8 or so to convict, and a quiet plan is in place to have federal marshals racing into position to physically put Trump on his last chopper ride immediately.
posted by PhineasGage at 1:16 PM on October 7, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 1:16 PM on October 7, 2019 [8 favorites]
Mod note: Time to make a Syria thread if you want to talk about it. This can't be the place.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 1:22 PM on October 7, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 1:22 PM on October 7, 2019 [5 favorites]
It's all very speculative at this point. My intuition is that the Republican leadership is so tied up in all of this that they will fight the impeachment process at all costs. But an alternative version of that could be that they are so tied up that very soon, they will want to get rid of Trump real fast so the investigations don't go too deep. I don't know which it will be. Not least because everything points to Trump taking all the others with him down in a maniacal revenge drama and they probably know that.
posted by mumimor at 1:23 PM on October 7, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by mumimor at 1:23 PM on October 7, 2019 [4 favorites]
Something I found pretty insightful if you're wondering how Republicans might try to thread the needle with pure bullshit:
@Zeddary: Republicans are more ready to hit Trump over Syria than they are Ukraine because, short of carpet-bombing Cambodia, decisions on troop deployments aren't generally considered impeachable.
They get to criticize him for something that they can't do anything about. That's the dream if you're a Republican dodging impeachment questions the last 3 weeks.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 1:24 PM on October 7, 2019 [30 favorites]
@Zeddary: Republicans are more ready to hit Trump over Syria than they are Ukraine because, short of carpet-bombing Cambodia, decisions on troop deployments aren't generally considered impeachable.
They get to criticize him for something that they can't do anything about. That's the dream if you're a Republican dodging impeachment questions the last 3 weeks.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 1:24 PM on October 7, 2019 [30 favorites]
via Drudge: Pat Robertson ‘Appalled’ By Trump: He ‘Allowed Khashoggi to Be Cut in Pieces,’ May Lose ‘The Mandate of Heaven’ Over Syria
posted by robbyrobs at 1:36 PM on October 7, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by robbyrobs at 1:36 PM on October 7, 2019 [7 favorites]
Pres. Supervillain has the unmatched wisdom tweet covered.
posted by christopherious at 1:56 PM on October 7, 2019 [23 favorites]
posted by christopherious at 1:56 PM on October 7, 2019 [23 favorites]
via Drudge: Pat Robertson ‘Appalled’ By Trump: He ‘Allowed Khashoggi to Be Cut in Pieces,’ May Lose ‘The Mandate of Heaven’ Over Syria
I can't tell if it's more bananas that Pat Robertson is speaking against Trump, or that he's made the wild choice of words that equates Trump with historical emperors of China. The way fascism accumulates cultural concepts from all over the place like a cargo cult to justify their strongman is weird as hell to see. Like, Pat, you're a Christian fundamentalist and there's a buffet table of Christian philosophy justifying the divine right of kings or whatever, what are you doing
posted by jason_steakums at 2:27 PM on October 7, 2019 [54 favorites]
I can't tell if it's more bananas that Pat Robertson is speaking against Trump, or that he's made the wild choice of words that equates Trump with historical emperors of China. The way fascism accumulates cultural concepts from all over the place like a cargo cult to justify their strongman is weird as hell to see. Like, Pat, you're a Christian fundamentalist and there's a buffet table of Christian philosophy justifying the divine right of kings or whatever, what are you doing
posted by jason_steakums at 2:27 PM on October 7, 2019 [54 favorites]
Hrm, "can two things be more bananas than each other?" is yet another thing I didn't expect to be worrying about when I thought ahead to middle age.
posted by Horkus at 2:34 PM on October 7, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by Horkus at 2:34 PM on October 7, 2019 [17 favorites]
Mod note: A few comments deleted; totally get where the worry comes from, but just the same, let's keep a lid on "what if this standing order about disaster relief means something more" unless there's more to go on.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 4:44 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 4:44 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
John Dowd, erstwhile Trump lawyer now representing Giuliani's associates, writes to HPSCI to let them know that his clients won't be appearing or providing documents this week as requested.
The letter itself is written in Comic Sans.
posted by un petit cadeau at 4:49 PM on October 7, 2019 [38 favorites]
The letter itself is written in Comic Sans.
posted by un petit cadeau at 4:49 PM on October 7, 2019 [38 favorites]
But I believe there is quiet understanding in the Senate that as soon as the impeachment articles arrive from the House, the Senate is ready to vote 92-8 or so to convict,
What, pray tell, makes you believe this?
posted by Big Al 8000 at 5:05 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
What, pray tell, makes you believe this?
posted by Big Al 8000 at 5:05 PM on October 7, 2019 [3 favorites]
WSJ, House Lawyers to Ask Sondland About Efforts to Sway Ukrainians
Mr. Giuliani had said he met the previous week with a top aide to Mr. Zelensky. After that meeting, Mr. Sondland and Kurt Volker, U.S. special envoy for Ukraine negotiations, learned that Ukraine was considering issuing a statement on investigations they would pursue according to text messages released by House lawmakers last week.posted by zachlipton at 5:14 PM on October 7, 2019 [4 favorites]
When Mr. Volker and Mr. Sondland discussed the draft statement with Mr. Giuliani, the lawyer asked that it specifically name Burisma Group, a Ukrainian gas company where Mr. Biden’s son had once sat on the board, according to a person familiar with Mr. Volker’s closed-door testimony to House lawmakers last week.
A draft statement subsequently circulated by Mr. Volker included a line that Ukraine investigate “all available facts and episodes, including those involving Burisma and the 2016 U.S. elections.”
...
That statement was ultimately scuttled over concerns in Ukraine about being perceived as wading into U.S. elections, among other matters, according to the person familiar with Mr. Volker’s testimony to House lawmakers. But Mr. Sondland and Bill Taylor, a top U.S. diplomat in Kyiv, continued to discuss the possibility of having Mr. Zelensky give a media interview in which he would make similar commitments about Ukrainian investigations, according to the person familiar with Mr. Volker’s testimony.
The letter itself is written in Comic Sans.Not the first time.
posted by christopherious at 5:24 PM on October 7, 2019 [6 favorites]
I can't tell if it's more bananas that Pat Robertson is speaking against Trump, or that he's made the wild choice of words that equates Trump with historical emperors of China.
Robertson's audience is septuagenarian low-information evangelicals with perfect attendance at every election. They are ...there's not an ideal way to put this... highly likely to be struggling with age-related cognitive impairment of some kind. Part of what makes Robertson effective at what he does is his tendency to slowly build up narrative 'ramps' for his audience, and do so in such a way that they can be easily reversed with a "God spoke to me" or simply never revisited. So in a sense this is a tell: Robertson has been doing this long enough to know that if things implode for the administration then they will do so all at once, and he's making sure his audience is primed for a "Trump turned his back on God" narrative twist. This week's flavor is "when he abandoned our allies in the fight against ISIS [MUSLIMS]."
Plus a "Deus Vult" reference would come off as too Catholic for his audience.
It's hardly conclusive and I wouldn't bank on it, but it is interesting to see him doing some political hurricane prep.
posted by Ryvar at 6:47 PM on October 7, 2019 [28 favorites]
Robertson's audience is septuagenarian low-information evangelicals with perfect attendance at every election. They are ...there's not an ideal way to put this... highly likely to be struggling with age-related cognitive impairment of some kind. Part of what makes Robertson effective at what he does is his tendency to slowly build up narrative 'ramps' for his audience, and do so in such a way that they can be easily reversed with a "God spoke to me" or simply never revisited. So in a sense this is a tell: Robertson has been doing this long enough to know that if things implode for the administration then they will do so all at once, and he's making sure his audience is primed for a "Trump turned his back on God" narrative twist. This week's flavor is "when he abandoned our allies in the fight against ISIS [MUSLIMS]."
Plus a "Deus Vult" reference would come off as too Catholic for his audience.
It's hardly conclusive and I wouldn't bank on it, but it is interesting to see him doing some political hurricane prep.
posted by Ryvar at 6:47 PM on October 7, 2019 [28 favorites]
Volker has resigned as executive director of the McCain Institute due to all the attention he's getting over Ukraine.
posted by azpenguin at 6:53 PM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by azpenguin at 6:53 PM on October 7, 2019 [2 favorites]
jason_steakums: Like, Pat, you're a Christian fundamentalist and there's a buffet table of Christian philosophy justifying the divine right of kings or whatever, what are you doing
The Mandate of Heaven allows for violent revolution when the ruler fails to be righteous; the divine right of kings does not, so far as I know. The divine right of kings is a bit of a dead end when you want to talk about tossing a leader.
posted by clawsoon at 7:28 PM on October 7, 2019 [11 favorites]
The Mandate of Heaven allows for violent revolution when the ruler fails to be righteous; the divine right of kings does not, so far as I know. The divine right of kings is a bit of a dead end when you want to talk about tossing a leader.
posted by clawsoon at 7:28 PM on October 7, 2019 [11 favorites]
They are ...there's not an ideal way to put this... highly likely to be struggling with age-related cognitive impairment of some kind.
When you feel the need to preface a statement with something like "there's not an ideal way to put this", that's a hint that there's a bigger problem with what you're saying than just how you're saying it. Evangelical Christians in the United States, regardless of their age or their neurological condition, have had decades of practice with cognitive dissonance and failure to challenge their intellectual and political leaders (e.g. their mostly-complete about-face on Jim Crow), so it's not necessary to appeal to ageism and ableism to explain Pat Robertson's actions.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 7:38 PM on October 7, 2019 [16 favorites]
When you feel the need to preface a statement with something like "there's not an ideal way to put this", that's a hint that there's a bigger problem with what you're saying than just how you're saying it. Evangelical Christians in the United States, regardless of their age or their neurological condition, have had decades of practice with cognitive dissonance and failure to challenge their intellectual and political leaders (e.g. their mostly-complete about-face on Jim Crow), so it's not necessary to appeal to ageism and ableism to explain Pat Robertson's actions.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 7:38 PM on October 7, 2019 [16 favorites]
so it's not necessary to appeal to ageism and ableism to explain Pat Robertson's actions
Robertson’s grift is explicitly predatory upon people fighting hopeless battles against senility, Alzheimer’s, dementia, and related cognitive impairment from medications prescribed by doctors who regard assisted living or nursing homes as hospice. Watching the heartbreaking impact of his bullshit on many, many people I care about dealing with those issues is my lived experience from very early childhood. I was trying to phrase that as delicately as I could without turning it into a major thread derail, and my caveat was because I knew it would probably fail somebody’s purity test, but that was the best I could do without making a mess of my comment. I’m sorry if it wasn’t good enough for you.
posted by Ryvar at 7:51 PM on October 7, 2019 [71 favorites]
Robertson’s grift is explicitly predatory upon people fighting hopeless battles against senility, Alzheimer’s, dementia, and related cognitive impairment from medications prescribed by doctors who regard assisted living or nursing homes as hospice. Watching the heartbreaking impact of his bullshit on many, many people I care about dealing with those issues is my lived experience from very early childhood. I was trying to phrase that as delicately as I could without turning it into a major thread derail, and my caveat was because I knew it would probably fail somebody’s purity test, but that was the best I could do without making a mess of my comment. I’m sorry if it wasn’t good enough for you.
posted by Ryvar at 7:51 PM on October 7, 2019 [71 favorites]
it's not necessary to appeal to ageism and ableism to explain Pat Robertson's actions.
Similarly: Why dismissing President Trump as mad or ill is a major mistake (Byrd McDaniel and Paul M. Renfro, WaPo Perspective)
posted by katra at 8:11 PM on October 7, 2019 [21 favorites]
Similarly: Why dismissing President Trump as mad or ill is a major mistake (Byrd McDaniel and Paul M. Renfro, WaPo Perspective)
[...] while critics often denounce Trump’s policies, his flouting of norms and his personal tweet-driven style as products of his perceived deficiencies, [his] racist appeals, praise for dictators, alleged corruption and support for right-wing conspiracy theories are not mental illnesses. Casting Trump as ill or disabled therefore has the twin effects of minimizing his ideological motivations and portraying all people with mental illness as harmful or deficient.Ryvar, I'm empathetic to your point about the potential impact on vulnerable people, and especially your personal experience. As someone with a frontal lobe injury, I'm also sensitive to broad generalizations, and I also don't want to get into a major derail over this issue. However, I think the tendency to ascribe mental health issues and neurological deficits to Trump comes up often enough that I would hope that we can at least consider how these armchair diagnoses can reinforce stigma and stereotypes that can be harmful to a large population of people, many of whom do not support Trump at all.
Indeed, a tendency to focus on Trump’s supposedly deficient body and mind — apparent in discussions of not only his mental capacity but also his weight, hair or even spray tan — only reinforces the stigmas facing those who’ve suffered most acutely under Trump’s rule: namely women, people of color, LGBTQ people and people with disabilities. By pathologizing and body-shaming the president, many of his critics harness and mobilize deeply entrenched prejudices rather than challenge them.
posted by katra at 8:11 PM on October 7, 2019 [21 favorites]
Mod note: One comment deleted; points made, let's please leave it there and steer back to impeachment stuff in this thread.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 8:26 PM on October 7, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 8:26 PM on October 7, 2019 [7 favorites]
NYT: We surveyed former White House chiefs of staff under Presidents Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. None of them recalled a time when the White House solicited or accepted political help from a foreign country. > ‘We Absolutely Could Not Do That’: When Seeking Foreign Help Was Out of the Question (NYT) "and all said they would have considered the very idea out of bounds."
posted by katra at 8:35 PM on October 7, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by katra at 8:35 PM on October 7, 2019 [16 favorites]
A new poll from the Washington Post has support for the impeachment inquiry and removal from office shifting dramatically in favor. 58% support the inquiry, 49% removal from office. Even republican voter support swinging in favor. Link.
posted by lazaruslong at 5:30 AM on October 8, 2019 [31 favorites]
posted by lazaruslong at 5:30 AM on October 8, 2019 [31 favorites]
Well guess what... Sondland is not even going to show up today!
Breaking News, NYT: Witness in Trump-Ukraine Matter Ordered Not to Speak in Impeachment Inquiry
Breaking News, NYT: Witness in Trump-Ukraine Matter Ordered Not to Speak in Impeachment Inquiry
The Trump administration directed a top American diplomat involved in its pressure campaign on Ukraine not to appear Tuesday morning for a scheduled interview in the House’s impeachment inquiry.posted by bitteschoen at 6:01 AM on October 8, 2019 [19 favorites]
The decision to block Gordon D. Sondland, the United States ambassador to the European Union, from speaking with investigators for three House committees is certain to provoke an immediate conflict with potentially profound consequences for the White House and President Trump. House Democrats have repeatedly warned that if the administration tries to interfere with their investigation, it will be construed as obstruction, a charge they see as potentially worthy of impeachment.
Trump has ordered Sondland not to speak to the House committees investigating the Ukraine issue, something that the House has previously warned would be treated as obstruction, so... I guess we find out if a Congressional committee can actually compel someone to testify in an investigation, and what the exact mechanics of that would look like.
Also isn't it getting crowded down there under that bus?
posted by Kadin2048 at 6:02 AM on October 8, 2019 [22 favorites]
Also isn't it getting crowded down there under that bus?
posted by Kadin2048 at 6:02 AM on October 8, 2019 [22 favorites]
So it turns out that Sondland was a literal Leverage villain.
posted by Etrigan at 6:18 AM on October 8, 2019 [31 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 6:18 AM on October 8, 2019 [31 favorites]
Maybe, and I hope they do take the relevant steps to compel his testimony. But the way the dems in the committees have framed this kind of interference by the white house is that it's evidence of obstruction.
It's a little bit like the FBI's common strategy to compel cooperation from witnesses. It's illegal to lie to the FBI so the FBI just needs to have evidence that the witness lied and they can be charged with that crime. But they can helps themselves by cooperating. In essence, they get to choose between going to jail for the crimes the FBI was initially investigating or lying to the FBI.
Here Trump has two choices, be impeached for whatever the investigation uncovers or be impeached for obstructing that investigation*. That doesn't really require that the house do anything to compel anyone's testimony. And if they do attempt to compel that testimony, even if it's ultimately fruitless, it drives home the point that the administration is going to extreme lengths to hide it's maleficence.
*This of course assumes that both articles of impeachment are equally as likely to result in successfully removing Trump from office.
posted by VTX at 6:26 AM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
It's a little bit like the FBI's common strategy to compel cooperation from witnesses. It's illegal to lie to the FBI so the FBI just needs to have evidence that the witness lied and they can be charged with that crime. But they can helps themselves by cooperating. In essence, they get to choose between going to jail for the crimes the FBI was initially investigating or lying to the FBI.
Here Trump has two choices, be impeached for whatever the investigation uncovers or be impeached for obstructing that investigation*. That doesn't really require that the house do anything to compel anyone's testimony. And if they do attempt to compel that testimony, even if it's ultimately fruitless, it drives home the point that the administration is going to extreme lengths to hide it's maleficence.
*This of course assumes that both articles of impeachment are equally as likely to result in successfully removing Trump from office.
posted by VTX at 6:26 AM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
The people being interviewed could show up and say nothing, they could show up and plead the fifth. They could comply without assisting, and yet, this is the path the White House is taking.
posted by kokaku at 6:51 AM on October 8, 2019 [22 favorites]
posted by kokaku at 6:51 AM on October 8, 2019 [22 favorites]
New conservative defense for Trump: He was wrong on Ukraine, but impeachment is too icky (Matthew Rozsa, Salon)
Tucker Carlson, Neil Patel and Jonah Goldberg won't defend Trump, but claim impeachment would be terribleposted by ZeusHumms at 7:02 AM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
The people being interviewed could show up and say nothing, they could show up and plead the fifth. They could comply without assisting, and yet, this is the path the White House is taking.
My guess is Trump is forcing a confrontation earlier in the process. He's likely betting this will go to the courts (rather than Congress ramping up a Sargent at Arms), at which point:
posted by MrGuilt at 7:03 AM on October 8, 2019 [7 favorites]
My guess is Trump is forcing a confrontation earlier in the process. He's likely betting this will go to the courts (rather than Congress ramping up a Sargent at Arms), at which point:
- He runs out the clock, so the election is in the rear view mirror before this is settled and moves forward.
- Whatever interference he's orchestrating gets an opportunity to take place.
- Moves the narrative from a true crime story involving a transcript and underhanded dealings to a technical issue around Pelosi compelling testimony.
- Once in the courts, given the nature of appointments, it's more likely to get decided in his favor, stopping the whole thing.
posted by MrGuilt at 7:03 AM on October 8, 2019 [7 favorites]
My concern about the current impeachment iteration is that Pence gets his opportunity to stand as his own person (which sets himself up well for the 2024 election); Trump gets reelected in 2020, ; and the impeachment effort fails. Again. For the Nth time.
Oh, all the gun control stuff that was to prevent carnage?
Seriously showing how the mind set of the early 21st century lacks a temporal focus.
Kinda hoping these things don't align this way; but at the present pace; these events are being set up to occur.
posted by buzzman at 7:08 AM on October 8, 2019
Oh, all the gun control stuff that was to prevent carnage?
Seriously showing how the mind set of the early 21st century lacks a temporal focus.
Kinda hoping these things don't align this way; but at the present pace; these events are being set up to occur.
posted by buzzman at 7:08 AM on October 8, 2019
Trump has ordered Sondland not to speak to the House committees investigating the Ukraine issue, something that the House has previously warned would be treated as obstruction, so... I guess we find out if a Congressional committee can actually compel someone to testify in an investigation, and what the exact mechanics of that would look like.
The House has the power of the purse. Can they put language in the next budget stating that Executive Branch employees immediately forego their salary if they refuse to appear before a congressional committee or comply with a subpoena?
If memory serves me correctly, Sondland is a wealthy Trump donor, so it wouldn't likely impoverish him, but it would be something.
posted by Gelatin at 7:09 AM on October 8, 2019 [3 favorites]
The House has the power of the purse. Can they put language in the next budget stating that Executive Branch employees immediately forego their salary if they refuse to appear before a congressional committee or comply with a subpoena?
If memory serves me correctly, Sondland is a wealthy Trump donor, so it wouldn't likely impoverish him, but it would be something.
posted by Gelatin at 7:09 AM on October 8, 2019 [3 favorites]
I think we’re reaching a point where the House should have the Sargeant at Arms arrest some people. Yes, this hasn’t been done in a long time, and yes, the Trumpists will use that as an excuse to scream “coup!” But these guys aren’t going to play by the rules unless they’re given no other choice.
posted by azpenguin at 7:10 AM on October 8, 2019 [39 favorites]
posted by azpenguin at 7:10 AM on October 8, 2019 [39 favorites]
Tucker Carlson, Neil Patel and Jonah Goldberg won't defend Trump, but claim impeachment would be terrible
That this trio is making this claim reveals the fear that impeachment would be terrible for the Republicans (though David Brooks gave the game away already last week).
posted by Gelatin at 7:11 AM on October 8, 2019 [9 favorites]
That this trio is making this claim reveals the fear that impeachment would be terrible for the Republicans (though David Brooks gave the game away already last week).
posted by Gelatin at 7:11 AM on October 8, 2019 [9 favorites]
Mitch McConnell's new Halloween role: Gravedigger of impeachment (Sophia Tesfaye, Salon)
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:16 AM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
Yet as Trump attempts to normalize brazen corruption and calling on an ever-growing list of political opponents to be impeached in his stead, he has no real reason to fear a Senate trial. McConnell likely sees his pledge on [blocking Trump's] impeachment as his best bet to preserve his own political power. Like nearly every Republican senator up for re-election next year, his path to remaining in office is through Trump’s voters.Emphasis mine.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:16 AM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
Been following news and politics for 20+ years. No expert; but I've never seen or read Sondland's name before.
He's probably an example of giving people something else to look at; being used to dissipate any concentration in any one area.
Three or four days ago it was Rick Perry.
About the time the 'impeachment' involves some 20 30 or more people; all energies will become as a drop of water in an ocean.
The 'R's did this to the 'D's during the Clinton era; nothing became of it. Ok, a lot of anger and time waste. Angry 'R's back in the day, lots of time waste for the 'D's as they had to rally against Clinton's impeachment.
Here in another few days; we'll have another newer and previously unheard of gov't official being brought into the 'impeachment'.
So goes our news cycle.
posted by buzzman at 7:28 AM on October 8, 2019 [4 favorites]
He's probably an example of giving people something else to look at; being used to dissipate any concentration in any one area.
Three or four days ago it was Rick Perry.
About the time the 'impeachment' involves some 20 30 or more people; all energies will become as a drop of water in an ocean.
The 'R's did this to the 'D's during the Clinton era; nothing became of it. Ok, a lot of anger and time waste. Angry 'R's back in the day, lots of time waste for the 'D's as they had to rally against Clinton's impeachment.
Here in another few days; we'll have another newer and previously unheard of gov't official being brought into the 'impeachment'.
So goes our news cycle.
posted by buzzman at 7:28 AM on October 8, 2019 [4 favorites]
From the Washington Post poll posted by lazaruslong, above:
I'm with those who see the Republican critique of Trump in Syria as in line with their testing a political narrative for removing Trump. If they critique Trump for not being macho and militaristic enough, maybe it means the base forgives them for removing him. Not that I think they're gung-ho for impeachment by any means, but surely they recognize the dilemma they're in, enough to be deliberating a route towards caving that looks a little bit less... cave-y.
posted by rorgy at 7:29 AM on October 8, 2019 [29 favorites]
Among Republicans, roughly 7 in 10 do not support the inquiry but almost 3 in 10 do, and almost one-fifth of Republicans say they favor a vote recommending his removal.This is a massive swing in favor of impeachment. Their numbers started at, what, something like 3% even wanting impeachment? 3-in-10 is not brilliantly high, but that's after just two weeks of this procedure.
I'm with those who see the Republican critique of Trump in Syria as in line with their testing a political narrative for removing Trump. If they critique Trump for not being macho and militaristic enough, maybe it means the base forgives them for removing him. Not that I think they're gung-ho for impeachment by any means, but surely they recognize the dilemma they're in, enough to be deliberating a route towards caving that looks a little bit less... cave-y.
posted by rorgy at 7:29 AM on October 8, 2019 [29 favorites]
The people being interviewed could show up and say nothing, they could show up and plead the fifth. They could comply without assisting, and yet, this is the path the White House is taking.
The WH's path makes sense if you don't trust the potential witness not to sing like a bird the second they get in front of the House. Trump ordered Sondland not to appear, which he can (apparently, according to whatever insane legal theory they're notionally operating under) do, because Sondland is an Executive-branch employee and his chain of command runs up to the President. Sondland, per his lawyers, claims to want to testify.
Now, Sondland could just resign and then testify; we've seen that happen with Volker and a bunch of House Democrats have called on Sondland to do just that. I'm not sure why Sondland wouldn't; it's not like he really needs that sweet, sweet government pension to keep himself off a cat food diet in his old age.
Personally though, I think Sondland is crooked AF, and the combination of not resigning combined with Trump's "order" not to appear is designed to give him some plausible deniability with both sides. He can claim to Republicans that he played ball and didn't squeal (at least, until he does, because that's the post-Trump MO for basically everyone who's worked for him), while claiming to Democrats that he wanted to turn his coat but wasn't allowed to because of... whatever the consequences would be if he ignored Trump's order. Getting fired, I guess? I don't think there could be any criminal or civil liability there, but maybe someone more knowledgable can chime in.
Anyway, the dude is probably going to learn why it's a bad idea to straddle a barbed wire fence while someone pulls on each leg, if that's really his strategy.
The odd thing about Trump's entire delay-delay-delay strategy is that it isn't really that good a strategy. The more time passes, the less time there would be for a hypothetical pro-Trump primary challenger to appear and threaten vulnerable Republican Senators. And that's really Trump's only hold on the Senate: he can threaten to withdraw support and back a dark-horse primary challenger from the right. But in a few more months that threat won't be as serious; even with Trump's backing, a serious challenger would need time to put a campaign together. As it gets closer to the election, what is Trump going to threaten to do—campaign for a Democrat?
I think this was at the heart of Pelosi's reluctance to go down the impeachment road: she wanted to wait until closer to the election so it would be easier to get Republicans on board. The longer the impeachment game takes, the more advantageous it is to Democrats, not Republicans.
posted by Kadin2048 at 7:46 AM on October 8, 2019 [26 favorites]
The WH's path makes sense if you don't trust the potential witness not to sing like a bird the second they get in front of the House. Trump ordered Sondland not to appear, which he can (apparently, according to whatever insane legal theory they're notionally operating under) do, because Sondland is an Executive-branch employee and his chain of command runs up to the President. Sondland, per his lawyers, claims to want to testify.
Now, Sondland could just resign and then testify; we've seen that happen with Volker and a bunch of House Democrats have called on Sondland to do just that. I'm not sure why Sondland wouldn't; it's not like he really needs that sweet, sweet government pension to keep himself off a cat food diet in his old age.
Personally though, I think Sondland is crooked AF, and the combination of not resigning combined with Trump's "order" not to appear is designed to give him some plausible deniability with both sides. He can claim to Republicans that he played ball and didn't squeal (at least, until he does, because that's the post-Trump MO for basically everyone who's worked for him), while claiming to Democrats that he wanted to turn his coat but wasn't allowed to because of... whatever the consequences would be if he ignored Trump's order. Getting fired, I guess? I don't think there could be any criminal or civil liability there, but maybe someone more knowledgable can chime in.
Anyway, the dude is probably going to learn why it's a bad idea to straddle a barbed wire fence while someone pulls on each leg, if that's really his strategy.
The odd thing about Trump's entire delay-delay-delay strategy is that it isn't really that good a strategy. The more time passes, the less time there would be for a hypothetical pro-Trump primary challenger to appear and threaten vulnerable Republican Senators. And that's really Trump's only hold on the Senate: he can threaten to withdraw support and back a dark-horse primary challenger from the right. But in a few more months that threat won't be as serious; even with Trump's backing, a serious challenger would need time to put a campaign together. As it gets closer to the election, what is Trump going to threaten to do—campaign for a Democrat?
I think this was at the heart of Pelosi's reluctance to go down the impeachment road: she wanted to wait until closer to the election so it would be easier to get Republicans on board. The longer the impeachment game takes, the more advantageous it is to Democrats, not Republicans.
posted by Kadin2048 at 7:46 AM on October 8, 2019 [26 favorites]
China rejects Trump’s call to investigate Biden and son (Politico)
“China has long pursued the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries,” foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Tuesday. “We have no intention of intervening in the domestic affairs of the United States. Our position is consistent and clear.” [...]posted by katra at 8:19 AM on October 8, 2019 [20 favorites]
Taoran Notes, the social media account affiliated with state-run Economic Daily, warned that remarks about China meddling in U.S. politics would complicate the trade talks.
“Such acts are nothing but political blackmail,” the commentary said. “They know China’s long-held stance of not interfering in other nations’ affairs, so [some people in the U.S.] unscrupulously manipulated related issues, adding further complications to the negotiations.”
And so the United States has now ceded the moral high ground of international relations to China. Their "stance of not interfering in other nations' affairs" is of course as much a political fiction as is the US's, with China having aggressively expanded its sphere of influence in sub-Saharan Africa. China's leadership has been pursuing a soft power imperialism that adopts many of the successful strategies of the 20th century US, and this is a huge gift for them and their goal of economic hegemony. Every one of these stupid little games Trump plays as part of his extended banana republic dictator cosplay opens a soft power vacuum that the Chinese government is happy to move into.
posted by biogeo at 8:59 AM on October 8, 2019 [53 favorites]
posted by biogeo at 8:59 AM on October 8, 2019 [53 favorites]
WaPo now reporting that Schiff, Engel and Cummings (their committees, actually) will issue a subpoena for Sondland. Developing.
Also: Hooray
posted by martin q blank at 9:10 AM on October 8, 2019 [32 favorites]
Also: Hooray
posted by martin q blank at 9:10 AM on October 8, 2019 [32 favorites]
It appears Romny is trying to lead the GOP Senate to impeach. What struck me was the last quote in the article:
Second, between this and the shift in polling on impeachment among Republicans makes me wonder if this is not the way out. Include Syria/Turkey/Kurds in the articles of impeachment, and the GOP may have a slightly larger fig leaf with their base.
posted by MrGuilt at 9:49 AM on October 8, 2019 [28 favorites]
“The Syria decision is a much bigger deal,” another former West Wing official said. “No one on the inside can hold Trump accountable. The Senate Republicans are the only check on power right now.”First, it's about damn time Senate Republicans realize this.
Second, between this and the shift in polling on impeachment among Republicans makes me wonder if this is not the way out. Include Syria/Turkey/Kurds in the articles of impeachment, and the GOP may have a slightly larger fig leaf with their base.
posted by MrGuilt at 9:49 AM on October 8, 2019 [28 favorites]
NYT: White House Signals It Won’t Cooperate With Impeachment Inquiry
"Mr. Trump, defiant as investigators dig further into his efforts to pressure Ukraine to find dirt on his political rivals, declared the inquiry illegitimate in a signal that he plans to stonewall Congress, an act that could itself build the case for charging him in an impeachment proceeding with obstruction."
"House Democrats quickly said they would regard the president’s stance as amounting to obstruction. Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said the administration’s refusal to allow Mr. Sondland to appear was 'strong evidence' of 'obstruction of the constitutional functions of Congress, a coequal branch of government.'"
"Trump administration lawyers and aides have spent days puzzling over how to respond to the impeachment inquiry, and the abrupt move suggested that the president’s team has calculated that he is better off risking the House’s ire — and even an impeachment article focused on the obstruction — than setting a precedent for cooperation with an investigation they have strenuously argued is illegitimate.
The strategy, if it holds, carries substantial risk to the White House. Privately, some Republicans had urged the White House to allow witnesses like Mr. Sondland to appear, in order to deflate Democratic accusations of a cover-up and offer a public rationale for the president’s actions toward Ukraine. Now, some Republicans worry, Democrats have more fodder to argue publicly that Mr. Trump has something to hide."
posted by jocelmeow at 9:54 AM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
"Mr. Trump, defiant as investigators dig further into his efforts to pressure Ukraine to find dirt on his political rivals, declared the inquiry illegitimate in a signal that he plans to stonewall Congress, an act that could itself build the case for charging him in an impeachment proceeding with obstruction."
"House Democrats quickly said they would regard the president’s stance as amounting to obstruction. Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said the administration’s refusal to allow Mr. Sondland to appear was 'strong evidence' of 'obstruction of the constitutional functions of Congress, a coequal branch of government.'"
"Trump administration lawyers and aides have spent days puzzling over how to respond to the impeachment inquiry, and the abrupt move suggested that the president’s team has calculated that he is better off risking the House’s ire — and even an impeachment article focused on the obstruction — than setting a precedent for cooperation with an investigation they have strenuously argued is illegitimate.
The strategy, if it holds, carries substantial risk to the White House. Privately, some Republicans had urged the White House to allow witnesses like Mr. Sondland to appear, in order to deflate Democratic accusations of a cover-up and offer a public rationale for the president’s actions toward Ukraine. Now, some Republicans worry, Democrats have more fodder to argue publicly that Mr. Trump has something to hide."
posted by jocelmeow at 9:54 AM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
Trump did promise to build a (stone)wall.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:00 AM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:00 AM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
Guardian: Rudy Giuliani expressed openness to appearing before the Senate judiciary committee after the panel’s Republican chairman, Lindsey Graham, invited the president’s personal lawyer to discuss “corruption in Ukraine.”
posted by katra at 10:01 AM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
The former New York mayor told CNN: “Love Lindsey, but I am still a lawyer and I will have to deal with privilege.”Reminder: Giuliani Cannot Rely on Attorney-Client Privilege to Avoid Congressional Testimony (John E. Bies, Lawfare)
But Giuliani added: “Given the nature of his invitation about my concerns I might be able to do it without discussing privileged information.”
posted by katra at 10:01 AM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
Include Syria/Turkey/Kurds in the articles of impeachment, and the GOP may have a slightly larger fig leaf with their base.
I'm skeptical, and I think if anything it might be the other way around. The President has a great deal of latitude as Commander-in-Chief of the military. If Trump had done nothing wrong other than the sudden withdrawal of troops from Syria, people would still be grumbling about abandoning our ally, but no one would be talking impeachment on that alone.
However, if Senate Republicans are upset by the withdrawal but know they can't justify impeachment on those grounds, they might discover a newfound respect for Congress as a co-equal branch of government, and now find Trump's defiance of Congressional subpoenas to be impeachment-worthy.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:03 AM on October 8, 2019 [9 favorites]
I'm skeptical, and I think if anything it might be the other way around. The President has a great deal of latitude as Commander-in-Chief of the military. If Trump had done nothing wrong other than the sudden withdrawal of troops from Syria, people would still be grumbling about abandoning our ally, but no one would be talking impeachment on that alone.
However, if Senate Republicans are upset by the withdrawal but know they can't justify impeachment on those grounds, they might discover a newfound respect for Congress as a co-equal branch of government, and now find Trump's defiance of Congressional subpoenas to be impeachment-worthy.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:03 AM on October 8, 2019 [9 favorites]
Giving the Medal of Freedom to Edwin Meese III at this moment is certainly a choice.
posted by jocelmeow at 10:15 AM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by jocelmeow at 10:15 AM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
Giuliani Cannot Rely on Attorney-Client Privilege to Avoid Congressional Testimony
I mean, it's nice to think that, but the unfortunate lesson that still hasn't really sunk in for congress is that it doesn't matter what the law says, it only matters what Trump and his cronies can get away with. Trump has been demonstrably making up the rules for some time now, but in the absence of an authority actually stepping in and making him stop doing so, whatever privilege Trump claims and isn't challenged on is de facto his.
posted by tocts at 10:29 AM on October 8, 2019 [34 favorites]
I mean, it's nice to think that, but the unfortunate lesson that still hasn't really sunk in for congress is that it doesn't matter what the law says, it only matters what Trump and his cronies can get away with. Trump has been demonstrably making up the rules for some time now, but in the absence of an authority actually stepping in and making him stop doing so, whatever privilege Trump claims and isn't challenged on is de facto his.
posted by tocts at 10:29 AM on October 8, 2019 [34 favorites]
I still have faith in the ability of Congress to eventually compel testimony and/or use noncompliance as further evidence of obstruction, but (Vanity Fair),
posted by katra at 10:47 AM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
Barb McQuade, a former U.S. attorney in Michigan, cites a 1799 federal law. “There is a statute known as the Logan Act,” McQuade says. “It’s of unknown legal validity, because it hasn’t been used in 200 years. But the idea behind it is we don’t want private citizens out there negotiating with foreign governments on behalf of the United States. No one has elected you, you don’t have the authority to do it. So Giuliani is at risk of criminal exposure. The bigger issue is that even if you can’t charge President Trump with a crime, because he’s a sitting president, you could charge Giuliani with a crime if he has conspired with the president to extort the Ukrainians. Giuliani would be the president’s agent in this abuse of power.”JustSecurity: "Witnesses may assert the Fifth Amendment privilege whether the subpoena originates from a congressional inquiry"
posted by katra at 10:47 AM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
This fresh CNN piece fills in a lot of details about the Ukraine call:
Where was Trump? In his private quarters in the residence, apparently alone.
Who else was on the line? Mike Pompeo; Tim Morrison (NSC senior director for Europe and Russia); Rob Blair (national security aide to Mick Mulvaney*); Keith Kellogg (national security adviser to Pence); Alexander Vindman (NSC Ukraine expert); a State Department interpreter fluent in Ukrainian providing real-time translation; and a duty officer from the Situation Room who took notes that would later be paired with a log of the call using voice recognition software to put together a rough transcript.
Who was responsible for having the call summary moved into the code-word classified system? John Eisenberg, the top lawyer on the National Security Council, gave the order, and it was carried out by a different lawyer for the NSC and “council officials.”
Who saw the call summary? Vindman (the NSC director responsible for Ukraine), the NSA, deputy NSA, members of the NSC’s executive secretariat, NSC lawyers, John Bolton, and Bolton’s deputy Charlie Kupperman. (We know from prior reporting that a deputy for Pence and perhaps Pence himself also read the summary.)
*the piece claims that Mulvaney was left out of the loop, but this seems unlikely to me if his aide was on the call
posted by sallybrown at 10:51 AM on October 8, 2019 [31 favorites]
Where was Trump? In his private quarters in the residence, apparently alone.
Who else was on the line? Mike Pompeo; Tim Morrison (NSC senior director for Europe and Russia); Rob Blair (national security aide to Mick Mulvaney*); Keith Kellogg (national security adviser to Pence); Alexander Vindman (NSC Ukraine expert); a State Department interpreter fluent in Ukrainian providing real-time translation; and a duty officer from the Situation Room who took notes that would later be paired with a log of the call using voice recognition software to put together a rough transcript.
Who was responsible for having the call summary moved into the code-word classified system? John Eisenberg, the top lawyer on the National Security Council, gave the order, and it was carried out by a different lawyer for the NSC and “council officials.”
Who saw the call summary? Vindman (the NSC director responsible for Ukraine), the NSA, deputy NSA, members of the NSC’s executive secretariat, NSC lawyers, John Bolton, and Bolton’s deputy Charlie Kupperman. (We know from prior reporting that a deputy for Pence and perhaps Pence himself also read the summary.)
*the piece claims that Mulvaney was left out of the loop, but this seems unlikely to me if his aide was on the call
posted by sallybrown at 10:51 AM on October 8, 2019 [31 favorites]
I've been wondering for a couple weeks now why no one has mentioned the Logan Act.
posted by nickmark at 10:58 AM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by nickmark at 10:58 AM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
and a duty officer from the Situation Room who took notes that would later be paired with a log of the call using voice recognition software to put together a rough transcript.
Wasn’t a fed employee mentioned in these threads just last week stating that voice transcription software would NEVER be used in these circumstances? Cuz it sounds a lot like there are tapes (oh lawdy).
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 11:29 AM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
Wasn’t a fed employee mentioned in these threads just last week stating that voice transcription software would NEVER be used in these circumstances? Cuz it sounds a lot like there are tapes (oh lawdy).
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 11:29 AM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
A few days ago I caught a good chunk of the "Meanwhile in Ukraine" radio program from On the Media. It's really amazing, about 26 minutes long and worth checking out for a deep look into the skulduggery. It left me feeling cautiously optimistic that a few people are going to face justice on this.
posted by exogenous at 11:35 AM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by exogenous at 11:35 AM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
I made a quantitative analysis of the Ukraine call summary just to see what it would show. Take these as approximate, some classifications were judgment calls and some sentences mixed praise of one thing and insults of others.
Trump: 54 sentences, including single word exclamations.
Trump: pleasantries and the single word exclamations: 8 sentences.
Trump praising Zelensky and or Ukraine: 14 sentences.
Trump praising U.S. actions in Ukraine: 3 sentences.
Trump insulting European (mostly Merkel) actions in Ukraine: 5 sentences.
Trump asking for a favor regarding Biden / investigations: 24 sentences.
Zelensky covered more ground. 62 sentences.
Zelensky pleasantries: 5 sentences.
Zelensky praising Trump: 7 sentences and 4 half-sentences.
Zelensky wanting to be friends with U.S. and Trump specifically: 14 sentences.
Zelensky mentioning defense, requesting Javelins: 2 sentences (followed by Trump asking for a favor).
Zelensky responding to Trump's request for investigation by generally pledging
anti-corruption efforts and agreeing to meet with Giuliana: 17 and a half sentences.
Zelensky, economy, Russian sanctions, other topics: 24 and a half sentences.
With all the praise being flung around, I understand how Trump thought the phone call would support him.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 11:36 AM on October 8, 2019 [17 favorites]
Trump: 54 sentences, including single word exclamations.
Trump: pleasantries and the single word exclamations: 8 sentences.
Trump praising Zelensky and or Ukraine: 14 sentences.
Trump praising U.S. actions in Ukraine: 3 sentences.
Trump insulting European (mostly Merkel) actions in Ukraine: 5 sentences.
Trump asking for a favor regarding Biden / investigations: 24 sentences.
Zelensky covered more ground. 62 sentences.
Zelensky pleasantries: 5 sentences.
Zelensky praising Trump: 7 sentences and 4 half-sentences.
Zelensky wanting to be friends with U.S. and Trump specifically: 14 sentences.
Zelensky mentioning defense, requesting Javelins: 2 sentences (followed by Trump asking for a favor).
Zelensky responding to Trump's request for investigation by generally pledging
anti-corruption efforts and agreeing to meet with Giuliana: 17 and a half sentences.
Zelensky, economy, Russian sanctions, other topics: 24 and a half sentences.
With all the praise being flung around, I understand how Trump thought the phone call would support him.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 11:36 AM on October 8, 2019 [17 favorites]
Justice Department asks judge to block House from getting Mueller grand jury materials, says Watergate decision was wrong
Judge: "Wow. The Department is taking extraordinary positions in this case."
posted by zakur at 12:19 PM on October 8, 2019 [45 favorites]
Judge: "Wow. The Department is taking extraordinary positions in this case."
posted by zakur at 12:19 PM on October 8, 2019 [45 favorites]
This Cult of the Theory of the Unitary Executive is persistent.
posted by Harry Caul at 12:30 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 12:30 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
Justice Department asks judge to block House from getting Mueller grand jury materials, says Watergate decision was wrong ... DOJ says the result would be different if argued today.
DOJ isn't exactly wrong. If argued today they would have Gorsuch and Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court.
posted by JackFlash at 12:37 PM on October 8, 2019 [4 favorites]
DOJ isn't exactly wrong. If argued today they would have Gorsuch and Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court.
posted by JackFlash at 12:37 PM on October 8, 2019 [4 favorites]
Judge: "Wow. The Department is taking extraordinary positions in this case."
And how -- asking the Judiciary to side against the Judiciary -- SCOTUS, no less -- in favor of the Executive.
posted by Gelatin at 12:37 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
And how -- asking the Judiciary to side against the Judiciary -- SCOTUS, no less -- in favor of the Executive.
posted by Gelatin at 12:37 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
They are going to push every bit of obstruction and delay that they can all the way up to the Supreme Court; doesn't matter the argument, just keep appealing.
posted by nubs at 12:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by nubs at 12:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [12 favorites]
Judge: "Wow. The Department is taking extraordinary positions in this case."
Aka “Now, before you say Final Answer, I’m just going to give you one more chance to think. Are you sure you don’t want to poll the audience?”
posted by sallybrown at 12:44 PM on October 8, 2019 [18 favorites]
Aka “Now, before you say Final Answer, I’m just going to give you one more chance to think. Are you sure you don’t want to poll the audience?”
posted by sallybrown at 12:44 PM on October 8, 2019 [18 favorites]
NYT, Trump’s Ukraine Call Was ‘Crazy’ and ‘Frightening,’ Official Told Whistle-Blower
posted by zachlipton at 1:11 PM on October 8, 2019 [56 favorites]
A White House official who listened to President Trump’s July phone call with Ukraine’s leader described it as “crazy,” “frightening,” and “completely lacking in substance related to national security,” according to a memo written by the whistle-blower at the center of the Ukraine scandal, a C.I.A. officer who spoke to the White House official.That last bit is important, and goes with sallybrown's post earlier about what happened. After the call, White House officials realized that the president appeared to have committed a crime, they called White House lawyers, and put a plan in place to cover it up by hiding the transcript.
The White House official was “visibly shaken by what had transpired,” the C.I.A. officer wrote in his memo, one day after Mr. Trump pressured President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine in a July 25 phone call to open investigations that would benefit him politically.
A palpable sense of concern had already taken hold among at least some in the White House that the call had veered well outside the bounds of traditional diplomacy, the officer wrote.
“The official stated that there was already a conversation underway with White House lawyers about how to handle the discussion because, in the official’s view, the president had clearly committed a criminal act by urging a foreign power to investigate a U.S. person for the purposes of advancing his own re-election bid in 2020,” the C.I.A. officer wrote.
posted by zachlipton at 1:11 PM on October 8, 2019 [56 favorites]
Ambassador to E.U. called Trump before texting 'no quid pro quo' to top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine (NBC News)
. . . a person with knowledge of the call confirmed to NBC News.
Sondland spoke to Trump by phone on Sept. 9 before responding to acting Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor's remark that it would be “crazy” to link Ukraine assistance to help with a political campaign, the person said. When Sondland responded several hours later, he told Taylor that Trump had been “crystal clear” that there had been no quid pro quo.
The conversation between Trump and Sondland was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 1:47 PM on October 8, 2019 [10 favorites]
. . . a person with knowledge of the call confirmed to NBC News.
Sondland spoke to Trump by phone on Sept. 9 before responding to acting Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor's remark that it would be “crazy” to link Ukraine assistance to help with a political campaign, the person said. When Sondland responded several hours later, he told Taylor that Trump had been “crystal clear” that there had been no quid pro quo.
The conversation between Trump and Sondland was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 1:47 PM on October 8, 2019 [10 favorites]
“A person with knowledge of the call” is Sondland, right?
posted by saturday_morning at 1:52 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by saturday_morning at 1:52 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
"No quid pro quo" seems pretty similar to the "no infringement intended" note that people for some reason always write in the description of youtube videos that they're posting of other people's copyrighted works.
posted by aubilenon at 1:59 PM on October 8, 2019 [49 favorites]
posted by aubilenon at 1:59 PM on October 8, 2019 [49 favorites]
yeah, especially in light of how aware they were that they were committing crimes and covering them up, the gap in time between Sondland and Taylor's last tweets is pretty damning, regardless of the hour
posted by angrycat at 2:17 PM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by angrycat at 2:17 PM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
Trump's counsel has sent Pelosi, Engel, Schiff and Cummings a letter that describes the inquiry as "unauthorized" and says it challenges the results of the 2016 election.
Screenshots, from Maggie Haberman's Twitter.
posted by mynameisluka at 2:22 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
Screenshots, from Maggie Haberman's Twitter.
posted by mynameisluka at 2:22 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
That letter was probably drafted a long time ago. It seems designed to set the narrative for his base.
posted by agregoli at 2:35 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by agregoli at 2:35 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
Obstructing the inquiry challenges the results of the 2018 election, when we elected a Democratic majority in the House to provide oversight for the Executive Branch...
posted by Mister Cheese at 2:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [24 favorites]
posted by Mister Cheese at 2:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [24 favorites]
Not just Trump's Counsel but the White House Counsel, Pat Cipollone*. A man with a law degree from the University of Chicago. The letter seems wild and unhinged.
*Wikipedia tells me that he graduated high school from Covington Catholic which was the school involved in the January 2019 students and Native American confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial.
posted by mmascolino at 2:39 PM on October 8, 2019 [9 favorites]
*Wikipedia tells me that he graduated high school from Covington Catholic which was the school involved in the January 2019 students and Native American confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial.
posted by mmascolino at 2:39 PM on October 8, 2019 [9 favorites]
So he's a king: he's claiming he cannot be held accountable by the courts, and cannot be impeached by Congress.
Huh. While I know SCOTUS considers impeachment to be an inherently political act (and thus non-justiciable), will they sit by and allow the administration to just reject impeachment? Can SCOTUS insist that the process by undertaken while staying out of what that process is?
posted by suelac at 2:41 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
Huh. While I know SCOTUS considers impeachment to be an inherently political act (and thus non-justiciable), will they sit by and allow the administration to just reject impeachment? Can SCOTUS insist that the process by undertaken while staying out of what that process is?
posted by suelac at 2:41 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
They were never going to cooperate. They were never going to acknowledge the legitimacy of Congress' ability to investigate and impeach. They were always going to move the goalposts. This time they just decided "screw moving them over and over, we're gonna move these posts all the way over in one shot."
posted by azpenguin at 2:46 PM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by azpenguin at 2:46 PM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
This is the place where I would repost a certain excerpt from Joseph Heller's Catch-22, about the titular statute in its most primal incarnation, how power is the simple inability of others to resist it.
But by this point we can all sing along with it by heart.
posted by delfin at 2:48 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
But by this point we can all sing along with it by heart.
posted by delfin at 2:48 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
Yo dawg, I heard you like Constitutional crisises......
posted by thelonius at 2:49 PM on October 8, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by thelonius at 2:49 PM on October 8, 2019 [17 favorites]
Can SCOTUS insist that the process by undertaken while staying out of what that process is?
In theory yes. Subpoenas are legally enforceable, and there is ample precedent -- I would say overwhelming precedent -- that when the Constitution says that each house of Congress can set its own rules, that means procedures like impeachment, which are authorized but not spelled out with procedures in Article I, are judged to be happening whenever Congress says they're happening. In practice, it might depend on which hat Roberts is wearing that day (although I wouldn't rule out peeling off Gorsuch on that one).
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 3:04 PM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
In theory yes. Subpoenas are legally enforceable, and there is ample precedent -- I would say overwhelming precedent -- that when the Constitution says that each house of Congress can set its own rules, that means procedures like impeachment, which are authorized but not spelled out with procedures in Article I, are judged to be happening whenever Congress says they're happening. In practice, it might depend on which hat Roberts is wearing that day (although I wouldn't rule out peeling off Gorsuch on that one).
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 3:04 PM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
will [SCOTUS] sit by and allow the administration to just reject impeachment?
There has been no impeachment. Congress doesn't need the Executive branch's help to impeach, which is a process that can take place wholly within Congress.
posted by ryanrs at 3:09 PM on October 8, 2019 [3 favorites]
There has been no impeachment. Congress doesn't need the Executive branch's help to impeach, which is a process that can take place wholly within Congress.
posted by ryanrs at 3:09 PM on October 8, 2019 [3 favorites]
Subpoenas are legally enforceable...
Enforceable by whom, exactly? Not DoJ, that’s for sure. Other than levying fines, I don’t believe Congress has any effective way to enforce subpoenas. SCOTUS could chime in and say Trump has to acquiesce to the subpoenas, but they can’t actually force him to do so. Trump is nigh-on untouchable in this matter.
posted by Thorzdad at 3:11 PM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
Enforceable by whom, exactly? Not DoJ, that’s for sure. Other than levying fines, I don’t believe Congress has any effective way to enforce subpoenas. SCOTUS could chime in and say Trump has to acquiesce to the subpoenas, but they can’t actually force him to do so. Trump is nigh-on untouchable in this matter.
posted by Thorzdad at 3:11 PM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
Wow. This is legit an ongoing criminal enterprise. Especially hiding the calls on the classified system. Need to start up some RICO investigations and start turning the low-levels. Oh, wait. I guess Burr is in charge of the Justice Department Praetorian Guard.
posted by j_curiouser at 3:12 PM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by j_curiouser at 3:12 PM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
Also, too, that WH letter is Nazi-grade propaganda. (Godwin: It's not Godwin-ing if they really are).
posted by j_curiouser at 3:14 PM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by j_curiouser at 3:14 PM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
Right-wing media has been going with the 'trying to overturn the 2016 election' angle for a long time now. It's really trivially easy to say 'but the Ukraine call happened in July 2019,' but, then, as j_curioser quoted a Trumpist redditor in the previous impeachment thread:
I think what most liberals are missing is that this isn't about right and wrong. It's about winning and losing. I've attached my entire worldview to this man and I am going down with the ship. Not one of you is going to convince me otherwise.posted by box at 3:15 PM on October 8, 2019 [20 favorites]
Enforceable by whom, exactly?
Sergent-at-Arms is the officer charged with executing the will of Congress. In this time of "Fuck it, there is no normal", they should be sending him with The Mace and a few deputies and drag the subpoenaed individual before the legislature.
Acts of the Legislature are presumed Constitutional until decided otherwise by the USSC. So let the Republicans play defense for a while.
posted by mikelieman at 3:33 PM on October 8, 2019 [23 favorites]
Sergent-at-Arms is the officer charged with executing the will of Congress. In this time of "Fuck it, there is no normal", they should be sending him with The Mace and a few deputies and drag the subpoenaed individual before the legislature.
Acts of the Legislature are presumed Constitutional until decided otherwise by the USSC. So let the Republicans play defense for a while.
posted by mikelieman at 3:33 PM on October 8, 2019 [23 favorites]
The other night I saw some chalk scrawlings on a sidewalk here. It said, in large letters "We Are Trump. This Is A Coup D'Etat." They're going to keep pushing that kind of crap on the crazies as long as they feel threatened.
I think you misunderstand. It’s Trump and co. who are carrying out the coup. He’s just deflecting attention by accusing the Democrats of doing what he’s actively perpetrating. What we are in the middle of is far beyond a constitutional crisis.
.........................
Acts of the Legislature are presumed Constitutional until decided otherwise by the USSC. So let the Republicans play defense for a while.
They aren’t playing defense. There are no rules anymore. They’re the Globetrotters to the Democrats’ (and democracy’s) Generals.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:07 PM on October 8, 2019 [12 favorites]
I think you misunderstand. It’s Trump and co. who are carrying out the coup. He’s just deflecting attention by accusing the Democrats of doing what he’s actively perpetrating. What we are in the middle of is far beyond a constitutional crisis.
.........................
Acts of the Legislature are presumed Constitutional until decided otherwise by the USSC. So let the Republicans play defense for a while.
They aren’t playing defense. There are no rules anymore. They’re the Globetrotters to the Democrats’ (and democracy’s) Generals.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:07 PM on October 8, 2019 [12 favorites]
There were some comments earlier saying (essentially) that the Democrats are setting things up so that Trump can cooperate and be impeached for his misdeeds or dig his heels in and be impeached for him obstruction. But unless the Democrats are incredibly foolish (maybe!) that’s not a choice they need to make. There’s enough evidence right now to impeach him for ten different things. The only question is whether to add obstruction to the list. Dropping the other charges and impeaching on obstruction alone shouldn’t be on the table.
posted by Pater Aletheias at 4:56 PM on October 8, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by Pater Aletheias at 4:56 PM on October 8, 2019 [17 favorites]
Sure, they could vote on articles of impeachment right now in the House, and it would probably pass, but then it would just die in the Senate. And there are negative political consequences ("EXONERATED!") for doing that.
Going slowly and building an overwhelming case—not legally, but in the court of public opinion, which is the only one that actually matters right now—seems like a better strategy. It's the only strategy that I can see that might actually result in Trump leaving Pennsylvania Avenue without waiting on the election.
There's no point in impeaching now; the Senate Rs and their base haven't stewed long enough. But as recent polling shows, Trump's support even among the base is slipping. While his base may be low-information voters, it's becoming apparent that you can't fool even simple farmers forever.
posted by Kadin2048 at 5:10 PM on October 8, 2019 [31 favorites]
Going slowly and building an overwhelming case—not legally, but in the court of public opinion, which is the only one that actually matters right now—seems like a better strategy. It's the only strategy that I can see that might actually result in Trump leaving Pennsylvania Avenue without waiting on the election.
There's no point in impeaching now; the Senate Rs and their base haven't stewed long enough. But as recent polling shows, Trump's support even among the base is slipping. While his base may be low-information voters, it's becoming apparent that you can't fool even simple farmers forever.
posted by Kadin2048 at 5:10 PM on October 8, 2019 [31 favorites]
One means by which the Congress can show they are serious about fighting Trump is to request that the Supreme Court immediately consider certain matters related to impeachment.
The notion that the constitution gave the Executive Branch power to decide whether it could consider the impeachment illegitimate is ridiculous. Which means it will receive at least four votes.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 5:18 PM on October 8, 2019 [23 favorites]
The notion that the constitution gave the Executive Branch power to decide whether it could consider the impeachment illegitimate is ridiculous. Which means it will receive at least four votes.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 5:18 PM on October 8, 2019 [23 favorites]
Not just Trump's Counsel but the White House Counsel, Pat Cipollone*. A man with a law degree from the University of Chicago. The letter seems wild and unhinged.
*Wikipedia tells me that he graduated high school from Covington Catholic which was the school involved in the January 2019 students and Native American confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial
Now, now...remember, they're not just the school that embarassed our nation on a shool trip. They're also the school that regularly wears a shit-ton of blackface.
posted by sexyrobot at 5:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
*Wikipedia tells me that he graduated high school from Covington Catholic which was the school involved in the January 2019 students and Native American confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial
Now, now...remember, they're not just the school that embarassed our nation on a shool trip. They're also the school that regularly wears a shit-ton of blackface.
posted by sexyrobot at 5:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
They aren’t playing defense. There are no rules anymore. They’re the Globetrotters to the Democrats’ (and democracy’s) Generals.
I guess that's my point. It's time for the Democrats to dust off every possible thing that can be used, no matter how old, untested, or even I would suggest #batshitinsane. Because as has been shown by the GOP, there's no actual downside
posted by mikelieman at 6:09 PM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
I guess that's my point. It's time for the Democrats to dust off every possible thing that can be used, no matter how old, untested, or even I would suggest #batshitinsane. Because as has been shown by the GOP, there's no actual downside
posted by mikelieman at 6:09 PM on October 8, 2019 [8 favorites]
The way he and his people keep showing off the election results map saying "try to impeach this" as if he truly won in a landslide and is adored by the majority of people in this country and therefore he is above the law, when nearly three million more people voted for his opponent and even some of the states he won were pretty close, is bizarre. Does that really work on anybody?
posted by wondermouse at 6:54 PM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by wondermouse at 6:54 PM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
In case you prefer PDFs to Twitter screenshots, the letter from White House Counsel to Pelosi can be found at https://whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/PAC-Letter-10.08.2019.pdf.
posted by bardophile at 7:00 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by bardophile at 7:00 PM on October 8, 2019 [6 favorites]
Does that really work on anybody?
Over the past few years it has become abundantly clear to me that many people are much more willing to believe simple untruths than complicated truths.
posted by bardophile at 7:03 PM on October 8, 2019 [73 favorites]
Over the past few years it has become abundantly clear to me that many people are much more willing to believe simple untruths than complicated truths.
posted by bardophile at 7:03 PM on October 8, 2019 [73 favorites]
I guess that's my point. It's time for the Democrats to dust off every possible thing that can be used, no matter how old, untested, or even I would suggest #batshitinsane. Because as has been shown by the GOP, there's no actual downside
Well, one of the rules Democrats have dusted off is subpoena power. Before 2015 a subpoena required a majority vote of a committee and the minority chairman's approval. In 2015 Republicans changed the rules so that majority committee chairmen have unilateral power to issue subpoenas. They don't need a single minority vote to do so.
Darrel Issa, for example, unilaterally issued over 100 subpoenas in one year to harass Obama officials.
Now, of course, you hear Republicans crying a different tune and Trump demanding a vote of the entire House before they can issue impeachment subpoenas. Pelosi is telling them to go fish. The House majority makes the rules and Democrats are just using the norm-breaking rules put in place by the Republicans. Democrats don't need anybody's permission to issue subpoenas.
posted by JackFlash at 7:06 PM on October 8, 2019 [46 favorites]
Well, one of the rules Democrats have dusted off is subpoena power. Before 2015 a subpoena required a majority vote of a committee and the minority chairman's approval. In 2015 Republicans changed the rules so that majority committee chairmen have unilateral power to issue subpoenas. They don't need a single minority vote to do so.
Darrel Issa, for example, unilaterally issued over 100 subpoenas in one year to harass Obama officials.
Now, of course, you hear Republicans crying a different tune and Trump demanding a vote of the entire House before they can issue impeachment subpoenas. Pelosi is telling them to go fish. The House majority makes the rules and Democrats are just using the norm-breaking rules put in place by the Republicans. Democrats don't need anybody's permission to issue subpoenas.
posted by JackFlash at 7:06 PM on October 8, 2019 [46 favorites]
Trumpies agree that the three million are illegal aliens voting in California. I'm told by *that* relative.
Here's an election map to throw back. I can't even get a trumpie to listen long enough to explain the legend. Click the 'i' for the explainer.
#batshitinsane ...I really want to see the inherent contempt thing invoked on the subpoena deniers.
posted by j_curiouser at 7:09 PM on October 8, 2019 [12 favorites]
Here's an election map to throw back. I can't even get a trumpie to listen long enough to explain the legend. Click the 'i' for the explainer.
#batshitinsane ...I really want to see the inherent contempt thing invoked on the subpoena deniers.
posted by j_curiouser at 7:09 PM on October 8, 2019 [12 favorites]
Going slowly and building an overwhelming case—not legally, but in the court of public opinion, which is the only one that actually matters right now—seems like a better strategy. It's the only strategy that I can see that might actually result in Trump leaving Pennsylvania Avenue without waiting on the election.
The questionable Christopher Wylie was on Fresh Air tonight and in talking about the motivations of Cambridge Analytica he mentioned a truism that "politics is downstream from culture." I'm sure this has been mentioned a bunch of times before in the CA story, but this time it stuck with me: just focus on what is acceptable, what people want for the country (in this case) such that evidence that comes out in the future will be interpreted through the lens of prevailing values.
So now I'm thinking that promoting and advocating for the cultural aspects I think the US should prioritize is a good way to stop being so mired in the politics of the moment.
posted by rhizome at 7:28 PM on October 8, 2019 [14 favorites]
The questionable Christopher Wylie was on Fresh Air tonight and in talking about the motivations of Cambridge Analytica he mentioned a truism that "politics is downstream from culture." I'm sure this has been mentioned a bunch of times before in the CA story, but this time it stuck with me: just focus on what is acceptable, what people want for the country (in this case) such that evidence that comes out in the future will be interpreted through the lens of prevailing values.
So now I'm thinking that promoting and advocating for the cultural aspects I think the US should prioritize is a good way to stop being so mired in the politics of the moment.
posted by rhizome at 7:28 PM on October 8, 2019 [14 favorites]
Okay, this is my personal take on how to fight dirt cleanly. Back in 1988, Dukakis put out a white paper on helping the American farmer. One of his points was to diversify crops. Among the crop rotation items was Brussel sprouts. The Bush team jumped on this, ridiculing it, claiming that Dukakis's big plan was Brussel sprouts.
You could try to fight this with logic. The correct way to fight is with show. Dukakis should have said, "I suppose you want America to buy Brussel sprouts from Brussels?"
You don't need to make sense to fight toxic stupidity. (And you don't need to descend to their level.) "Show" can take the higher ground.
Democrats in Congress should put out a pledge that none of them will seek foreign governments to assist in their elections. That pledge should include words such as traitorous and illegal. They should invite Republicans to sign it. They should try to put each Republican on the record: will you seek aid for your campaign from foreign governments? Will you be asking foreign governments for dirt on your opponents or any of their children?
TLDR: fight stupid, fight bad faith with "show."
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:43 PM on October 8, 2019 [70 favorites]
You could try to fight this with logic. The correct way to fight is with show. Dukakis should have said, "I suppose you want America to buy Brussel sprouts from Brussels?"
You don't need to make sense to fight toxic stupidity. (And you don't need to descend to their level.) "Show" can take the higher ground.
Democrats in Congress should put out a pledge that none of them will seek foreign governments to assist in their elections. That pledge should include words such as traitorous and illegal. They should invite Republicans to sign it. They should try to put each Republican on the record: will you seek aid for your campaign from foreign governments? Will you be asking foreign governments for dirt on your opponents or any of their children?
TLDR: fight stupid, fight bad faith with "show."
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:43 PM on October 8, 2019 [70 favorites]
That Fresh Air interview sort of blew my mind. Hearing Wylie describe how SCL first used that tech in a military context to target young marginalized men who were potential ISIS recruitment candidates and help prevent recruitment, only to have Steve Bannon and CA use the same tech for reverse purposes.
CA was literally using terrorist prevention technology on social media to instead recruit terrorists, albeit while attempting to ride a line just short of violent action to avoid being labelled as such (although some of their recruits have crossed that line anyways). They were completely latching on to marginalized people full of resentment, and stoking that resentment in the same way terrorists leaders do. Even putting Russian coordination aside, their entire operation reveals a reprehensible approach to politics.
posted by p3t3 at 7:51 PM on October 8, 2019 [26 favorites]
CA was literally using terrorist prevention technology on social media to instead recruit terrorists, albeit while attempting to ride a line just short of violent action to avoid being labelled as such (although some of their recruits have crossed that line anyways). They were completely latching on to marginalized people full of resentment, and stoking that resentment in the same way terrorists leaders do. Even putting Russian coordination aside, their entire operation reveals a reprehensible approach to politics.
posted by p3t3 at 7:51 PM on October 8, 2019 [26 favorites]
That insane Cipollone letter! Trump is now directly trying to turn the president job that he has into the dictator job that he wants.
posted by marlys at 8:03 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by marlys at 8:03 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
claiming that Dukakis's big plan was Brussel sprouts
Not to derail anything, but as a Massachusetts resident who voted for Dukakis and loves how he still walks along the Muddy River picking up trash and asks people to leave him turkey carcasses so he can make soup after Thanksgiving, I have to correct this. It was Belgian endive, not Brussels sprouts, that the Bush campaign went after him for, if not quite as much as the ride in the tank, Boston Harbor and Willie Horton.
posted by adamg at 8:15 PM on October 8, 2019 [19 favorites]
Not to derail anything, but as a Massachusetts resident who voted for Dukakis and loves how he still walks along the Muddy River picking up trash and asks people to leave him turkey carcasses so he can make soup after Thanksgiving, I have to correct this. It was Belgian endive, not Brussels sprouts, that the Bush campaign went after him for, if not quite as much as the ride in the tank, Boston Harbor and Willie Horton.
posted by adamg at 8:15 PM on October 8, 2019 [19 favorites]
I will surrender to admitting to misremembering. And I don't like Brussel sprouts, anyhow.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:29 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:29 PM on October 8, 2019 [2 favorites]
Democrats in Congress should put out a pledge that none of them will seek foreign governments to assist in their elections. That pledge should include words such as traitorous and illegal. They should invite Republicans to sign it. They should try to put each Republican on the record: will you seek aid for your campaign from foreign governments? Will you be asking foreign governments for dirt on your opponents or any of their children?
I'm curious about what would happen if Democrats started running radically transparent campaigns, too. Everything open - your strategy, internal polls, meetings with fundraisers and interest groups, and on and on, as much as possible and in real time. Because on the one hand you're giving your election strategy away to your opponents for free, but on the other, 1) they can deduce what they don't already know anyways because political campaigning is an industry full of professionals whose job it is to know that, 2) they're going to be doing nothing but chasing your tail trying to put out every fire you start, 3) the public gets a truckload of social proof about the candidate's value because it's going to turn retail politics and meetings with everyday supporters into spectacle, and 4) very publicly walking the walk of anticorruption and transparency gives you credibility and bridges a trust gap.
posted by jason_steakums at 8:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [10 favorites]
I'm curious about what would happen if Democrats started running radically transparent campaigns, too. Everything open - your strategy, internal polls, meetings with fundraisers and interest groups, and on and on, as much as possible and in real time. Because on the one hand you're giving your election strategy away to your opponents for free, but on the other, 1) they can deduce what they don't already know anyways because political campaigning is an industry full of professionals whose job it is to know that, 2) they're going to be doing nothing but chasing your tail trying to put out every fire you start, 3) the public gets a truckload of social proof about the candidate's value because it's going to turn retail politics and meetings with everyday supporters into spectacle, and 4) very publicly walking the walk of anticorruption and transparency gives you credibility and bridges a trust gap.
posted by jason_steakums at 8:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [10 favorites]
Not as much as George HW Bush didn't like broccoli, I'll bet.
posted by biogeo at 8:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by biogeo at 8:38 PM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
Trump critics on the right join the media wars (Politico)
“I’ve never given a rat’s ass about being a Republican,” said [National Review stalwart Jonah] Goldberg, who will be The Dispatch’s editor-in-chief. “I care a lot about being a conservative, and being conservative means not changing your positions based on one politician.”posted by katra at 9:03 PM on October 8, 2019 [1 favorite]
Goldberg describes himself and [Dispatch CEO Steve] Hayes, a former editor of the now-defunct Weekly Standard, as “Trump skeptics,” a slightly different sentiment from The Bulwark's.
“We’re more accurately characterized as Trump hostile,” [former Weekly Standard co-founder Bill] Kristol told POLITICO.
A scan of Tuesday’s headlines in The Bulwark — “Trump’s Fake ‘War on Corruption’ Is a Real War on Joe Biden,” “Watch How Trump Moves the Goalposts on Ukraine,” and “Trump Betrays the Kurds, Republicans…Speak Up?” — supports Kristol’s description.
A coup is when the presidential motorcade is diverted to the nearest army base, and the Air Force is bombing Chevy Chase for some reason.
Chevy Chase would consider it a coup any time he doesn't bomb.
posted by zaixfeep at 9:13 PM on October 8, 2019 [28 favorites]
Chevy Chase would consider it a coup any time he doesn't bomb.
posted by zaixfeep at 9:13 PM on October 8, 2019 [28 favorites]
Refuse, block, stonewall – but Trump's strategy leaves little margin for error (Guardian)
It is a strategy with little margin for error, analysts say, with Trump depending all at once on keeping public approval behind him, on blocking myriad avenues by which Congress might collect evidence and, crucially, on retaining the loyalty of subordinates who will come under increasing pressure to testify.posted by katra at 9:16 PM on October 8, 2019 [5 favorites]
A major poll released on Tuesday indicated that Trump might be miscalculating badly about public opinion. A 58% majority now support the inquiry versus 38% who oppose it, the Washington Post-Schar School poll found. Support for an impeachment inquiry has grown 20 points in three months, the poll found. [...]
Trump’s reliance on the loyalty of subordinates also could represent a strategic misstep – because former officials are already talking. After resigning, Kurt Volker, the former special envoy to Ukraine, last week delivered to Congress pages of WhatsApp messages between himself and other diplomats that damaged Trump’s efforts to characterize his negotiations on Ukraine. [...]
In a piece on the Just Security site comparing proceedings against Nixon, Clinton and Trump, the former Clinton aide and impeachment trial witness Sidney Blumenthal noted that Nixon’s resistance to Congress accelerated his decline. “When the Senate Watergate hearings began, Nixon’s standing in public opinion began to erode, a decline accelerated at each stage by his stonewalling of Congress and the courts,” Blumenthal wrote.
[...] It took five months of hearings against Nixon before public approval for the process hit 58%, noted Greg Dworkin, an editor at the liberal Daily Kos. Impeachment proceedings against Trump are only two weeks old.
> Over the past few years it has become abundantly clear to me that many people are much more willing to believe simple untruths than complicated truths.
Exactly. Or, put somewhat less succinctly by a bestselling German author:
Of course, lots of hardcore Team Trumpers are very much allowing themselves to be "corrupted [...] consciously or voluntarily", so there's no need to let people off the hook on an individual basis.
posted by Kadin2048 at 10:10 PM on October 8, 2019 [14 favorites]
Exactly. Or, put somewhat less succinctly by a bestselling German author:
"[I]n the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie [...] It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation."About 75% of Fox News seems to be providing the "other explanation" necessary to avoid the cognitive dissonance backscattered by reality impinging on the various facets of the große Lüge. (The other 25% is Shepard Smith looking surprised to discover his badge still got him in the building.)
Of course, lots of hardcore Team Trumpers are very much allowing themselves to be "corrupted [...] consciously or voluntarily", so there's no need to let people off the hook on an individual basis.
posted by Kadin2048 at 10:10 PM on October 8, 2019 [14 favorites]
so how quickly could this get to SCOTUS?
and sorry if if I missed it, but is there a real chance it could deny cert? On what grounds, jurisdictional?
posted by angrycat at 1:51 AM on October 9, 2019
and sorry if if I missed it, but is there a real chance it could deny cert? On what grounds, jurisdictional?
posted by angrycat at 1:51 AM on October 9, 2019
Where has Biden been on all of this? I am genuinely surprised by his lackluster response to the direct attack on him and his son's character.
posted by xammerboy at 3:06 AM on October 9, 2019
posted by xammerboy at 3:06 AM on October 9, 2019
never interrupt your opponent etc. etc.
posted by golwengaud at 4:16 AM on October 9, 2019 [31 favorites]
posted by golwengaud at 4:16 AM on October 9, 2019 [31 favorites]
Pod Save America mentioned that Biden gave a fiery response to Trump’s actions in a Nevada speech over the weekend, but it was drowned out by the deluge of news about additional crimes. (It might have been “planned to give” - I wasn’t paying full attention.)
posted by shortfuse at 5:08 AM on October 9, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by shortfuse at 5:08 AM on October 9, 2019 [2 favorites]
Biden did have an editorial in the Washington Post titled "Trump won’t destroy me, and he won’t destroy my family". Mostly it's a familiar litany of Trump's outrageousness, but it has a feisty ending:
posted by Sublimity at 5:08 AM on October 9, 2019 [2 favorites]
And to Trump and those who facilitate his abuses of power, and all the special interests funding his attacks against me: Please know that I’m not going anywhere. You won’t destroy me, and you won’t destroy my family. And come November 2020, I intend to beat you like a drum.So, it's not like he's been totally silent--but I agree with golwengaud, Trump is doing a perfectly fine job of making himself look like a fool.
posted by Sublimity at 5:08 AM on October 9, 2019 [2 favorites]
There's a theory, and it's based on a Mormon prophecy, not really officially endorsed anymore, called the White Horse prophecy(wikipedia).
To quote Joseph Smith:
It's just one of those things, you have your 1A rights to believe that if you like. I'm not judging. Whatever helps Mitt grow a spine.
He's going straight to hell for being cruel to his dog anyhow. I will be judgemental on that one.
While I'm being a little batty, if you're into numerology we write dates like DD/MM/YYYY where I'm from, which makes today's date a palindrome. 9/10/2019. According to my prophecy this is when our universe begins to revert to the sane timeline and all the insanity starts being corrected. We can hope.
posted by adept256 at 5:19 AM on October 9, 2019 [25 favorites]
To quote Joseph Smith:
You will see the Constitution of the United States almost destroyed. It will hang like a thread as fine as a silk fiber.... I love the Constitution; it was made by the inspiration of God; and it will be preserved and saved by the efforts of the White Horse, and by the Red Horse who will combine in its defense."Basically, a Mormon will ride on a white horse from Utah to DC to save the constitution. The theory is that this is Mitt Romney.
It's just one of those things, you have your 1A rights to believe that if you like. I'm not judging. Whatever helps Mitt grow a spine.
He's going straight to hell for being cruel to his dog anyhow. I will be judgemental on that one.
While I'm being a little batty, if you're into numerology we write dates like DD/MM/YYYY where I'm from, which makes today's date a palindrome. 9/10/2019. According to my prophecy this is when our universe begins to revert to the sane timeline and all the insanity starts being corrected. We can hope.
posted by adept256 at 5:19 AM on October 9, 2019 [25 favorites]
Mod note: A few Romney comments deleted. These impeachment threads tend to fill up fast, so unless something / someone is fairly directly involved, let's not get out in the weeds discussing them generally.
posted by taz (staff) at 6:18 AM on October 9, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by taz (staff) at 6:18 AM on October 9, 2019 [4 favorites]
so how quickly could this get to SCOTUS?
and sorry if if I missed it, but is there a real chance it could deny cert? On what grounds, jurisdictional?
This incarnation of SCOTUS? You bet there's a real chance. Which is why I'm on the fence about any of this going before SCOTUS. If SCOTUS does deny cert, that would pretty much be the final nail in the coffin for congressional oversight, and a green light to the White House to do whatever it damned well pleases. Basically, the end of functional democracy in the US. And, as it sits, there are easily four votes in SCOTUS who would seem open to doing just that. Roberts would be the vote that could save democracy (and I never thought I'd ever put those words together in that way.)
posted by Thorzdad at 6:22 AM on October 9, 2019 [10 favorites]
and sorry if if I missed it, but is there a real chance it could deny cert? On what grounds, jurisdictional?
This incarnation of SCOTUS? You bet there's a real chance. Which is why I'm on the fence about any of this going before SCOTUS. If SCOTUS does deny cert, that would pretty much be the final nail in the coffin for congressional oversight, and a green light to the White House to do whatever it damned well pleases. Basically, the end of functional democracy in the US. And, as it sits, there are easily four votes in SCOTUS who would seem open to doing just that. Roberts would be the vote that could save democracy (and I never thought I'd ever put those words together in that way.)
posted by Thorzdad at 6:22 AM on October 9, 2019 [10 favorites]
The White House’s scathing and legally questionable impeachment letter, annotated
posted by kirkaracha at 6:37 AM on October 9, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 6:37 AM on October 9, 2019 [5 favorites]
From a little bit ago: Why words alone do not convey all the meaning in Trump's phone call with Zelensky.
posted by gudrun at 6:56 AM on October 9, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by gudrun at 6:56 AM on October 9, 2019 [1 favorite]
Trump Ordered Perry, State Dept To Primarily Huddle With Giuliani On Ukraine (Nicole Lafond, TPM)
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:09 AM on October 9, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:09 AM on October 9, 2019 [11 favorites]
...Chairman Schiff chose to concoct a false version of the call and to read his made-up transcript to the American people at a public hearing. This powerfully confirms there is no issue with the actual call.
I wish the WaPo would annotate that part because that’s incredibly incorrect. It’s not a false version of the call.
posted by affectionateborg at 7:11 AM on October 9, 2019 [18 favorites]
I wish the WaPo would annotate that part because that’s incredibly incorrect. It’s not a false version of the call.
posted by affectionateborg at 7:11 AM on October 9, 2019 [18 favorites]
Trump declares "war" — and, yes, our full-blown constitutional crisis is here (Heather Digby Parton, Salon)
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:24 AM on October 9, 2019 [18 favorites]
Insane White House letter — clearly dictated by Trump himself — suggests he's ready to overturn the ConstitutionIt notes that Joe diGenova, one of his lawyers, appeared on Laura Ingraham's Fox News show Tuesday night, and pointedly used the word 'regicide'.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:24 AM on October 9, 2019 [18 favorites]
Where has Biden been on all of this? I am genuinely surprised by his lackluster response to the direct attack on him and his son's character.
He's just waiting for all his Republican friends in congress to come to his defense.
posted by JackFlash at 7:28 AM on October 9, 2019 [41 favorites]
He's just waiting for all his Republican friends in congress to come to his defense.
posted by JackFlash at 7:28 AM on October 9, 2019 [41 favorites]
Investigations usually hurt a president’s public reputation — but Trump isn’t usual (Douglas L. Kriner • Eric Schickler, Salon)
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:29 AM on October 9, 2019
Trump’s approval rating has a lower ceiling and higher floor than that of past presidentsHigh levels of partisanship may buffer Trump's reputation and keep his approval ratings relatively stable.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:29 AM on October 9, 2019
The White House’s scathing and legally questionable impeachment letter, annotated
The annotated version lets a number of whoppers skate by. For only one example, it doesn't address the letter's claim that "President Trump took the unprecedented step of providing the public transparency by declassifying and releasing the record of his call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine" by noting that the call was classified in the first place, contrary to prior practice but in keeping with other Trump call records, because White House officials were concerned about the political damage it would case.
posted by Gelatin at 7:32 AM on October 9, 2019 [14 favorites]
The annotated version lets a number of whoppers skate by. For only one example, it doesn't address the letter's claim that "President Trump took the unprecedented step of providing the public transparency by declassifying and releasing the record of his call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine" by noting that the call was classified in the first place, contrary to prior practice but in keeping with other Trump call records, because White House officials were concerned about the political damage it would case.
posted by Gelatin at 7:32 AM on October 9, 2019 [14 favorites]
The media likes to talk to regular republican voters. They should find the people at that portion of the Venn diagram where they approve of him but also want him impeached and ask what’s up.
posted by Selena777 at 7:38 AM on October 9, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by Selena777 at 7:38 AM on October 9, 2019 [6 favorites]
If SCOTUS does deny cert, that would pretty much be the final nail in the coffin for congressional oversight, and a green light to the White House to do whatever it damned well pleases.
I think this is backwards -- Trump's power grabs have a very bad record in circuit court, and he relies on SCOTUS to reverse those decisions along party lines. For the justices to refuse to even take the case (assuming an appellate loss) would be a powerful rebuke to Trump, because it would show that not every bullshit argument his lawyers throw at the wall is worth their time, much less their deference.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:50 AM on October 9, 2019 [16 favorites]
I think this is backwards -- Trump's power grabs have a very bad record in circuit court, and he relies on SCOTUS to reverse those decisions along party lines. For the justices to refuse to even take the case (assuming an appellate loss) would be a powerful rebuke to Trump, because it would show that not every bullshit argument his lawyers throw at the wall is worth their time, much less their deference.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:50 AM on October 9, 2019 [16 favorites]
‘Wow. This Letter Is Bananas.’ (David Leonhardt, NYT Opinion)
Mimi Rocah, former federal prosector: “Can you imagine lawyers in any other forum — criminal or civil — writing a letter saying ‘nope, my client doesn’t like this, he’s not participating?’ Of course not. This a political propaganda not real legal arguments.”posted by katra at 8:42 AM on October 9, 2019 [27 favorites]
Here’s Another Impeachable Offense: Trump’s War on the Constitution (David Corn, Mother Jones)
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:03 AM on October 9, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:03 AM on October 9, 2019 [4 favorites]
This Is a Constitutional Crisis. What Happens Next? (Noah Feldman, NYT Opinion)
As a matter of ordinary constitutional law, there’s little doubt that the House’s arguments before the courts would be much stronger than any offered in Mr. Cipollone’s letter. [...]posted by katra at 9:10 AM on October 9, 2019 [14 favorites]
The president could always assert executive privilege with respect to particular confidential documents. Such claims of privilege could be analyzed by the courts under existing constitutional precedents. There is no precedent in constitutional doctrine, however, supporting a president’s blanket refusal to comply with any subpoenas regardless of privilege.
More to the point, Mr. Cipollone’s letter presents the president as the judge of whether a congressional inquiry into impeachment is constitutional. That obviously can’t be right. Not only would that violate the principle of separation of powers; it also would effectively put the president in ultimate control of the impeachment process.
Given the extreme weakness of Mr. Trump’s arguments, it’s probable that the lower federal courts would side with the House. Going to the Supreme Court, however, is always a bit of a gamble. [...] What will happen? A good guess is that Justice Roberts, with his back to the wall, would stand up for the clear constitutional precedent that says the courts will enforce valid congressional subpoenas. The Supreme Court chose the rule of law over President Nixon, a precedent that will not be lost on Justice Roberts.
More to the point, Mr. Cipollone’s letter presents the president as the judge of whether a congressional inquiry into impeachment is constitutional. That obviously can’t be right. Not only would that violate the principle of separation of powers; it also would effectively put the president in ultimate control of the impeachment process.
I said before that Trump's corruption has members of Congress working against their own branch to carry water for the Executive, and that he's circumvented the Senate's advise and consent powers with the use of "acting" officials. Now Trump wants to not only have the Judicary side against the Judiciary, but also take away SCOTUS' most prized power. SCOTUS should rule against him 9-0 simply on separation of powers grounds; as it is, I'm hoping for at least a 5-4 decision against legally establishing a dictatorship.
In any case, Congress should impeach him for appropriating the other branches' Constitutional powers, if nothing else.
The thing that absolutely boggles my mind about Trump supporters is that, as the Founders well knew, tyranny is a double edged sword. If Trump loses the 2020 election (TTTCS), the powers that his supporters have gleefully seen him appropriate in order to impose an agenda that's unacceptable to the majority of loyal Americans could be used by a President Warren. I don't think they -- or the Republicans' wealthy backers -- want that outcome.
posted by Gelatin at 9:51 AM on October 9, 2019 [17 favorites]
I said before that Trump's corruption has members of Congress working against their own branch to carry water for the Executive, and that he's circumvented the Senate's advise and consent powers with the use of "acting" officials. Now Trump wants to not only have the Judicary side against the Judiciary, but also take away SCOTUS' most prized power. SCOTUS should rule against him 9-0 simply on separation of powers grounds; as it is, I'm hoping for at least a 5-4 decision against legally establishing a dictatorship.
In any case, Congress should impeach him for appropriating the other branches' Constitutional powers, if nothing else.
The thing that absolutely boggles my mind about Trump supporters is that, as the Founders well knew, tyranny is a double edged sword. If Trump loses the 2020 election (TTTCS), the powers that his supporters have gleefully seen him appropriate in order to impose an agenda that's unacceptable to the majority of loyal Americans could be used by a President Warren. I don't think they -- or the Republicans' wealthy backers -- want that outcome.
posted by Gelatin at 9:51 AM on October 9, 2019 [17 favorites]
Even from across the pond it's rather clear the if a Democratic president attempts to use powers reserved for Republican presidents, the separation of powers will be magically reinstated as the conservative judges suddenly awake and swing into action in defense of Constitution.
posted by hat_eater at 10:00 AM on October 9, 2019 [56 favorites]
posted by hat_eater at 10:00 AM on October 9, 2019 [56 favorites]
Even from across the pond it's rather clear the if a Democratic president attempts to use powers reserved for Republican presidents, the separation of powers will be magically reinstated as the conservative judges suddenly awake and swing into action in defense of Constitution.
No doubt Republican politicians will suddenly rediscover their so-called principles, just as they only care about deficits when Democrats are president; and no doubt the so-called "liberal media" will allow them once again to get away with that pose.
But if Trump truly mangles the separation of powers the way he makes clear he intends to, it may be too late.
The social contract of living in a democratic republic is that one should oppose a dictatorship even of one's own side. Republicans' embrace of authoritarianism is not just an admission that they can't convince a majority of loyal Americans to adopt their agenda; it's a craven betrayal of America's fundamental principles. It may come back to bite them before it bites the rest of us, but a dictatorship is bad no matter who's in charge.
posted by Gelatin at 10:06 AM on October 9, 2019 [39 favorites]
No doubt Republican politicians will suddenly rediscover their so-called principles, just as they only care about deficits when Democrats are president; and no doubt the so-called "liberal media" will allow them once again to get away with that pose.
But if Trump truly mangles the separation of powers the way he makes clear he intends to, it may be too late.
The social contract of living in a democratic republic is that one should oppose a dictatorship even of one's own side. Republicans' embrace of authoritarianism is not just an admission that they can't convince a majority of loyal Americans to adopt their agenda; it's a craven betrayal of America's fundamental principles. It may come back to bite them before it bites the rest of us, but a dictatorship is bad no matter who's in charge.
posted by Gelatin at 10:06 AM on October 9, 2019 [39 favorites]
The thing that absolutely boggles my mind about Trump supporters is that, as the Founders well knew, tyranny is a double edged sword. If Trump loses the 2020 election (TTTCS), the powers that his supporters have gleefully seen him appropriate in order to impose an agenda that's unacceptable to the majority of loyal Americans could be used by a President Warren. I don't think they -- or the Republicans' wealthy backers -- want that outcome.
They understand that the partisans won't care. Look at their record on deficits and states rights. They'll flip like a grounded fish and no one will bat an eye.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 10:17 AM on October 9, 2019 [11 favorites]
They understand that the partisans won't care. Look at their record on deficits and states rights. They'll flip like a grounded fish and no one will bat an eye.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 10:17 AM on October 9, 2019 [11 favorites]
The Final Demise of “Adults in the Room” (Dahlia Lithwick, Slate)
Trump’s staffers have alternated between enabling his bad behavior and claiming they’re protecting us from his worst instincts. This defense can’t hold.posted by ZeusHumms at 10:29 AM on October 9, 2019 [14 favorites]
[…] every cornered co-conspirator, like every December snowflake, is different, and it may be of use to try to understand and flesh out the 11th-hour bravery that will begin to go down. It’s being seeded, already, before our credulous eyes.
[…] But if impeachment fever continues to gather steam, those swept up in the scandal will eventually need to make heroic efforts to deflect any blame from themselves.
Three noxious years of the “grown-up in the room” narrative, … is enough.
[…] Don’t be fooled - they’re looking to find an escape hatch. Whistleblowers have led the way, but they remain few and far between. The remaining adults in the room need to act like adults and put the country before the tired charade of a secret shadow resistance, which was never really resistance, and which will not serve as exoneration.
The Daily 202: Trump’s refusal to comply with House subpoenas depends on an absolutist view of executive power (WaPo)
-- The absolutist position articulated in Cipollone’s letter follows Trump’s increasingly provocative assertions of his own power. “Article II allows me to do whatever I want,” Trump said this summer. The president was making the point during an interview with ABC News that he could have fired Mueller and ended his probe if he wanted to do so. He’s made variations of this statement several times in the past few months, from a gaggle on the White House lawn to an 80-minute speech at a conference for pro-Trump students. “I have to the right to do whatever I want as president,” Trump told the kids.posted by katra at 10:57 AM on October 9, 2019 [8 favorites]
Article II enumerates several specific powers for the president but by no means gives him total power. Quite the opposite. In fact, the impeachment clause is in Section Four of Article II. Removing a president for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” is literally, by definition, a constitutional act.
-- Substantively, many legal experts agree, the arguments in the White House’s latest letter are specious. Impeachment is literally a constitutional remedy. It cannot be “unconstitutional,” as Cipollone claimed in his letter. Several prominent attorneys, including conservatives, rebuked the White House counsel for putting his name on such an incendiary letter.
The thing that absolutely boggles my mind about Trump supporters is that, as the Founders well knew, tyranny is a double edged sword. If Trump loses the 2020 election (TTTCS), the powers that his supporters have gleefully seen him appropriate in order to impose an agenda that's unacceptable to the majority of loyal Americans could be used by a President Warren. I don't think they -- or the Republicans' wealthy backers -- want that outcome.
For some odd reason, they don't feel that it's possible for that to happen.
*stares at compromised voting machines and eligible voter rolls*
*stares at Mitch McConnell deliberately blocking any and all attempts at certifying fair elections*
*stares at the Republicans engaging in massive amounts of projection, as usual, while accusing Democrats of being in support of rampant voter fraud*
I wonder why that could be?
posted by delfin at 11:06 AM on October 9, 2019 [58 favorites]
For some odd reason, they don't feel that it's possible for that to happen.
*stares at compromised voting machines and eligible voter rolls*
*stares at Mitch McConnell deliberately blocking any and all attempts at certifying fair elections*
*stares at the Republicans engaging in massive amounts of projection, as usual, while accusing Democrats of being in support of rampant voter fraud*
I wonder why that could be?
posted by delfin at 11:06 AM on October 9, 2019 [58 favorites]
On the other hand, if they really had election fraud on lock there wouldn't be a Democratic House majority for Trump to defy.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:26 AM on October 9, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:26 AM on October 9, 2019 [13 favorites]
We have a Democratic House majority in spite of election fraud*, not because it doesn't exist.
* counting as election fraud: voter suppression, voter disenfranchisement, gutting of Voting Rights Act, subsequent closing of hundreds of polling places, and oh yeah that gerrymandering thing.
posted by mcstayinskool at 11:35 AM on October 9, 2019 [28 favorites]
* counting as election fraud: voter suppression, voter disenfranchisement, gutting of Voting Rights Act, subsequent closing of hundreds of polling places, and oh yeah that gerrymandering thing.
posted by mcstayinskool at 11:35 AM on October 9, 2019 [28 favorites]
Oh, for sure. Maybe I should have said “perfected.” All the fuckery they have in place still doesn’t guarantee Republican majorities, is my point.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:39 AM on October 9, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:39 AM on October 9, 2019 [8 favorites]
We have a Democratic House majority in spite of election fraud*, not because it doesn't exist.
Because there are more of us than them. Republicans have the benefits of a number of structural advantages meant to accommodate slave states, and those advantages let Trump slither into the Oval Office and lets Moscow Mitch McConnell smother legislation to benefit the American people in its crib, but the Republicans have to suppress votes in order to have even half a shot at power. Which is a fairly startling admission in a democratic republic, and the fact that it's so studiously ignored by the media proves that it isn't liberal at all.
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by almost three million votes, and I take some comfort in the fact that this wide margin apparently has always soured the experience of being president for Trump, judging form how touchy he is about exaggerating his victory margin.
posted by Gelatin at 12:01 PM on October 9, 2019 [19 favorites]
Because there are more of us than them. Republicans have the benefits of a number of structural advantages meant to accommodate slave states, and those advantages let Trump slither into the Oval Office and lets Moscow Mitch McConnell smother legislation to benefit the American people in its crib, but the Republicans have to suppress votes in order to have even half a shot at power. Which is a fairly startling admission in a democratic republic, and the fact that it's so studiously ignored by the media proves that it isn't liberal at all.
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by almost three million votes, and I take some comfort in the fact that this wide margin apparently has always soured the experience of being president for Trump, judging form how touchy he is about exaggerating his victory margin.
posted by Gelatin at 12:01 PM on October 9, 2019 [19 favorites]
Mod note: A few deleted; please drop the election stuff, let's stick to impeachment stuff in here. Thanks.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 12:02 PM on October 9, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 12:02 PM on October 9, 2019 [5 favorites]
Today's The Daily podcast covers three town halls Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) held in the last week in her district to discuss her position on the impeachment inquiry. She is a moderate D, former CIA employee, and won in a district that was Trump +7.
It's an interesting (and aggravating) listen. In the town halls where she faced significant pushback, constituents take great umbrage with her using the term "dig up dirt" when referring to what the Ukraine transcript revealed, speaking very directly to the semantics of her words. Not a minute later the same person uses the term "coup" to describe the impeachment inquiry. To Slotkin's credit, she handles this really calmly while also being very clear that there is definitely not a coup taking place.
I can't imagine how hard it must be to face people this brain-addled by FoxNews/Trump doublespeak and false terminology. We talk a lot here how these moderate D's need to step up. And now they are, and it's pretty ugly for them. So, hat tip, Slotkin, and all the rest of you that put country before (perceived) re-election damage.
posted by mcstayinskool at 12:34 PM on October 9, 2019 [59 favorites]
It's an interesting (and aggravating) listen. In the town halls where she faced significant pushback, constituents take great umbrage with her using the term "dig up dirt" when referring to what the Ukraine transcript revealed, speaking very directly to the semantics of her words. Not a minute later the same person uses the term "coup" to describe the impeachment inquiry. To Slotkin's credit, she handles this really calmly while also being very clear that there is definitely not a coup taking place.
I can't imagine how hard it must be to face people this brain-addled by FoxNews/Trump doublespeak and false terminology. We talk a lot here how these moderate D's need to step up. And now they are, and it's pretty ugly for them. So, hat tip, Slotkin, and all the rest of you that put country before (perceived) re-election damage.
posted by mcstayinskool at 12:34 PM on October 9, 2019 [59 favorites]
I had literally forgotten he existed
posted by schadenfrau at 2:31 PM on October 9, 2019 [49 favorites]
posted by schadenfrau at 2:31 PM on October 9, 2019 [49 favorites]
This Is What a Legitimate Anti-Corruption Effort in Ukraine Would Look Like (Samantha Vinograd, Politico Magazine)
When it comes to the Bidens, asking a foreign country to investigate an American, when there is no domestic criminal investigation into him, is a non-starter. We have domestic law enforcement avenues for that. But there is no evidence of wrongdoing by Biden and no criminal investigation into his activities.posted by katra at 2:47 PM on October 9, 2019 [18 favorites]
If Trump were really, legitimately focused on rooting out corruption in Ukraine, however—whether at companies like Burisma, which employed Hunter Biden, or within the government—there are U.S. government processes for doing so, when there is a credible case. Here’s what they are:
Step 1: Stop cutting State Department anti-corruption funding [...]
STEP 2: Alert the Ukraine ambassador, and let him deal with it [...]
STEP 3. Request cooperation (officially) [...]
There is no shortage of official options when it comes to cooperation on criminal matters and fighting corruption with a foreign country—whether it be with the Ukrainians or the Chinese or anyone else. If the president actually cared about addressing corruption in Ukraine more broadly, he would ensure that experts like INL staffers at the State Department have the resources they need to do their jobs. The fact that Giuliani was his answer suggests that something very different is going on here.
Fox News Poll: Record support for Trump impeachment (FOX News, via Drudge banner: FOX SHOCK: 51% WANT TRUMP REMOVED )
A new high of 51 percent wants Trump impeached and removed from office, another 4 percent want him impeached but not removed, and 40 percent oppose impeachment altogether. In July, 42 percent favored impeachment and removal, while 5 percent said impeach but don’t remove him, and 45 percent opposed impeachment. [...]posted by katra at 3:57 PM on October 9, 2019 [16 favorites]
Approval of Trump’s job performance is down a couple points to 43 percent, while 55 percent disapprove. Last month, it was 45-54 percent. Currently, 86 percent of Republicans approve compared to 89 percent in September. [...]
By a 66-25 percent margin, voters say it is generally inappropriate for Trump to ask foreign leaders to investigate political rivals. [...]
Meanwhile, voters think President Trump is just out for himself. Fifty-five percent overall and 18 percent of Republicans say he is doing what’s best for Trump. Thirty-nine percent think he puts the country first. [...]
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is in negative territory by 23 points (26-49) and 25 percent can’t rate him. Voters have a negative view of both Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani by 22 points (31-53) and Attorney General William Barr by 14 points (24-38). [...]
Conducted October 6-8, 2019 under the joint direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company (R), this Fox News Poll includes interviews with 1,003 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide who spoke with live interviewers on both landlines and cellphones. The poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all registered voters.
Lindsey Graham (1989): A president who doesn't comply with Congressional requests for information is subject to impeachment.
posted by kirkaracha at 4:33 PM on October 9, 2019 [37 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 4:33 PM on October 9, 2019 [37 favorites]
@luivelarde
Trump on the Kurds: "They didn't help us in the Second World War, they didn't help us with Normandy, as an example." He suggests that they battled alongside U.S. forces for "their land," and adds, "With all of that being said, we like the Kurds."
Trump said he learned the Kurds didn't help in WWII from a "very, very powerful" article.
posted by xammerboy at 5:20 PM on October 9, 2019 [6 favorites]
Trump on the Kurds: "They didn't help us in the Second World War, they didn't help us with Normandy, as an example." He suggests that they battled alongside U.S. forces for "their land," and adds, "With all of that being said, we like the Kurds."
Trump said he learned the Kurds didn't help in WWII from a "very, very powerful" article.
posted by xammerboy at 5:20 PM on October 9, 2019 [6 favorites]
OK, I acknowledge that it is pointless to argue with nonsense but:
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:23 PM on October 9, 2019 [5 favorites]
"They didn't help us in the Second World War, they didn't help us with Normandy, as an example." He suggests that they battled alongside U.S. forces for "their land,"What does this have to do with anything? Why does he think this is a justification for anything?
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:23 PM on October 9, 2019 [5 favorites]
Trump didn't help us in World War II either. Or Vietnam, for that matter.
posted by Faint of Butt at 5:24 PM on October 9, 2019 [40 favorites]
posted by Faint of Butt at 5:24 PM on October 9, 2019 [40 favorites]
What happened to Eric Holder when he did the whole thing where he refused to turn over documents to Congress? Didn't Obama invoke some kind of executive privilege to shield him? In terms of procedure and powers, could someone break down how that situation differed from this one?
posted by clawsoon at 5:26 PM on October 9, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by clawsoon at 5:26 PM on October 9, 2019 [1 favorite]
Russia did help us in WW2, there's your Trump logic seed.
posted by prize bull octorok at 5:33 PM on October 9, 2019 [22 favorites]
posted by prize bull octorok at 5:33 PM on October 9, 2019 [22 favorites]
they didn't help us with Normandy, as an example
It's a huge oversight that there's no wanking it emoji. We need people with rhetorical power in the public eye to just stop responding to this stuff factually and tell him he's a fucking moron who is talking bullshit nonstop. There are so many reasons why this is a stupid statement that it is hardly worth enumerating them.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:35 PM on October 9, 2019 [39 favorites]
It's a huge oversight that there's no wanking it emoji. We need people with rhetorical power in the public eye to just stop responding to this stuff factually and tell him he's a fucking moron who is talking bullshit nonstop. There are so many reasons why this is a stupid statement that it is hardly worth enumerating them.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:35 PM on October 9, 2019 [39 favorites]
What happened to Eric Holder when he did the whole thing where he refused to turn over documents to Congress? Didn't Obama invoke some kind of executive privilege to shield him? In terms of procedure and powers, could someone break down how that situation differed from this one?
Congressional Subpoena Power and Executive Privilege: The Coming Showdown Between the Branches (Margaret Taylor, Lawfare, Jan 30, 2019)
posted by katra at 5:46 PM on October 9, 2019 [20 favorites]
Congressional Subpoena Power and Executive Privilege: The Coming Showdown Between the Branches (Margaret Taylor, Lawfare, Jan 30, 2019)
The most recent example is President Obama’s assertion of executive privilege in the context of “Operation Fast and Furious”—a federal gun-running investigation and operation gone wrong. On March 31, 2011, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, then chaired by Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, issued a subpoena to the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. The Justice Department responded in writing to the committee a few months later. After more back-and-forth, on Oct. 12, the committee issued a second subpoena to the department for communications from several top officials, including Attorney General Eric Holder, relating to the operation. [...]As to how this is different, there's this: What Powers Does a Formal Impeachment Inquiry Give the House? (Molly E. Reynolds, Margaret Taylor, Lawfare, May 21, 2019)
In June of 2012, Obama invoked executive privilege to deny the committee access to certain documents responsive to the subpoena on the basis that complying “would raise substantial separation of powers concerns and potentially create an imbalance in the relationship” between Congress and the White House. The House voted on June 28, 2012, to hold Holder in contempt—the first such action against a sitting Cabinet official. The committee then brought a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to force disclosure of the documents at issue. The court case was repeatedly delayed by procedural issues and unsuccessful efforts to broker a settlement.
It wasn’t until January of 2016—a full three and a half years later—that a federal judge rejected Obama's assertion of executive privilege to deny Congress access to the records on the grounds that “under the unique and limited circumstances of this case, ... the qualified privilege must yield, given the executive’s acknowledgment of the legitimacy of the investigation, and the fact that the Department itself has already publicly revealed the sum and substance of the very material it is now seeking to withhold.” The court also found that “records reflecting the agency’s internal deliberations over how to respond to Congressional and media inquiries fall under the protection of the deliberative process privilege.” Finally, the court “encourage[d] the parties to start with a fresh slate and resolve the few remaining issues with flexibility and respect.”
By then, a new Congress had convened and access to the documents was, for most practical purposes, moot.
posted by katra at 5:46 PM on October 9, 2019 [20 favorites]
Thanks, katra!
posted by clawsoon at 5:48 PM on October 9, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by clawsoon at 5:48 PM on October 9, 2019 [3 favorites]
It's a huge oversight that there's no wanking it emoji.
✊🌈✊
posted by J.K. Seazer at 5:49 PM on October 9, 2019 [8 favorites]
✊🌈✊
posted by J.K. Seazer at 5:49 PM on October 9, 2019 [8 favorites]
When asked today about the possibility of imprisoned ISIS fighters potentially escaping as the U.S. vacates northern Syria, Trump said this:
posted by zakur at 5:53 PM on October 9, 2019 [22 favorites]
Well they’re going to be escaping to Europe. That’s where they want to go. They want to go back to their homes. But Europe didn't want them from us. We could've given it to them. They could've had trials they could've had whatever they wanted. But as usual, it's not reciprocal. [then some nonsense about reciprocal being his favorite word, and referring to the PKK as the "PK Key"]What does this even mean? I mean, seriously, what is he trying to say here? That it doesn't matter if ISIS prisoners escape, because they're just going to go to Europe, that this is Europe's fault, and they deserve whatever happens to them? JFC
posted by zakur at 5:53 PM on October 9, 2019 [22 favorites]
That may be intersecting a bit with the ongoing Syria/Turkey thread. The Syrian Democratic Forces are the ones that have been holding the prisoners this entire time, not the US. Secondly, Trump actually is correct that their home countries did not want them back, but that also includes the US. The SDF said if the prisoners’ home countries don’t take them back then they needed help/resources for holding them and wanted an international court developed in Syria for dealing with them.
posted by gucci mane at 6:17 PM on October 9, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by gucci mane at 6:17 PM on October 9, 2019 [6 favorites]
Well, where were the Europeans during Normandy? Some of them helped, sure. But some of them fought against us!
posted by xammerboy at 6:20 PM on October 9, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 6:20 PM on October 9, 2019 [13 favorites]
The reality is that the Kurds will probably not release the prisoners, because the first people the prisoners attack will be innocent Kurds in the region...
posted by xammerboy at 6:24 PM on October 9, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by xammerboy at 6:24 PM on October 9, 2019 [1 favorite]
It's a huge oversight that there's no wanking it emoji.
When emojis first hit big, someone right here on MetaFilter said they only had a use for two among the entire set: the fist emoji and the double-arrow/back-and-forth emoji.
THE CIRCLE IS COMPLETE
posted by wenestvedt at 6:24 PM on October 9, 2019 [19 favorites]
When emojis first hit big, someone right here on MetaFilter said they only had a use for two among the entire set: the fist emoji and the double-arrow/back-and-forth emoji.
THE CIRCLE IS COMPLETE
posted by wenestvedt at 6:24 PM on October 9, 2019 [19 favorites]
Donald Trump pressed then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to help persuade the Justice Department to drop a criminal case against an Iranian-Turkish gold trader who was a client of Rudy Giuliani, according to three people familiar with the 2017 meeting in the Oval Office. < Bloomberg
'Zarrab was being prosecuted in federal court in New York at the time on charges of evading U.S. sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program. He had hired former Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Giuliani, who has said he reached out repeatedly to U.S. officials to seek a diplomatic solution for his client outside the courts.'
'The president’s request to Tillerson -- which included asking him to speak with Giuliani -- bears the hallmarks of Trump’s governing style, defined by his willingness to sweep aside the customary procedures and constraints of government to pursue matters outside normal channels. Tillerson’s objection came to light as Trump’s dealings with foreign leaders face intense scrutiny following the July 25 call with Ukraine’s president that has sparked an impeachment inquiry in the House.'
posted by Harry Caul at 6:25 PM on October 9, 2019 [22 favorites]
'Zarrab was being prosecuted in federal court in New York at the time on charges of evading U.S. sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program. He had hired former Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Giuliani, who has said he reached out repeatedly to U.S. officials to seek a diplomatic solution for his client outside the courts.'
'The president’s request to Tillerson -- which included asking him to speak with Giuliani -- bears the hallmarks of Trump’s governing style, defined by his willingness to sweep aside the customary procedures and constraints of government to pursue matters outside normal channels. Tillerson’s objection came to light as Trump’s dealings with foreign leaders face intense scrutiny following the July 25 call with Ukraine’s president that has sparked an impeachment inquiry in the House.'
posted by Harry Caul at 6:25 PM on October 9, 2019 [22 favorites]
The NYT editorial board sez: the letter is indeed bananas, but, maybe a few concessions on process would be reasonable? For example, let the minority parry have some subpoena power, too... As happened with Clinton.
Which makes me realize that the right amount of process is the amount the public needs to accept the proceedings as legitimate. This, in turn, depends on the circumstances of the impeachment. Cheating with an intern thus requires lots of process. Trying to subset the foundations of the democracy or Republic or whatever, and then backstabbing some allies with some ill considered tweets would ostensibly require far less process. I feel like there just needs to be one more strong reminder that this dude has the nuclear codes to really pump some nitro into the proceedings... The Syria situation is pretty much exactly what everyone has been expecting you happen, at the most perfect moment.
The fox poll with 51% approval for impeach and remove should also help shake things up. I can't imagine Trump is especially happy to see even his own wolves admiring the truth tonight.
It is, as always, hella depressing to consider that if trump were just ten percent more effective, we'd be looking at President Hitler.
[Sorry, almost forgot: trump delenda est.]
posted by kaibutsu at 7:03 PM on October 9, 2019 [14 favorites]
Which makes me realize that the right amount of process is the amount the public needs to accept the proceedings as legitimate. This, in turn, depends on the circumstances of the impeachment. Cheating with an intern thus requires lots of process. Trying to subset the foundations of the democracy or Republic or whatever, and then backstabbing some allies with some ill considered tweets would ostensibly require far less process. I feel like there just needs to be one more strong reminder that this dude has the nuclear codes to really pump some nitro into the proceedings... The Syria situation is pretty much exactly what everyone has been expecting you happen, at the most perfect moment.
The fox poll with 51% approval for impeach and remove should also help shake things up. I can't imagine Trump is especially happy to see even his own wolves admiring the truth tonight.
It is, as always, hella depressing to consider that if trump were just ten percent more effective, we'd be looking at President Hitler.
[Sorry, almost forgot: trump delenda est.]
posted by kaibutsu at 7:03 PM on October 9, 2019 [14 favorites]
Donald Trump has defended the wife of a US diplomat accused of killing a British teenager in a road accident
This is some bullshit as there is no Jonathan Sacoolas on the official Diplomatic list. Neither Sacoolas nor his wife has any right to claim diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention.
posted by adamvasco at 7:11 PM on October 9, 2019 [30 favorites]
This is some bullshit as there is no Jonathan Sacoolas on the official Diplomatic list. Neither Sacoolas nor his wife has any right to claim diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention.
posted by adamvasco at 7:11 PM on October 9, 2019 [30 favorites]
It's a huge oversight that there's no wanking it emoji.
When emojis first hit big, someone right here on MetaFilter said they only had a use for two among the entire set: the fist emoji and the double-arrow/back-and-forth emoji.
Can we please not, even as a joke, say that the world needs more focus on and discussion of and representations of penises? Fucking hell.
posted by medusa at 7:16 PM on October 9, 2019 [13 favorites]
When emojis first hit big, someone right here on MetaFilter said they only had a use for two among the entire set: the fist emoji and the double-arrow/back-and-forth emoji.
Can we please not, even as a joke, say that the world needs more focus on and discussion of and representations of penises? Fucking hell.
posted by medusa at 7:16 PM on October 9, 2019 [13 favorites]
Trump is literally what impeachment is for
And why not, because Trump is also literally what the Electoral College is for.
Once Trump is gone, Republicans will try to pretend they were against him all along. Democrats and other loyal Americans must never let them forget that We -- Hillary Clinton especially -- said clearly that Trump was unfit for office, and he proved it himself ever since, and Republicans went right along with it.
Perhaps some day we can forgive, but we must never forget.
posted by Gelatin at 7:18 PM on October 9, 2019 [26 favorites]
And why not, because Trump is also literally what the Electoral College is for.
Once Trump is gone, Republicans will try to pretend they were against him all along. Democrats and other loyal Americans must never let them forget that We -- Hillary Clinton especially -- said clearly that Trump was unfit for office, and he proved it himself ever since, and Republicans went right along with it.
Perhaps some day we can forgive, but we must never forget.
posted by Gelatin at 7:18 PM on October 9, 2019 [26 favorites]
maybe a few concessions on process would be reasonable? For example, let the minority parry have some subpoena power, too... As happened with Clinton.I know a lot of self-styled moderates to whom this would appeal, but all I can really think about is how any such concessions would be used by the Republicans to undermine the proceedings at every turn. I know that they're going to try and do that anyway, but I don't think Democratic leadership should help them. It's also worth remembering how many concession were made to Democrats during, say, the 9,438 Benghazi hearings (all figures are approximate): none, IIRC. I have no idea how to rebuild good-faith relationships with the GOP later when it's gone all-in for Trump now. That's the ultimate problem with throwing all norms and conventions out the window -- nobody ever has reason to trust you ever again. Your stated motives can't be accepted at face value. De-Nazification has been mentioned in other threads, so maybe there'll be some kind of de-Trumpification after this administration is over, but I think that requires some recognition that Trumpism is actually a thing to be ashamed of.
posted by wintermind at 7:27 PM on October 9, 2019 [19 favorites]
Mod note: Y'all please drop it with the emoji thing and maybe with the wankery thing in general.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:42 PM on October 9, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:42 PM on October 9, 2019 [15 favorites]
I think that requires some recognition that Trumpism is actually a thing to be ashamed of.
Trump splits Republican voters as friends and family clash: 'We don't speak' (Guardian)
Trump splits Republican voters as friends and family clash: 'We don't speak' (Guardian)
[Terri Burl, chair of the Forest County GOP in Wisconsin] said the county has become so polarised over the president she struggles to get even solid Trump supporters to turn out and campaign for him.posted by katra at 7:49 PM on October 9, 2019 [6 favorites]
“Behind the scenes they know who they’re going to vote for but people don’t want to say that they’re for Trump. They’re embarrassed to. I’m embarrassed sometimes with things he says and how he says them,” said Burl, a substitute teacher who worked with disabled people and victims of domestic violence.
So we're a third of the way through October, and we're supposed to have an actual factual impeachment by...thanksgiving.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:52 PM on October 9, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:52 PM on October 9, 2019 [1 favorite]
Maybe the real impeachment was the family we alienated along the way.
posted by Ryvar at 9:22 PM on October 9, 2019 [66 favorites]
posted by Ryvar at 9:22 PM on October 9, 2019 [66 favorites]
“Behind the scenes they know who they’re going to vote for but people don’t want to say that they’re for Trump. They’re embarrassed to. I’m embarrassed sometimes with things he says and how he says them,” said Burl, a substitute teacher who worked with disabled people and victims of domestic violence.
On the other hand, the camps for children really won her over.
posted by jaduncan at 10:38 PM on October 9, 2019 [37 favorites]
On the other hand, the camps for children really won her over.
posted by jaduncan at 10:38 PM on October 9, 2019 [37 favorites]
I can't imagine anyone thinks it's a good idea to give Devin Nunes subpeona power again, even as a gesture of goodwill
posted by TwoWordReview at 11:49 PM on October 9, 2019 [18 favorites]
posted by TwoWordReview at 11:49 PM on October 9, 2019 [18 favorites]
Once Trump is gone, Republicans will try to pretend they were against him all along.
Which is one reason why you have to take impeachment as far as you can even if the Senate won't act.
Make sure that there is solid evidence that shows they supported this.
I know they're too shameless for it to matter much, but put it on paper. Make it fact.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 2:44 AM on October 10, 2019 [24 favorites]
Which is one reason why you have to take impeachment as far as you can even if the Senate won't act.
Make sure that there is solid evidence that shows they supported this.
I know they're too shameless for it to matter much, but put it on paper. Make it fact.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 2:44 AM on October 10, 2019 [24 favorites]
The latest development in the fleeing-diplomat-wife scandal is the revelation - by way of Trump waving around his Secret-flagged cue card - that the US has no intention whatsoever of waiving Mrs Sacoolas' alleged diplomatic immunity, despite all the talk of further discussions.
I used to work closely with the US military during my RAF service. Mrs Clanger used to work in a diplomatic role for the UK Foreign Office. This development comes as no surprise as US policy is and always has been that its overseas personnel are above the local law.
posted by Major Clanger at 3:37 AM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
I used to work closely with the US military during my RAF service. Mrs Clanger used to work in a diplomatic role for the UK Foreign Office. This development comes as no surprise as US policy is and always has been that its overseas personnel are above the local law.
posted by Major Clanger at 3:37 AM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
This development comes as no surprise as US policy is and always has been that its overseas personnel are above the local law.
Last time I heard, there was a million pounds or so of unpaid parking tickets incurred by US Embassy staff in London, which the mayor of London occasionally made noises about but everyone acknowledged there was no prospect of collecting on. However. from that to vehicular homicide is quite a step.
posted by acb at 4:25 AM on October 10, 2019 [6 favorites]
Last time I heard, there was a million pounds or so of unpaid parking tickets incurred by US Embassy staff in London, which the mayor of London occasionally made noises about but everyone acknowledged there was no prospect of collecting on. However. from that to vehicular homicide is quite a step.
posted by acb at 4:25 AM on October 10, 2019 [6 favorites]
Last time I heard, there was a million pounds or so of unpaid parking tickets incurred by US Embassy staff in London, which the mayor of London occasionally made noises about but everyone acknowledged there was no prospect of collecting on.
If I recall correctly, the only time any mayor of London made noises about it was when Boris Johnson was in that office, and the US had been recently trying to come after him for not paying US taxes (he still held dual citizenship at the time).
He didn't seem particularly interested in the similar bills run up by other embassies for some reason, funny that.
posted by automatronic at 4:50 AM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
If I recall correctly, the only time any mayor of London made noises about it was when Boris Johnson was in that office, and the US had been recently trying to come after him for not paying US taxes (he still held dual citizenship at the time).
He didn't seem particularly interested in the similar bills run up by other embassies for some reason, funny that.
posted by automatronic at 4:50 AM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Didn't Ken Livingstone use US Embassy parking fines for anti-imperialist cred at some point?
posted by acb at 4:56 AM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by acb at 4:56 AM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
It's probably protocol to get out of Dodge and pick up the pieces later. I know it's standard airline policy for cabin and flight crew that if they find themselves in trouble abroad that may result in arrest or detention, they should get back to the airport and on a flight home AFSAFP. I was told this by a gay cabin crew member while discussing how it works when they're rostered to a destination where homosexuality is illegal, but he said that it was standard practice no matter what the offence. It is always, always less trouble and expense to avoid having the local authorities getting their talons into you - it's sorted out at a much higher level, and if you have to go back to face the music then so be it.
I would say that the chances of the ambo's wife ever coming back to the UK are as close to zero as you could count, and that this would be the case no matter who was in the White House. It's a case of every country knowing that it's in their best interests in general to not open this particular can of worms.
posted by Devonian at 6:00 AM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
I would say that the chances of the ambo's wife ever coming back to the UK are as close to zero as you could count, and that this would be the case no matter who was in the White House. It's a case of every country knowing that it's in their best interests in general to not open this particular can of worms.
posted by Devonian at 6:00 AM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Once Trump is gone, Republicans will try to pretend they were against him all along.
I was naive enough to think Republicans would do some soul searching after Bush got us into a forever war, dragged the country's reputation through the mud, gave away the surplus to the rich, and melted down the world economy. Instead, Republicans started looking for someone worse.
What Republicans will learn from Trump is that racism plays. Promise to build a wall and make life miserable for anyone that isn't white, and you'll get enough support to rip that constitution in two and stop this experiment of a government of the people.
posted by xammerboy at 6:01 AM on October 10, 2019 [26 favorites]
I was naive enough to think Republicans would do some soul searching after Bush got us into a forever war, dragged the country's reputation through the mud, gave away the surplus to the rich, and melted down the world economy. Instead, Republicans started looking for someone worse.
What Republicans will learn from Trump is that racism plays. Promise to build a wall and make life miserable for anyone that isn't white, and you'll get enough support to rip that constitution in two and stop this experiment of a government of the people.
posted by xammerboy at 6:01 AM on October 10, 2019 [26 favorites]
> What Republicans will learn from Trump is that racism plays.
> Trump splits Republican voters as friends and family clash: 'We don't speak' (Guardian)
> Trump splits Republican voters as friends and family clash: 'We don't speak' (Guardian)
Of all the nests the president has stirred, perhaps none has inflamed anger quite like immigration. Trump’s portrayal of asylum seekers flooding across the US’s southern border, and claim that they pose a security threat, as well as his at times vitriolic language to describe immigrants has riled public opinion. [...]posted by katra at 6:23 AM on October 10, 2019 [15 favorites]
It’s not clear though that the issue is playing as well as Trump would like. A poll by Marquette Law School showed rising tolerance of immigration in the state with 65% saying immigrants make the country a better place while just 4% said they are to the detriment of Wisconsin.
WaPo: Two business associates of Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani have been arrested and are in custody: "The two men, who helped Giuliani investigate former vice president Joe Biden, were charged with campaign finance violations, according to a person familiar with the charges.
Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman have been under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan."
posted by jocelmeow at 7:05 AM on October 10, 2019 [53 favorites]
Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman have been under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan."
posted by jocelmeow at 7:05 AM on October 10, 2019 [53 favorites]
Some background (from the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, July 2019) on Parnas and Fruman, who I like to imagine as looking exactly like the Wet Bandits.
posted by theodolite at 7:12 AM on October 10, 2019 [14 favorites]
posted by theodolite at 7:12 AM on October 10, 2019 [14 favorites]
Trump likes to use the phrase 'right out of central casting' a lot and he will be pleased that Parnas and Fruman look exactly like henchmen.
posted by readery at 7:16 AM on October 10, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by readery at 7:16 AM on October 10, 2019 [12 favorites]
I was naive enough to think Republicans would do some soul searching after Bush got us into a forever war, dragged the country's reputation through the mud, gave away the surplus to the rich, and melted down the world economy. Instead, Republicans started looking for someone worse.
They did do that autopsy after Romney lost in 2012 and basically proceeded to ignore all of it.
posted by octothorpe at 7:20 AM on October 10, 2019 [26 favorites]
They did do that autopsy after Romney lost in 2012 and basically proceeded to ignore all of it.
posted by octothorpe at 7:20 AM on October 10, 2019 [26 favorites]
Guardian: The indictment of Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman has now been posted, and it lays out charges that the two foreign-born Republican donors tried to circumvent election laws to exert political influence.
Guardian: Rudy Giuliani minimized campaign-finance charges against Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman as recently as two weeks ago, a New York Times reporter noted.
Guardian: Parnas, one of the men arrested on campaign-finance charges, was scheduled to be deposed today by House Democrats leading the impeachment inquiry against Trump. USA Today has more
Guardian: A lawyer [John Dowd] for the two arrested men said last week that they were still working with Rudy Giuliani to assist him in representing the president.
posted by katra at 7:29 AM on October 10, 2019 [13 favorites]
Guardian: Rudy Giuliani minimized campaign-finance charges against Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman as recently as two weeks ago, a New York Times reporter noted.
Guardian: Parnas, one of the men arrested on campaign-finance charges, was scheduled to be deposed today by House Democrats leading the impeachment inquiry against Trump. USA Today has more
Guardian: A lawyer [John Dowd] for the two arrested men said last week that they were still working with Rudy Giuliani to assist him in representing the president.
posted by katra at 7:29 AM on October 10, 2019 [13 favorites]
The ‘I’m rubber, you’re glue’ presidency: Trump turns to schoolyard taunts in impeachment battle (Ashley Parker, WaPo)
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:31 AM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:31 AM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
So I guess the lesson is, don't let your lawyer use comic sans if you want to stay out of jail.
posted by mabelstreet at 7:43 AM on October 10, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by mabelstreet at 7:43 AM on October 10, 2019 [12 favorites]
Guardian: The indictment of Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman has now been posted, and it lays out charges that the two foreign-born Republican donors tried to circumvent election laws to exert political influence.
Basically it says they took money from Foreign National - 1 and funneled it to various politicians for the purposes of obtaining recreational marijuana business licenses in Nevada and elsewhere . . .
I wonder if there arent at least some congresspeople (one unnamed in the indictment) and local level officials referenced who should be concerned about what these guys would tell the Feds?
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 7:48 AM on October 10, 2019
Basically it says they took money from Foreign National - 1 and funneled it to various politicians for the purposes of obtaining recreational marijuana business licenses in Nevada and elsewhere . . .
I wonder if there arent at least some congresspeople (one unnamed in the indictment) and local level officials referenced who should be concerned about what these guys would tell the Feds?
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 7:48 AM on October 10, 2019
Two Giuliani Ukraine associates indicted on campaign finance charges (Politico)
Some of the charges against the two men, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, stem from alleged activities related to their work with Giuliani, including a successful effort to have the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, removed from her post.posted by katra at 7:50 AM on October 10, 2019 [10 favorites]
According to the indictment, Parnas and Fruman agitated for her removal at the behest of an unnamed Ukrainian government official, and hid the source of political donations they made in order to further that goal. [...]
The ultimate source of the political donations, according to the indictment, was an unnamed Russian businessman.
Someone's going to roll. This conversation is happening right now: first one on the train is leaving the station. You or him?
posted by jquinby at 7:57 AM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by jquinby at 7:57 AM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
Attorney General William Barr has been aware of the investigation into Parnas and Fruman and was since shortly after he came into office this past February
posted by zombieflanders at 7:59 AM on October 10, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by zombieflanders at 7:59 AM on October 10, 2019 [17 favorites]
And they were scheduled to testify to congress today and tomorrow. Hope their cell CCTV cameras don't mysteriously stop working tonight.
posted by PenDevil at 8:01 AM on October 10, 2019 [22 favorites]
posted by PenDevil at 8:01 AM on October 10, 2019 [22 favorites]
The unnamed congressman would likely be Pete Sessions who received more than $3 million from the America First Action PAC and played a role in firing Ambassador Yovanovitch.
posted by peeedro at 8:05 AM on October 10, 2019 [18 favorites]
posted by peeedro at 8:05 AM on October 10, 2019 [18 favorites]
Mike Pence’s conspicuously evasive answers on Ukraine (WaPo)
NBC News’s Vaughn Hillyard did yeoman’s work Wednesday pressing Pence on the matter. But Pence declined to directly answer many of the questions he was asked. Most notably, he repeatedly declined to say whether he we even aware of Trump’s interest in getting Ukraine to investigate the Bidens. [...]Pence aiming to release records of his own Ukraine calls (AP)
You could make an argument that Pence had to have known that this was really about the Bidens and about Trump’s conspiracy theories involving the Russia investigation’s origins, because Giuliani and Trump had made that pretty clear. But the fact that he can’t just come out and say that he was or wasn’t aware of Trump’s true interest suggests he knows he’s in a tough spot here.
Vice President Mike Pence said Wednesday he is working with the White House counsel’s office to release transcripts of his own calls with Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. [...] Pence said he “never discussed the issue of the Bidens” with Zelenskiy. And he again defended the president, insisting that a “plain reading” of the rough transcript of Trump’s call with the Ukranian leader shows “there was no quid pro quo.” [...] Pence also said he stands by his assertion during a 2016 vice presidential debate that foreign governments shouldn’t get involved in domestic elections.posted by katra at 8:06 AM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
The unnamed congressman would likely be Pete Sessions who received more than $3 million from the America First Action PAC and played a role in firing Ambassador Yovanovitch.
Guardian: The pro-Trump super PAC that received money from Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman said it would place the funds in a “segregated” bank account until the charges against them are addressed.
Guardian: The pro-Trump super PAC that received money from Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman said it would place the funds in a “segregated” bank account until the charges against them are addressed.
Rebecca Kaplan (@RebeccaRKaplan)posted by katra at 8:10 AM on October 10, 2019
In a statement, America First Action comms director Kelly Sadler said the contribution was placed in a segregated bank account and will remain there until the matter is resolved. The funds hadn't been used. https://t.co/Wz9GobRMSD
October 10, 2019
Any excuse to segregate something with that crowd.
posted by mikepop at 8:13 AM on October 10, 2019 [48 favorites]
posted by mikepop at 8:13 AM on October 10, 2019 [48 favorites]
The more info that comes out about Parnas and Fruman, the more this arrest feels like a rabbit hole. Unnamed Russian businessman funneling money to a Trump connected PAC through two guys connected to one of Trump’s fixers, and these guys have been poking around Ukraine trying to manufacture dirt on a political rival and helped get an ambassador dismissed? These guys probably know what closets are hiding a hell of a lot of skeletons.
posted by azpenguin at 8:14 AM on October 10, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by azpenguin at 8:14 AM on October 10, 2019 [16 favorites]
Guardian: The Wall Street Journal is now also reporting that the White House shifted responsibility of overseeing aid to Ukraine to a political appointee after budget staffers raised legal concerns about stalling the funds.
The Journal reports: [...]posted by katra at 8:26 AM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
The Democratic leaders of the House Budget and Appropriations committees, which are also probing the delay in the aid to Ukraine, called the involvement of a political official in the apportionment process ‘seemingly unprecedented’ in a letter requesting documents from OMB. Those committees have received some documents from OMB that they requested.
I’m seeing a pretty even split amongst Twitterers between gleeful speculation that Parnas and Fruman will flip and bring down Rudy, and that this was a mustache-twirling move orchestrated by Barr to keep their testimony away from the House, and I honestly can’t tell which take is the more fantastical.
posted by scarylarry at 8:34 AM on October 10, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by scarylarry at 8:34 AM on October 10, 2019 [11 favorites]
Some of the charges against the two men, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, stem from alleged activities related to their work with Giuliani, including a successful effort to have the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, removed from her post.
Guardian: The Wall Street Journal reported last week that Trump recalled Yovanovitch in May after some of his external advisers, including Rudy Giulaini, claimed she was obstructing efforts to convince Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden: [...]
Guardian: The Wall Street Journal reported last week that Trump recalled Yovanovitch in May after some of his external advisers, including Rudy Giulaini, claimed she was obstructing efforts to convince Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden: [...]
The recall of Marie Yovanovitch in the spring has become a key point of interest in the House impeachment inquiry. A whistleblower complaint by a CIA officer [...] cites Ms. Yovanovitch’s ouster as one of a series of events that paved the way for what the whistleblower alleges was an abuse of power by the president. ...posted by katra at 8:35 AM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
In an interview, Mr. Giuliani told The Wall Street Journal that in the lead-up to Ms. Yovanovitch’s removal, he reminded the president of complaints percolating among Trump supporters that she had displayed an anti-Trump bias in private conversations. In Mr. Giuliani’s view, she also had been an obstacle to efforts to push Ukraine to investigate Mr. Biden and his son Hunter.
And they were scheduled to testify to congress today and tomorrow. Hope their cell CCTV cameras don't mysteriously stop working tonight.
Apparently they were preparing to flee so the SDNY had to act.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:37 AM on October 10, 2019 [31 favorites]
Apparently they were preparing to flee so the SDNY had to act.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:37 AM on October 10, 2019 [31 favorites]
I love that reply: "Wait till we hear that Barr tipped off Guiliani about this, and Guiliani in turn told them to flee."
posted by JoeZydeco at 8:42 AM on October 10, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by JoeZydeco at 8:42 AM on October 10, 2019 [17 favorites]
OK, with the Parnas and Fruman stuff, now it feels more like Iran-Contra and less like Watergate.
posted by pseudophile at 8:45 AM on October 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by pseudophile at 8:45 AM on October 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
Basically it says they took money from Foreign National - 1 and funneled it to various politicians for the purposes of obtaining recreational marijuana business licenses in Nevada and elsewhere . . .
Those donations according to Nevada's campaign finance disclosure system were $10,000 each made to then-Nevada Attorney General and Republican gubernatorial candidate Adam Laxalt and Republican candidate for Attorney General Wes Duncan. Both lost their 2018 election bids.
posted by peeedro at 9:00 AM on October 10, 2019 [2 favorites]
Those donations according to Nevada's campaign finance disclosure system were $10,000 each made to then-Nevada Attorney General and Republican gubernatorial candidate Adam Laxalt and Republican candidate for Attorney General Wes Duncan. Both lost their 2018 election bids.
posted by peeedro at 9:00 AM on October 10, 2019 [2 favorites]
And they were scheduled to testify to congress today and tomorrow. Hope their cell CCTV cameras don't mysteriously stop working tonight.
Apparently they were preparing to flee so the SDNY had to act.
I guess this is why they're expected to appear in federal court in Virginia today.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:04 AM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
Apparently they were preparing to flee so the SDNY had to act.
I guess this is why they're expected to appear in federal court in Virginia today.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:04 AM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
octothorpe: They did do that autopsy after Romney lost in 2012 and basically proceeded to ignore all of it.
I think you mean "double down on the things it said they shouldn't do." Talking Points Memo boiled the autopsy down to 6 big take-aways:
These are good take-aways, but the problem is that they're problems for the future of the GOP, but Trump won with the GOP of today.
FACT CHECK: White House Legal Argument Against Impeachment Inquiry (NPR, October 9, 2019) -- digging into the claims made by White House counsel Pat Cipollone in his 8 page letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (PDF).
posted by filthy light thief at 9:25 AM on October 10, 2019 [30 favorites]
I think you mean "double down on the things it said they shouldn't do." Talking Points Memo boiled the autopsy down to 6 big take-aways:
1. Pass Immigration Reform YesterdayOf those six things to do, the GOP went hard the other way, and Trump won on being the most unlike those goals.
2. Listen To Minorities
3. Gays Aren’t Going Away
4. Epistemic Closure Is Real (a condition in which conservatives block out all dissenting voices until eventually their own arguments sound nonsensical to anyone who doesn’t already agree with them.)
5. Look To The States -- The GOP currently holds 30 governorships and many of them, like Chris Christie in New Jersey and John Kasich in Ohio, have been both moving to the center and gaining in popularity recently. They stand in stark contrast to House Republicans, who have more conservative constituencies and typically have been more inflexible in their views.
6. Stop Being The Rich Guys -- Less than year after nominating a millionaire investor who proclaimed that “corporations are people,” the RNC is concerned that the party has become too closely tied with wealthy interests.
These are good take-aways, but the problem is that they're problems for the future of the GOP, but Trump won with the GOP of today.
FACT CHECK: White House Legal Argument Against Impeachment Inquiry (NPR, October 9, 2019) -- digging into the claims made by White House counsel Pat Cipollone in his 8 page letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (PDF).
The impeachment standoff between two co-equal branches of government raises several key constitutional questions, none of which — spoiler alert — seem particularly favorable to the president's position.A decent review, in my eyes. Maybe nothing new, but I haven't been keeping up with everything as of late.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:25 AM on October 10, 2019 [30 favorites]
Meanwhile, he’s losing support among responsible Senate Republicans like Mitt Romney of Utah, who calls his actions “troubling in the extreme”, Nebraska’s Ben Sasse, who urges colleagues not to “circle the wagons”, and intelligence chair Richard Burr of North Carolina, who vows to “get to the bottom” of what happened.
This has kind of gotten buried under everything else, but on October 8th Burr tweeted this:
He goes on with a few more tweets in the thread, and links to the press release about the report. It doesn't say anything we didn't already know, but seeing it all spelled out there by a Republican senator from North Carolina.. I'm almost ashamed to say it.. gives me hope.
The fact that the press release has seemed to get very little press has more of a negative impact on my hope.
posted by wondermouse at 10:04 AM on October 10, 2019 [16 favorites]
This has kind of gotten buried under everything else, but on October 8th Burr tweeted this:
Russia is waging an information warfare campaign against the U.S. that didn’t start and didn’t end with the 2016 election. Their goal is to sow societal discord and erode confidence in the machinery of government.
He goes on with a few more tweets in the thread, and links to the press release about the report. It doesn't say anything we didn't already know, but seeing it all spelled out there by a Republican senator from North Carolina.. I'm almost ashamed to say it.. gives me hope.
The fact that the press release has seemed to get very little press has more of a negative impact on my hope.
posted by wondermouse at 10:04 AM on October 10, 2019 [16 favorites]
Trump is openly telling us he’s above the law. Here’s his next move. (Greg Sargent, WaPo Opinion)
It’s worth stepping back and stating in plain language just how profoundly President Trump is corrupting our political system right now. Several new media analyses take a stab at this — see this CNN piece or this New York Times take — by correctly suggesting that Trump’s total defiance of oversight poses a massive challenge to our constitutional order.posted by katra at 10:06 AM on October 10, 2019 [40 favorites]
But they aren’t quite grappling with the magnitude of what we’re seeing. That’s only half the story. [...]
What’s glaring at us in plain sight is a straight-up declaration that Trump possesses the legitimate authority to conscript a foreign power to help him rig the next election on his behalf.
“It’s now the official position of the White House that soliciting foreign election interference is appropriate,” Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, told me. The White House isn’t even contesting that this happened any longer: “The White House is saying, ‘Yeah, he did it, and it’s fine.'"
“It’s now the official position of the White House that soliciting foreign election interference is appropriate,” Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, told me. The White House isn’t even contesting that this happened any longer: “The White House is saying, ‘Yeah, he did it, and it’s fine.'"
In a few short months Trump has gone from "NO COLLUSION!" to "NO, COLLUSION!"
posted by Gelatin at 10:45 AM on October 10, 2019 [36 favorites]
In a few short months Trump has gone from "NO COLLUSION!" to "NO, COLLUSION!"
posted by Gelatin at 10:45 AM on October 10, 2019 [36 favorites]
I don't know what you're talking about. There's always been a hyphen in "NO, COLLUSION!"
posted by kaibutsu at 11:08 AM on October 10, 2019 [53 favorites]
posted by kaibutsu at 11:08 AM on October 10, 2019 [53 favorites]
The Narcissists Prayer has proved startlingly accurate, hasn't it.
That didn't happen. --NO COLLUSION, PERFECT CALL
And if it did, it wasn't that bad. --Memo, downgraded to great call
And if it was, that's not a big deal. --Let's do it live on TV and with China
And if it is, that's not my fault. --RICK PERRY
And if it was, I didn't mean it. --More Rick Perry?
And if I did...
You deserved it. --Call for impeaching all Democrats basically
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 11:12 AM on October 10, 2019 [30 favorites]
That didn't happen. --NO COLLUSION, PERFECT CALL
And if it did, it wasn't that bad. --Memo, downgraded to great call
And if it was, that's not a big deal. --Let's do it live on TV and with China
And if it is, that's not my fault. --RICK PERRY
And if it was, I didn't mean it. --More Rick Perry?
And if I did...
You deserved it. --Call for impeaching all Democrats basically
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 11:12 AM on October 10, 2019 [30 favorites]
I like to think I've been paying close attention to this whole mess, but this excellent Reddit comment really clearly laid out how these arrests tie into the two-act structure of the Ukraine scandal in a way I hadn't fully grasped till now:
* * *
* * *
This means SDNY has just arrested the bagman in: The Original Quid Pro Quo with Yuriy Lutsenko to Exchange [Ambassador] Maria Yovanovitch's Termination for Investigations into Biden and 2016posted by Rhaomi at 11:43 AM on October 10, 2019 [103 favorites]
You might remember Maria Yovanovitch as the woman whom Trump said "was going to go through some things" in his July call with Zelenskyy. Her firing by Donald Trump was the "quid" in the original quid pro quo conspiracy that Giuliani arranged in March 2019 with Ukraine's top prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko. Here is the run down:
- In March of 2019, Yovanovitch gives a speech blasting the failure of Ukraine's anticorruption prosecutors, and advocated for the removal of Lutsenko.
- Two weeks later, Lutsenko fabricated dirt on Yovanovitch and laundered it through a conspiracy theorist/pretend journalist at the Hill named John Solomon.
- At the same time Giuliani forges a deal with Lutsenko: we will get Yovanovitch terminated (a firing Donald Trump personally ordered), and in exchange Lutsenko fabricates the investigations Giuliani requests to help Trump politically (again, laundered through conspiracy theorist Solomon).
- In April, The deal falls apart when Zelenskyy wins a landslide election on an anti-corruption platform and fires Lutsenko.
- In May, Giuliani blasts the Lutsenko firing, praising him as "a much more honest guy" than his predecessor Victor Shokin, who hilariously is the guy Biden helped get fired. Giuliani travels to Ukraine for the expressed purpose of preserving the quid pro quo with Lutsenko's successor:
“We’re not meddling in an election, we’re meddling in an investigation, which we have a right to do...Somebody could say it’s improper. And this isn’t foreign policy — I’m asking them to do an investigation that they’re doing already and that other people are telling them to stop. And I’m going to give them reasons why they shouldn’t stop it because that information will be very, very helpful to my client, and may turn out to be helpful to my government.”- But it doesn't work, and in July they decide that Trump himself needs to pressure Zelensky directly. In the July phone call, Trump personally admonishes Zelenskyy for screwing up the Lutsenko deal:
In a White House transcript of a July 25 phone call, President Trump seemed to admonish the new Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, for firing Lutsenko: “I heard the prosecutor was treated very badly and he was a very fair prosecutor so good luck with everything.”The rest is history. Zelenskyy asks about military aid, Trump says "I would like you do us a favor, though", and then directly asks Zelenskyy for the same investigations into Biden and the Black Ledger that they had originally extracted from Lutsenko in exchange for Yovanovitch's termination. Lutsenko himself, now with no hope of getting his job back, readily admits the allegations of wrong doing by Hunter Biden were fabrications. Now SDNY has arrested two men who appear to have done the legwork coordinating with Lutsenko.
Highlights from October 8th's press release from the bipartisan Senate Intel Committee Report "Russia's Use of Social Media," for anyone who hasn't gone through to the Richard Burr tweet and clicked the link:
Key Findings and Recommendations:posted by wondermouse at 11:44 AM on October 10, 2019 [27 favorites]
The Committee found that the [Kremlin-backed Internet Research Agency] IRA sought to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election by harming Hillary Clinton’s chances of success and supporting Donald Trump at the direction of the Kremlin. The Committee found that IRA social media activity was overtly and almost invariably supportive of then-candidate Trump to the detriment of Secretary Clinton’s campaign.
The Internet Research Agency’s (IRA) targeting of the 2016 U.S. election was part of a broader, sophisticated, and ongoing information warfare campaign designed to sow discord in American politics and society. While the IRA exploited election-related content, the majority of its operations focused on exacerbating existing tensions on socially divisive issues, including race, immigration, and Second Amendment rights.
The Committee found the IRA targeted African-Americans more than any other group or demographic. Through individual posts, location targeting, Facebook pages, Instagram accounts, and Twitter trends, the IRA focused much of its efforts on stoking divisions around hot-button issues with racial undertones.
The IRA engaged with unwitting Americans to further its reach beyond the digital realm and into real-world activities. For example, IRA operatives targeting African-Americans convinced individuals to sign petitions, share personal information, and teach self-defense courses. Posing as U.S. political activists, operatives sought help from the Trump Campaign to procure campaign materials and to organize and promote rallies.
The Committee found IRA activity increased, rather than decreased, after Election Day 2016. Analysis of IRA-associated accounts shows a significant spike in activity after the election, increasing across Instagram (238 percent), Facebook (59 percent), Twitter (52 percent), and YouTube (84 percent). Researchers continue to uncover IRA-associated accounts that spread malicious content.
Some soccer fans worship their teams with a religious intensity, it's part of their identity and their community. When a player feigns an injury for a penalty, which happens all the time, indifferent people see it as cheating. The fanatics don't see it that way. They are either true believers, who know their heroes would never cheat and the injury is real, despite the evidence of their eyes. Or they are pragmatic, it's a professional foul, they are just doing what they need to do to win, which is the most important thing.
The commentators were carefully impartial about this in the old days, knowing that their audience were supporters of both teams. Perhaps in the most egregious cases they'd say with a note of concern 'well, that's the referee's decision', careful not to piss anyone off.
I remember a reporter asking a Roy Moore supporter if they believed the allegations. They said yes, but at least he's not a democrat. That's the pragmatic type. The true believer either hasn't heard the allegations, or they are told they are fake news. Shameless smears. They don't listen to impartial sources, they've been told not to trust them.
The media has a problem. This impeachment is being perceived as just another Trump scandal. What did he tweet this time? Is this about the porn star, or the golf course, or the hotel again? But it's not like the other scandals. This is about the establishment of one-man rule. An American dictatorship. Rigged elections, political opponents threatened, justice over-ruled by executive privilege. He's told you he wants to be a dictator. Do you think he's joking? When someone tells you who they are, believe them.
Fascism is undergoing a global rebirth. I know you think you're exceptional, it can't happen here, that only happens in far off places. You're not that special. Yet no-one is regarding this as the crisis it is because your media is broken, splintered, fractured, unreal. Half of your people think a pedophile is a better vote than a democrat.
The president is being impeached and no-one cares.
posted by adept256 at 11:54 AM on October 10, 2019 [51 favorites]
The commentators were carefully impartial about this in the old days, knowing that their audience were supporters of both teams. Perhaps in the most egregious cases they'd say with a note of concern 'well, that's the referee's decision', careful not to piss anyone off.
I remember a reporter asking a Roy Moore supporter if they believed the allegations. They said yes, but at least he's not a democrat. That's the pragmatic type. The true believer either hasn't heard the allegations, or they are told they are fake news. Shameless smears. They don't listen to impartial sources, they've been told not to trust them.
The media has a problem. This impeachment is being perceived as just another Trump scandal. What did he tweet this time? Is this about the porn star, or the golf course, or the hotel again? But it's not like the other scandals. This is about the establishment of one-man rule. An American dictatorship. Rigged elections, political opponents threatened, justice over-ruled by executive privilege. He's told you he wants to be a dictator. Do you think he's joking? When someone tells you who they are, believe them.
Fascism is undergoing a global rebirth. I know you think you're exceptional, it can't happen here, that only happens in far off places. You're not that special. Yet no-one is regarding this as the crisis it is because your media is broken, splintered, fractured, unreal. Half of your people think a pedophile is a better vote than a democrat.
The president is being impeached and no-one cares.
posted by adept256 at 11:54 AM on October 10, 2019 [51 favorites]
The revealing splits in GOP senators’ reactions to impeachment (WaPo)
"Pull my name off the 'I support Donald Trump' list."
posted by katra at 11:56 AM on October 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
0 Support the impeachment inquiryAlso: Metro East [Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.)] pulls Trump support after Syria decision (KMOX, via Politico)
15 Have expressed concerns or said they have questions
38 Support Trump unequivocally
"Pull my name off the 'I support Donald Trump' list."
posted by katra at 11:56 AM on October 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
Now SDNY has arrested two men who appear to have done the legwork coordinating with Lutsenko.
Suspects arrested on campaign finance charges after having lunch with Giuliani (The Hill)
Suspects arrested on campaign finance charges after having lunch with Giuliani (The Hill)
Two associates of President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani had lunch with Giuliani at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., hours before they were arrested, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing a source who saw the group together. [...]posted by katra at 1:07 PM on October 10, 2019 [13 favorites]
Prosecutors say the two were attempting to leave the country with one-way international tickets when they were arrested.
News trickling in citing the Wall Street Journal article that Giuliani met with Parnas and Fruman yesterday at the Trump Hotel in DC for lunch prior to them attempting to leave the country. Will be interesting to see if this is confirmed.
Surely no one is that stupid right?
posted by mike_honcho at 1:10 PM on October 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
Surely no one is that stupid right?
posted by mike_honcho at 1:10 PM on October 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
Giuliani hanging out at a Trump property with two who may have been under surveillance? Oooof. That's delicious.
posted by Harry Caul at 1:11 PM on October 10, 2019 [28 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 1:11 PM on October 10, 2019 [28 favorites]
Surely no one is that stupid right?
It's kinda what I've been wondering all day: is Trump succeeding in spite of the gross incompetency of his crew, or are law enforcement and intelligence agencies just really, really good at what they do.
/Not to say that's mutually exclusive...
posted by MrGuilt at 1:12 PM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
It's kinda what I've been wondering all day: is Trump succeeding in spite of the gross incompetency of his crew, or are law enforcement and intelligence agencies just really, really good at what they do.
/Not to say that's mutually exclusive...
posted by MrGuilt at 1:12 PM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
I was thinking the by-thanksgiving timeline of the impeachment was crazily fast, but there’s really no need for further evidence to start the proceedings. We can and should keep investigating until we’ve unraveled what the fuck happened to our country, but in terms of just I’ing TMFA there’s more than enough evidence to win over the court of public opinion, even with all the current obstruction going on.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 1:15 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 1:15 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
It's kinda what I've been wondering all day: is Trump succeeding in spite of the gross incompetency of his crew, or are law enforcement and intelligence agencies just really, really good at what they do.
Parnas and Fruman are indicted by the SDNY, and New York Prosecutors May Pose a Bigger Threat to Trump Than Mueller (Natasha Bertrand, Atlantic, Aug 24, 2018)
Parnas and Fruman are indicted by the SDNY, and New York Prosecutors May Pose a Bigger Threat to Trump Than Mueller (Natasha Bertrand, Atlantic, Aug 24, 2018)
SDNY’s aggressive pursuit of the Mafia and similarly structured organizations earned it a nickname, the Sovereign District of New York, and allowed it a little more leeway and independence from the Justice Department than most U.S. attorney’s offices enjoy, [Patrick Cotter, a former federal prosecutor who was part of the team that convicted the Gambino family boss John Gotti] said. It is also arguably subject to less oversight than Mueller’s probe, which is being overseen directly by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. “I think there’s a lot of truth to that sovereignty notion,” Cotter said. “Their strike zone is bigger in terms of DOJ supervision.”posted by katra at 1:24 PM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
Rick Perry has been subpoenaed
"Extortion, obstruction, and the uh, um, what's the third one there, let's see. The third crime I saw, obstruction, the uh, extortion, and let's see. I can't, the third one, sorry. Oops."
posted by jason_steakums at 1:32 PM on October 10, 2019 [43 favorites]
"Extortion, obstruction, and the uh, um, what's the third one there, let's see. The third crime I saw, obstruction, the uh, extortion, and let's see. I can't, the third one, sorry. Oops."
posted by jason_steakums at 1:32 PM on October 10, 2019 [43 favorites]
Mod note: This isn't a megathread, folks. A thread on Turkey would be appropriate.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 2:15 PM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 2:15 PM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
17 former Watergate special prosecutors:
We investigated the Watergate scandal. We believe Trump should be impeached.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:17 PM on October 10, 2019 [18 favorites]
We investigated the Watergate scandal. We believe Trump should be impeached.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:17 PM on October 10, 2019 [18 favorites]
In a few short months Trump has gone from "NO COLLUSION!" to "NO, COLLUSION!"
Hopefully soon American will see the headlines "Know Collusion!"
posted by srboisvert at 2:21 PM on October 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
Hopefully soon American will see the headlines "Know Collusion!"
posted by srboisvert at 2:21 PM on October 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
Parnas and Fruman are indicted by the SDNY, and New York Prosecutors May Pose a Bigger Threat to Trump Than Mueller
The fun part of this is that part of the reason SDNY has this freedom is their mob prosecutions. And who was head of SDNY when that was happening in the eighties? Rudy G.
posted by srboisvert at 2:48 PM on October 10, 2019 [12 favorites]
The fun part of this is that part of the reason SDNY has this freedom is their mob prosecutions. And who was head of SDNY when that was happening in the eighties? Rudy G.
posted by srboisvert at 2:48 PM on October 10, 2019 [12 favorites]
katra: Fox News Poll: Record support for Trump impeachment (FOX News, via Drudge banner: FOX SHOCK: 51% WANT TRUMP REMOVED )
Poll: Independents Move In Favor Of Impeachment Inquiry; GOP Stays Firmly Against (NPR, October 10, 2019)
And the Trump administration continues to side-step Congress: How The Trump Administration Uses 'Workarounds' To Reshape Legal Immigration (NPR, Oct. 10, 2019)
But it this case, it feels like the GOP would be happy to let Trump be the racist hardliner on immigration policies, so they can both throw up their hands and say "that's Trump, not us!" and also say to their racist base "see, the President has your racist backs!"
posted by filthy light thief at 2:59 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
Poll: Independents Move In Favor Of Impeachment Inquiry; GOP Stays Firmly Against (NPR, October 10, 2019)
A slim majority of Americans now approve of the Democratic House-led impeachment inquiry into President Trump, a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll finds.
Fifty-two percent say they approve of the inquiry, while 43% disapprove. That's a slight increase in support from two weeks ago, when 49% approved and 46% disapproved. The numbers are in line with other polls that have been released this week also showing majority support or an increase in support for the inquiry.
And the Trump administration continues to side-step Congress: How The Trump Administration Uses 'Workarounds' To Reshape Legal Immigration (NPR, Oct. 10, 2019)
Earlier this year, the State Department quietly rolled out new limits on one of President Trump's favorite targets: the diversity visa lottery.The article focuses on Trump's effort to change who is allowed on the path towards citizenship, but in terms of looking at his power grabs, particularly in light of impeachment investigations, he's acting on his own when he doesn't like what Congress says or does, even when the Republicans still have the Senate.
The White House made ending the program one of the "pillars" of its immigration policy proposal last year. But those proposals went nowhere on Capitol Hill.
So the administration tried something different: It is restricting who can apply for the diversity visa, in a way that advocates say will make it much harder for low-income immigrants to apply.
...
Despite pressure from the White House, Congress has not moved to end the program, which admits about 55,000 immigrants a year, largely from Africa and Europe, and gives them a path to a green card. Advocates say those immigrants tend to have higher levels of education and speak better English than other immigrants, and they come from countries that haven't historically had high levels of immigration to the U.S.
But the Trump administration didn't back down. In June of this year, the State Department announced a new rule: To be eligible for the diversity visa lottery, people must have a passport at the time they apply. The rule is designed to prevent fraud, officials said.
That may not sound like a big deal. But in many countries, obtaining a passport is difficult and time-consuming, says [Amaha Kassa, the executive director of African Communities Together, a nonprofit that helps African immigrants and their families], whose organization is suing to block the new rule.
"One of the plaintiffs on this lawsuit, he is a mechanic in a small town in Ethiopia. And in order to go to the place where he can apply for a passport he has to take three different buses. It's going to take him a full day to travel there. And the fees for acquiring a passport might be as much as a week's wages for him," Kassa said. "So what we're saying is, that is a huge burden."
...
Critics say the administration is still trying to achieve those goals — but in ways that don't require approval from Congress.
They point to the "public charge" rule, set to take effect next week, which would make it harder for immigrants to get green cards if they use a wide range of public benefits, such as food stamps. The rule also adds new income requirements for immigrants, favoring those who make more than 250% of the poverty line.
But it this case, it feels like the GOP would be happy to let Trump be the racist hardliner on immigration policies, so they can both throw up their hands and say "that's Trump, not us!" and also say to their racist base "see, the President has your racist backs!"
posted by filthy light thief at 2:59 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
The Atlantic: The Mystery of Rudy Giuliani’s Vienna Trip, Elaina Plott
Last night, when Rudy Giuliani told me he couldn’t get together for an interview, his reason made sense: As with many nights of late, he was due to appear on Hannity. When I suggested this evening instead, his response was a bit more curious. We would have to aim for lunch, Giuliani told me, because he was planning to fly to Vienna, Austria, at night. He didn’t offer any details beyond that.posted by jocelmeow at 3:26 PM on October 10, 2019 [41 favorites]
Giuliani called me at 6:22 p.m. last night—around the same time that two of his associates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, were arrested at Dulles Airport while waiting to board an international flight with one-way tickets. As The Wall Street Journal reported this afternoon, the two men were bound for Vienna. The Florida businessmen, who are reported to have assisted Giuliani in his alleged efforts to investigate Joe Biden and his family ahead of the 2020 election, were charged with campaign-finance violations, with prosecutors alleging that they had conspired to funnel money from a Russian donor into Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.
But Giuliani, when confirming today that Parnas and Fruman were heading to Vienna on matters “related to their business,” told the Journal that he himself only had plans to meet with them when they returned to Washington. By this logic, Giuliani was also planning to fly to Vienna within roughly 24 hours of his business associates, but do no business with them while all three were there.
This morning, Giuliani told me he’d have to reschedule our lunch. I’ve tried to reach him since then, to discuss Parnas’s and Fruman’s arrests, among other things, to no avail. When I called at 3 p.m. ET to ask about his Vienna trip, a woman claiming to be his communications director answered the phone. I have called him more than 100 times over the past year, and this is the first time that has ever happened. She said she’d have to get back to me. As we spoke, I could hear a voice that resembled Giuliani’s shout “asshole” in the background. “Oh, sorry,” the woman told me. “He was talking to the TV.”
Why were Parnas and Fruman bound for Vienna? Why was Giuliani—if what he told me was true—planning to be in the same city a day later?
Giuliani finally sent me a text message at 4:18 p.m. ET: “I can’t comment on it at this time.”
Poll: Independents Move In Favor Of Impeachment Inquiry; GOP Stays Firmly Against
Isn't this a tautology, with anybody moving for impeachment ceasing, by definition, to be GOP and becoming Independent?
posted by acb at 3:29 PM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Isn't this a tautology, with anybody moving for impeachment ceasing, by definition, to be GOP and becoming Independent?
posted by acb at 3:29 PM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
I have called him [Guiliani] more than 100 times over the past year ...
Is this normal for a journalist?
posted by JackFlash at 3:38 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
Is this normal for a journalist?
posted by JackFlash at 3:38 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
But you know that when the truth is told
That you can go to prison or you can get cold
You're gonna kick off before impeachment even
Gets halfway through
When will you realize, Vienna waits for you
posted by kirkaracha at 3:43 PM on October 10, 2019 [22 favorites]
That you can go to prison or you can get cold
You're gonna kick off before impeachment even
Gets halfway through
When will you realize, Vienna waits for you
posted by kirkaracha at 3:43 PM on October 10, 2019 [22 favorites]
There's a thought: the impeachment saga, a tale told in the lyrics of Billy Joel songs.
Trump, to Republican congress members:
Trump, to Republican congress members:
You may be rightNancy Pelosi to Donald Trump:
I may be crazy
but it just may be a lunatic you're looking for...
Because you had to be a big shot, didn't youposted by Sublimity at 3:51 PM on October 10, 2019 [13 favorites]
You had to open up your mouth
You had to be a big shot, didn't you
All your friends were so knocked out
You had to have the last word, last night
You know what everything's about
You and to have a white hot spotlight
You had to be a big shot last night...
god dammit I'm gonna be over here workshopping something involving the Conways and Scenes from an Italian Restaurant and by the time it's ready the thread will have moved on
posted by prize bull octorok at 3:54 PM on October 10, 2019 [22 favorites]
posted by prize bull octorok at 3:54 PM on October 10, 2019 [22 favorites]
Send it to me by MeMail, we'll make a date and I'll sing it to you over Skype.
posted by Sublimity at 3:56 PM on October 10, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by Sublimity at 3:56 PM on October 10, 2019 [10 favorites]
Come on Zelensky, don't make me wait
Ukraine is my personal Watergate
And ya know that it's really Joe Biden I hate
Some things will need to be done
Or missiles there will be none
That's what I say....
posted by cyndigo at 3:57 PM on October 10, 2019 [15 favorites]
Ukraine is my personal Watergate
And ya know that it's really Joe Biden I hate
Some things will need to be done
Or missiles there will be none
That's what I say....
posted by cyndigo at 3:57 PM on October 10, 2019 [15 favorites]
At least four national security officials raised alarms about Ukraine policy before and after Trump call with Ukrainian president (WaPo)
At least four national security officials were so alarmed by the Trump administration’s attempts to pressure Ukraine for political purposes that they raised concerns with a White House lawyer both before and immediately after President Trump’s July 25 call with that country’s president, according to U.S. officials and other people familiar with the matter.posted by katra at 3:58 PM on October 10, 2019 [16 favorites]
The nature and timing of the previously undisclosed discussions with National Security Council legal adviser John Eisenberg indicate that officials were delivering warnings through official White House channels earlier than previously understood — including before the call that precipitated a whistleblower complaint and the impeachment inquiry of the president.
At the time, the officials were unnerved by the removal in May of the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine; subsequent efforts by Trump’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani to promote Ukraine-related conspiracies; as well as signals in meetings at the White House that Trump wanted the new government in Kiev to deliver material that might be politically damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.
Those concerns soared in the call’s aftermath, officials said. Within minutes, senior officials including national security adviser John Bolton were being pinged by subordinates about problems with what the president had said to his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky. Bolton and others scrambled to obtain a rough transcript that was already being “locked down” on a highly classified computer network.
“When people were listening to this in real time there were significant concerns about what was going on — alarm bells were kind of ringing,” said one person familiar with the sequence of events inside the White House, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. “People were trying to figure out what to do, how to get a grasp on the situation.”
It is unclear whether some or all of the officials who complained to Eisenberg are also the ones who later spoke to the whistleblower.
Ousted Ukraine envoy expected to testify in impeachment probe despite White House vow not to cooperate, congressional aides say (WaPo)
Yovanovitch and her lawyer are “on board,” according to a senior congressional aide, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive negotiations. Yet House Democrats are preparing backup options to facilitate her testimony — including issuing a possible “friendly” subpoena, according to two people involved in the investigation — in case the State Department forbids her from speaking to lawmakers.posted by katra at 4:08 PM on October 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
Open Skies Treaty Allowed Eyes Over Russia; Trump Wants to Give Them Up.
Now tell me Putin doesn't completely own Tiny Hands...
posted by PhineasGage at 4:23 PM on October 10, 2019 [21 favorites]
Now tell me Putin doesn't completely own Tiny Hands...
posted by PhineasGage at 4:23 PM on October 10, 2019 [21 favorites]
Not quite impeachment news, but we can expect the tide of false information related to it to rise:
Biden campaign wants Facebook and Twitter to remove misleading Trump ads, both refuse (The Verge)
posted by saysthis at 4:27 PM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
Biden campaign wants Facebook and Twitter to remove misleading Trump ads, both refuse (The Verge)
posted by saysthis at 4:27 PM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
Also, with the latest from Ofcoursehedidistan, Axios brings us the White House's latest Ron Howard narration precursor: Trump denies knowing indicted Giuliani business associates
posted by saysthis at 4:32 PM on October 10, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by saysthis at 4:32 PM on October 10, 2019 [2 favorites]
Trump's former Russia aide set to give revealing testimony on Giuliani, Sondland (NBC News)
Fiona Hill’s appearance next week before Congress has stoked fear among people close to the president.
Fiona Hill’s appearance next week before Congress has stoked fear among people close to the president.
Fiona Hill, who was until recently President Donald Trump’s top aide on Russia and Europe, plans to tell Congress that Rudy Giuliani and E.U. ambassador Gordon Sondland circumvented the National Security Council and the normal White House process to pursue a shadow policy on Ukraine, a person familiar with her expected testimony told NBC News. [...]posted by katra at 4:56 PM on October 10, 2019 [14 favorites]
At the White House, Hill was not viewed as a Trump loyalist, leading those close to Trump to worry that she can’t be controlled or pressured not to reveal potentially damaging information about the president, the former senior White House official said. [...]
If Hill does testify as planned, it could strengthen House Democrats’ hand to pursue testimony from many other former White House officials who would have insight into activities central to the impeachment inquiry— including from former officials who may be disgruntled. That could include Bolton and his former aides at the National Security Council who also departed when Trump fired Bolton last month.
Current officials are employed by the executive branch, so an assertion of privilege is essentially an instruction that employees would be hard-pressed to ignore. Private citizens have no similar obligation and the assertion of privilege could run up against their First Amendment rights.
Giuliani dealings with associates scrutinized as part of investigation (CNN)
Rudy Giuliani's financial dealings with two associates indicted on campaign finance-related charges are under scrutiny by investigators overseeing the case, law enforcement officials briefed on the matter said.posted by katra at 5:22 PM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
The FBI and prosecutors in Manhattan are examining Giuliani's involvement in the broader flow of money that have become the focus of alleged violations that are at the center of the allegations against Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, the sources said. The sources did not say that Giuliani was a target of the investigation.
Serious question: why hasn't Rudy been arrested for FARA violations or acting as a government representative without holding such a title?
Giuliani Hunted Corruption. Now the Legal Peril May Be His (Bloomberg/Yahoo, Sept 25, 2019)
Giuliani Hunted Corruption. Now the Legal Peril May Be His (Bloomberg/Yahoo, Sept 25, 2019)
“Any objective, non-partisan Department of Justice would already be investigating Giuliani, who has gotten on TV and admitted things that, standing alone, raise serious concerns about violations of criminal laws,” said Mimi Rocah, a former federal prosecutor now at Pace University’s law school.posted by katra at 6:11 PM on October 10, 2019 [8 favorites]
Former federal prosecutors pointed to several possible lines of criminal inquiry, based on facts that have already become public, that could entangle Giuliani: Did he try to solicit something of value for Trump -- such as information that could damage a political opponent -- from a foreign party, in violation of federal election law? Did he engage in bribery by suggesting something of value -- like military aid to Ukraine -- in exchange for a Ukrainian investigation that could involve the Bidens? Did he step into a U.S. foreign policy dispute as a private citizen, which could violate the Logan Act? Was he a co-conspirator in a broader effort to defraud the U.S. by attempting to interfere in the 2020 presidential election? [...]
Giuliani’s conduct could be in violation of the 1799 Logan Act, said [John Moscow, who was a senior prosecutor in the office of former Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau] and [Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and former federal prosecutor]. The law forbids U.S. citizens from engaging in any “unauthorized” negotiations with foreign governments. “We want the government to act and not people who are running around winging it,” McQuade said.
U.S. foreign-lobbying laws could also apply. Seven Democratic Senators on Wednesday urged the Justice Department to review whether Giuliani has complied with the Foreign Agents Registration Act, known as FARA.
why hasn't Rudy been arrested for FARA violations or acting as a government representative without holding such a title?
Off the top of my head, because the fact that he hasn't can be used to put the screws to Parnas and Fruman, among (probably many) others? Rudy ain't going anywhere.
posted by rhizome at 6:12 PM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
Off the top of my head, because the fact that he hasn't can be used to put the screws to Parnas and Fruman, among (probably many) others? Rudy ain't going anywhere.
posted by rhizome at 6:12 PM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
I wonder if Giuliani's ticket to Vienna was also one-way because woah. Like, shits probably so much worse than we know now (ie those Russian goons were up to some other shit as well) if the freaking "hero of 9/11" is now looking to flee the country. I imagine he'll just keep spilling beans on camera while trying to do the opposite (god he is so bad at spin control) until Donny finally wakes up and turns on him...which I guarantee will be ugly. And oh crap I was just at the grocery store and forgot to buy popcorn.
posted by sexyrobot at 6:27 PM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by sexyrobot at 6:27 PM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
"Extortion, obstruction, and the uh, um, what's the third one there, let's see. The third crime I saw, obstruction, the uh, extortion, and let's see. I can't, the third one, sorry. Oops."
Needs Ron Paul helpfully suggesting crimes.
"Murder, Rick? Was there murder? bestiality, Rick?"
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:30 PM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
Needs Ron Paul helpfully suggesting crimes.
"Murder, Rick? Was there murder? bestiality, Rick?"
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:30 PM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
From katra's post above: U.S. foreign-lobbying laws could also apply. Seven Democratic Senators on Wednesday urged the Justice Department to review whether Giuliani has complied with the Foreign Agents Registration Act, known as FARA.
I always want to know who those senators are.
Mike Memoli, NBC News, Democratic Senators renew questions about Rudy Giuliani's apparent work for foreign governments, Sept. 25:
So, shouldn't there be some penalty or consequences when a government agency like DoJ simply fails to respond to a request from Congress for more than a year?
(Also from that story:
posted by kristi at 6:37 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
I always want to know who those senators are.
Mike Memoli, NBC News, Democratic Senators renew questions about Rudy Giuliani's apparent work for foreign governments, Sept. 25:
The Democratic senators who sent the letter were Dick Durbin of Illinois; Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts; Tom Udall of New Mexico; Tammy Duckworth of Illinois; Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island; Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut; and Jeff Merkley of Oregon.I'm surprised I don't see presidential candidate and former prosecutor Kamala Harris on that list.
They first raised concerns about whether Giuliani was in compliance with the Foreign Agent Registration Act, or FARA, more than a year ago, but say they received no response to their requests.
So, shouldn't there be some penalty or consequences when a government agency like DoJ simply fails to respond to a request from Congress for more than a year?
(Also from that story:
Separately Wednesday, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, called for Giuliani to testify before the panel under oath about his interactions with Ukrainian officials and whether he was acting, as he told Fox News Tuesday night, at the request of the State Department.Huh. I wasn't aware that a senator had called for Giuliani to testify under oath. Interesting.)
posted by kristi at 6:37 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
Giuliani Pressed for Turkish Prisoner Swap in Oval Office Meeting
Trump asked Tillerson to help broker deal to end U.S. prosecution of Turkish trader represented by Giuliani
posted by jasondigitized at 7:09 PM on October 10, 2019 [6 favorites]
Trump asked Tillerson to help broker deal to end U.S. prosecution of Turkish trader represented by Giuliani
posted by jasondigitized at 7:09 PM on October 10, 2019 [6 favorites]
...It’s still fake news to me
I’m ded.
posted by So You're Saying These Are Pants? at 7:12 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
I’m ded.
posted by So You're Saying These Are Pants? at 7:12 PM on October 10, 2019 [3 favorites]
It doesn't matter what they say in the papers
cause it's always been the same old thing
so the truth has been axed and you can't get the facts
from a right wing propaganda meme
aimed at your average teen
posted by Sublimity at 7:17 PM on October 10, 2019 [16 favorites]
cause it's always been the same old thing
so the truth has been axed and you can't get the facts
from a right wing propaganda meme
aimed at your average teen
posted by Sublimity at 7:17 PM on October 10, 2019 [16 favorites]
Harvard law professor and Reagan solicitor general unleashes his fury: This man terrifies me.
posted by Sublimity at 7:20 PM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Sublimity at 7:20 PM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
How about a pair of pink sidewinders
And a bright orange head of hair
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:20 PM on October 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
And a bright orange head of hair
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:20 PM on October 10, 2019 [5 favorites]
You could really be a Seb Gorka baby
if you sold your soul and didn't care
posted by Sublimity at 7:23 PM on October 10, 2019 [8 favorites]
if you sold your soul and didn't care
posted by Sublimity at 7:23 PM on October 10, 2019 [8 favorites]
We're almost to the point where we can just make a We Didn't Start the Fire parody using only the names of Trump's co-conspirators.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:54 PM on October 10, 2019 [26 favorites]
posted by tonycpsu at 7:54 PM on October 10, 2019 [26 favorites]
Mod note: I love you all but let's maybe try and get out of a new lyrics state of mind now.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:56 PM on October 10, 2019 [70 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:56 PM on October 10, 2019 [70 favorites]
Ukraine Whistleblower May Not Testify In Person (WSJ)
posted by katra at 8:05 PM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Lawyers for the CIA officer whose whistleblower complaint helped ignite an impeachment inquiry into President Trump have asked Congress whether their client could submit testimony in writing instead of appearing in person, according to people familiar with the matter.> Trump’s attacks fuel alarm that whistleblower protections fall short (Politico)
The request reflects concerns about whether the whistleblower could testify to Democrats and Republicans without revealing his identity, and fears that doing so would lead to it being publicly leaked, jeopardizing his personal safety. The intelligence committees haven't yet responded to the inquiry about potential written testimony, the people said. [...]
Negotiations between the whistleblower’s legal team and the intelligence committees over his potential testimony have played out for weeks, largely out of public view. During that time, Mr. Trump and his allies have attacked the whistleblower and those who supplied information for his complaint as treasonous, asserting they have partisan motives. [...]
Negotiations over the whistleblower’s testimony stem from fears among Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee that Republicans would quickly attempt to disclose the complainant’s identity, the people familiar with the matter said.
posted by katra at 8:05 PM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Before they attracted the attention of House investigators, Parnas and Fruman were known in Florida. From the Miami Herald, October 1.
He conned us from day one’: Giuliani’s Ukraine ally leaves trail of South Florida debts
He conned us from day one’: Giuliani’s Ukraine ally leaves trail of South Florida debts
Their relationship with Parnas dates back to 2010...Parnas solicited Michael Pues for a $350,000 bridge loan to help finance a movie called “Anatomy of an Assassin,” according to a lawsuit filed in 2011. Parnas even arranged a dinner with Jack Nicholson, court records state. But he never paid the money back. Five years later, a judge in New York federal court ruled that Parnas owed more than $500,000 to a Pues family trust...posted by TWinbrook8 at 8:06 PM on October 10, 2019 [12 favorites]
“He financially ruined us,” Dianne Pues said. “Our lives have not been the same since the day we met him.”....
Parnas has been sued over everything from a small-claims debt owed to a furniture maker in Delray Beach to unpaid legal bills to a $100,000 loan issued to a natural gas firm he runs with Fruman. The plaintiff in the latter case also alleged that Parnas and Fruman “boasted” about their close relationships with major figures in the GOP.
In 2014, Parnas and his wife were evicted from a $15,000-per-month, six-bedroom house in Boca Raton, court records show. Separately, his business, Fraud Guarantee, was ordered to pay more than $26,000 to its landlord. His career as a securities broker saw him work for three brokerages that were expelled from the industry by regulators...
Fruman runs an import/export business and a boutique hotel in Odessa, Ukraine, according to a profile by Buzzfeed. He also invested in a milk-canning plant in Ukraine that went bankrupt after going nearly $25 million in debt.
Fraud Gaurantee??
He really hid in plain sight.
posted by orange ball at 8:14 PM on October 10, 2019 [30 favorites]
He really hid in plain sight.
posted by orange ball at 8:14 PM on October 10, 2019 [30 favorites]
Trump aims to turn impeachment probe into campaign asset at Minneapolis rally (AP)
The rally in Minneapolis, the first since Democrats began proceedings two weeks ago to remove him from office, served as a proving ground for the president as he tries to use the impeachment inquiry to energize supporters for his 2020 campaign by casting himself — and his supporters — as victims of Democrats in the Washington swamp.posted by ZeusHumms at 8:20 PM on October 10, 2019 [1 favorite]
by casting himself — and his supporters — as victims of Democrats in the Washington swamp.
Former Trump Exec Predicts Trump Will Resign Over Impeachment Threat ‘To Save Face’ (Mediaite, Oct 7, 2019)
Former Trump Exec Predicts Trump Will Resign Over Impeachment Threat ‘To Save Face’ (Mediaite, Oct 7, 2019)
Barbara Res, former vice president of the Trump organization, told CNN’s Brian Stelter on Sunday that she was not surprised by the president’s angry reaction to the Ukraine scandal as it continues to unfold. She called it a typical response from Trump that matches what she saw from him when she used to head up his company’s construction projects.posted by katra at 8:35 PM on October 10, 2019 [9 favorites]
“He had this notion that everything that happened that was bad was directed at him like they were after him, people were after him,” said Res. “He makes it like, not that they’re after something he might’ve done, they’re after him.”
As Res continued to speak of Trump’s narcissistic tendencies, Stelter asked her for how she thinks her former boss’ time as president will come to an end. Res’ answer: “He does a lot of things to save face…It would be very, very, very bad for him to be impeached. I don’t know that he’ll be found guilty but I don’t know that he wants to be impeached. I think that’s what this panic is about. And my gut tells me he’ll leave office, he’ll resign or make some kind of a deal, even, depending on what comes out.”
Giuliani dealings with associates scrutinized as part of investigation (CNN)
Giuliani’s Ukraine Team: In Search of Influence, Dirt and Money (NYT)
The president’s lawyer was paid by Lev Parnas, who with Igor Fruman worked on behalf of President Trump in Ukraine.
Giuliani’s Ukraine Team: In Search of Influence, Dirt and Money (NYT)
The president’s lawyer was paid by Lev Parnas, who with Igor Fruman worked on behalf of President Trump in Ukraine.
Lev Parnas, a Ukrainian-American businessman with a trail of debts and lawsuits, had known Mr. Giuliani casually for years through Republican political circles. Last year, their relationship deepened when a company he helped found retained Mr. Giuliani — associates of Mr. Parnas said he told them he paid hundreds of thousands of dollars — for what Mr. Giuliani said on Thursday was business and legal advice.posted by katra at 9:43 PM on October 10, 2019 [7 favorites]
Even as he worked with Mr. Parnas’s company, Fraud Guarantee, Mr. Giuliani increasingly relied on Mr. Parnas to carry out Mr. Trump’s quest for evidence in Ukraine that would undercut the legitimacy of the special counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference on his behalf in the 2016 election and help him heading into his 2020 re-election campaign. [...] Their mission was to find people and information that could be used to undermine the special counsel’s investigation, and also to damage former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., a prospective Democratic challenger to Mr. Trump. [...]
They met regularly with Mr. Giuliani, often at the Trump International hotel in Washington. And all the while, they were pursuing their own business schemes and, according to an indictment unsealed on Thursday, illegally funneling campaign contributions in the United States in the service of both their political and business activities.
‘A great big money party’: Foreign efforts to influence Trump keep piling up (Politico)
Two Rudy Giuliani associates were indicted in the latest allegation of foreign attempts to sway Trump’s administration with secret money.
Two Rudy Giuliani associates were indicted in the latest allegation of foreign attempts to sway Trump’s administration with secret money.
“This is something that I believe is an increasing issue,” said one Republican election lawyer, who requested anonymity to speak frankly about issues related to his work. “When we’re dealing with foreign money, pretty much everyone agrees that it’s not allowed. You’re dealing with nefarious actors who are intentionally circumventing the law.” [...]posted by katra at 10:23 PM on October 10, 2019 [4 favorites]
Parnas and Fruman partnered with a powerful Washington ally, Giuliani, with whom they worked on efforts including a push to have the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine removed from her post. The indictment alleges Parnas and Fruman successfully agitated for Marie Yovanovitch’s removal at the behest of a Ukranian official they were working with. [...]
Illegal lobbying on behalf of former governments has also ensnared former Trump officials. Manafort and an associate, Rick Gates, were indicted after extensive foreign lobbying work and accused of filing false statements in their claims about lobbying for foreign countries, including a pro-Russian party in Ukraine. The indictment claimed Manafort laundered more than $18 million. Former national security adviser Michael Flynn was also convicted of secretly lobbying on behalf of the Turkish government, after Flynn cooperated with prosecutors in the case.
“He makes it like, not that they’re after something he might’ve done, they’re after him.”
At this point, shouldn't there be people very much after him? We're kinda past the point of "something he's done", we might even be past the point of somethings-plural he's done, we're very much approaching an accumulation of corruption which begs the question whether or not he should be considered a person or an actual portal to hell in vaguely anthropomorphic form.
I really hope there are political figures and law enforcement who consider taking him down both a matter of institution-preserving work AND a matter of personal satisfaction.
posted by wildblueyonder at 11:05 PM on October 10, 2019 [11 favorites]
At this point, shouldn't there be people very much after him? We're kinda past the point of "something he's done", we might even be past the point of somethings-plural he's done, we're very much approaching an accumulation of corruption which begs the question whether or not he should be considered a person or an actual portal to hell in vaguely anthropomorphic form.
I really hope there are political figures and law enforcement who consider taking him down both a matter of institution-preserving work AND a matter of personal satisfaction.
posted by wildblueyonder at 11:05 PM on October 10, 2019 [11 favorites]
Impeach Trump, Repeatedly
In other words...
Impeach Trump, Rinse and Repeat
A tad more metafiltery, that.,
posted by y2karl at 2:30 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
In other words...
Impeach Trump, Rinse and Repeat
A tad more metafiltery, that.,
posted by y2karl at 2:30 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
“Oh, sorry,” the woman told me. “He was talking to the TV.”
I mean, that's been our unofficial national motto for the past 3 years.
posted by mike_honcho at 4:56 AM on October 11, 2019 [28 favorites]
I mean, that's been our unofficial national motto for the past 3 years.
posted by mike_honcho at 4:56 AM on October 11, 2019 [28 favorites]
Spending bill would avert shutdown, keep government open through Nov. 21 (WashPo 9/19/2019)
Six days after that vote Nancy made her impeachment announcement. The whistleblower revelations became public between these two dates. We know from recent experience that Trump will use a shutdown for political purposes. Last time it was about his stupid fucking wall. Maybe this time he'll try to use it to make the impeachment go away.
November 21 is six weeks away. Is that how long we have?
posted by adept256 at 5:08 AM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
Six days after that vote Nancy made her impeachment announcement. The whistleblower revelations became public between these two dates. We know from recent experience that Trump will use a shutdown for political purposes. Last time it was about his stupid fucking wall. Maybe this time he'll try to use it to make the impeachment go away.
November 21 is six weeks away. Is that how long we have?
posted by adept256 at 5:08 AM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
We know from recent experience that Trump will use a shutdown for political purposes.
Bring it.
The last shutdown, over the wall, brought some of his lowest approval ratings. His numbers are shaky, and there is a slow trend upward across the electorate favoring impeachment (and removal).
I can only imagine another shutdown to derail impeachment on top of the obstruction to date will further erode his support. GOP senators will suddenly discover a love of democratic norms.
posted by MrGuilt at 5:28 AM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
Bring it.
The last shutdown, over the wall, brought some of his lowest approval ratings. His numbers are shaky, and there is a slow trend upward across the electorate favoring impeachment (and removal).
I can only imagine another shutdown to derail impeachment on top of the obstruction to date will further erode his support. GOP senators will suddenly discover a love of democratic norms.
posted by MrGuilt at 5:28 AM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
I'm not convinced of the "Trump will resign to save face" argument. His greed will likely overpower any such instinct and prevent him from stepping down during the height of campaign season. One of the only things he likes about being president is all the easy donor money and emoluments.
If he resigned, he'd still have a spotlight and his alt-right followers, but no working class donors, and the upper class will have no incentive to flood money into his businesses without the power of the office to provide anything useful in return. Not to mention the legal battles he'll be facing. He'll likely cling to the office until it's ripped from his short-fingered hands.
posted by p3t3 at 5:32 AM on October 11, 2019 [12 favorites]
If he resigned, he'd still have a spotlight and his alt-right followers, but no working class donors, and the upper class will have no incentive to flood money into his businesses without the power of the office to provide anything useful in return. Not to mention the legal battles he'll be facing. He'll likely cling to the office until it's ripped from his short-fingered hands.
posted by p3t3 at 5:32 AM on October 11, 2019 [12 favorites]
If he were slightly less of a narcissist, he'd feign serious illness, get the sympathy points and resign under an understanding that no one is going to want to be seen coming for a frail old man. But that would require him to appear weak, and he will never be able to bring himself to do that.
posted by soren_lorensen at 5:34 AM on October 11, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by soren_lorensen at 5:34 AM on October 11, 2019 [19 favorites]
I can see Trump logic assuming the shutdown would put a stop to the impeachment proceedings and buy him time to cover up things better.
posted by mrzarquon at 5:36 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by mrzarquon at 5:36 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
I'm beginning to prepare myself for Trump resigning in the face of impeachment, pardoned by Pence, and working a deal with SDNY to stay out of jail, with the help of Barr. Ugh. I mean, he'll probably throw a great deal of people under the bus who deserve it, but I'd really really like to see him in court, and in jail. But he has a lifelong history of moneyed support that has kept him out, despite hundreds of crimes.
posted by Harry Caul at 5:45 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 5:45 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
Trump will never resign. I'll rephrase that: he'll only resign if he gets a "better offer." Well, what's better for Trump right now than being the President of the US? Probably not much. He's the kind of person who thinks he should be able to do anything he wants, and if anyone tries to stop him or tells him it's wrong, it's a failing of those other people- never himself. If you've ever worked for a person like that, you know how it is.
He will never keep himself in check. The people who are in a position to do that absolutely need to do that. They are afraid to, for some reason. Maybe they have a hard time truly believing the situation is as dire as is it, because it sounds so far-fetched, like it can't happen in America. It seems to me like the House is doing everything it can to build a huge enough case and pressure around Trump not so that he himself resigns, but so that everyone left in the government in a position to do something about it has no choice but to do it. This will require those people to not already be Trump sycophants or Russian assets, and what's left to be seen is how many of those people we even have left.
posted by wondermouse at 5:59 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
He will never keep himself in check. The people who are in a position to do that absolutely need to do that. They are afraid to, for some reason. Maybe they have a hard time truly believing the situation is as dire as is it, because it sounds so far-fetched, like it can't happen in America. It seems to me like the House is doing everything it can to build a huge enough case and pressure around Trump not so that he himself resigns, but so that everyone left in the government in a position to do something about it has no choice but to do it. This will require those people to not already be Trump sycophants or Russian assets, and what's left to be seen is how many of those people we even have left.
posted by wondermouse at 5:59 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
One of the arrested Giuliani guys had a company called Fraud Guarantee.
The other had a club called Mafia Rave.
I am not making this up
posted by growabrain at 6:01 AM on October 11, 2019 [41 favorites]
The other had a club called Mafia Rave.
I am not making this up
posted by growabrain at 6:01 AM on October 11, 2019 [41 favorites]
pardoned by Pence, and working a deal with SDNY to stay out of jail, with the help of Barr.
Er, well, there are two different entities operating out of New York here. The SDNY is a federal office, and if he's issued a blanket pardon by Pence, they have nothing on him and nobody needs to call Barr to make that happen. The State of New York, no the other hand, seems like it has a few live indictments it'd like to fire off at him, and (a) Pence has no power to pardon those, and (b) Barr has no power to make them go away.
posted by jackbishop at 6:03 AM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
Er, well, there are two different entities operating out of New York here. The SDNY is a federal office, and if he's issued a blanket pardon by Pence, they have nothing on him and nobody needs to call Barr to make that happen. The State of New York, no the other hand, seems like it has a few live indictments it'd like to fire off at him, and (a) Pence has no power to pardon those, and (b) Barr has no power to make them go away.
posted by jackbishop at 6:03 AM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
I don't know if this is appropriate to post in the Billy Joel thread, but it seems Sondland is going to testify after all.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:35 AM on October 11, 2019 [35 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:35 AM on October 11, 2019 [35 favorites]
Democrats: Unlike the Mueller investigation, the Ukraine scandal is simple and easy to explain to voters.
Giuliani: Actually, I committed so many different crimes and tied them together so intricately that you'll be uncovering and untangling my web of conspiracies for months if not years.
posted by mbrubeck at 6:39 AM on October 11, 2019 [26 favorites]
Giuliani: Actually, I committed so many different crimes and tied them together so intricately that you'll be uncovering and untangling my web of conspiracies for months if not years.
posted by mbrubeck at 6:39 AM on October 11, 2019 [26 favorites]
Sondland is a loyalist, and while it's good he's testifying I expect very little of value from what he has to say. Unless he self-incriminates, but I doubt that happens. Pretty sure his flying back to D.C. last week for the testimony that never happened was so they could huddle and get stories straight.
Former and present ambassadors to Ukraine though...can't wait to hear from them.
posted by mcstayinskool at 6:44 AM on October 11, 2019
Former and present ambassadors to Ukraine though...can't wait to hear from them.
posted by mcstayinskool at 6:44 AM on October 11, 2019
Trump won’t resign. This is going to go to it’s logical conclusion which is he’s going to continue to call this a coup and fight until the bitter end. What that end looks like I have no idea but I can guarantee you that every institution will be in shambles by the time he’s dragged from the oval. If that even happens. Government in this country is fundamentally broken and Trump is going to take the country down with him. Not much anyone can do but stand back and watch.
posted by photoslob at 6:44 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by photoslob at 6:44 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
If he were slightly less of a narcissist, he'd feign serious illness, get the sympathy points and resign under an understanding that no one is going to want to be seen coming for a frail old man. But that would require him to appear weak, and he will never be able to bring himself to do that.
I said early on that Melania would feign an illness to let Trump resign with dignity, once he figured out how hard the job actually is. I think there are two reasons he hasn't tried that: He knows the State of New York is going to come after him hard, and he doesn't trust Pence to pardon him for the federal stuff.
posted by Etrigan at 6:46 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
I said early on that Melania would feign an illness to let Trump resign with dignity, once he figured out how hard the job actually is. I think there are two reasons he hasn't tried that: He knows the State of New York is going to come after him hard, and he doesn't trust Pence to pardon him for the federal stuff.
posted by Etrigan at 6:46 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
Under standard circumstances, Sondland would have three choices in his testimony.
Answer truthfully to the best of his ability.
Perjure himself.
Take the fifth.
In today's environment, he may try additional choices.
Snarl and say, "Have you? Have you?" (a la Gorsuch.)
Refuse to answer on the grounds that it is a witch hunt.
Claim executive privilege.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:51 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Answer truthfully to the best of his ability.
Perjure himself.
Take the fifth.
In today's environment, he may try additional choices.
Snarl and say, "Have you? Have you?" (a la Gorsuch.)
Refuse to answer on the grounds that it is a witch hunt.
Claim executive privilege.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:51 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Plus, who’d believe that he’d step down for the good of Melania?
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 6:52 AM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 6:52 AM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
Also: nobody would believe him to have sacrificed his political career for his wife's health.
posted by acb at 6:52 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by acb at 6:52 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Plus, who’d believe that he’d step down for the good of Melania?
Who believes anything the guy says? Of course it would be bullshit. We'd all know it was bullshit, and so would the people loudly proclaiming what a great and pure and true and valiant sacrifice it was. But they'd still proclaim it, because the only tenet of Trumpism is loyalty to Trump above all else, including objective reality.
posted by Etrigan at 6:54 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
Who believes anything the guy says? Of course it would be bullshit. We'd all know it was bullshit, and so would the people loudly proclaiming what a great and pure and true and valiant sacrifice it was. But they'd still proclaim it, because the only tenet of Trumpism is loyalty to Trump above all else, including objective reality.
posted by Etrigan at 6:54 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
I'm not convinced of the "Trump will resign to save face" argument. His greed will likely overpower any such instinct
Speculation about Trump resigning misses the obvious fact that holding the office of president is the only think shielding him from criminal investigation and prosecution.
posted by Gelatin at 6:59 AM on October 11, 2019 [29 favorites]
Speculation about Trump resigning misses the obvious fact that holding the office of president is the only think shielding him from criminal investigation and prosecution.
posted by Gelatin at 6:59 AM on October 11, 2019 [29 favorites]
Well, he could ask for asylum in Russia.
posted by hat_eater at 7:03 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by hat_eater at 7:03 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
the only thing shielding him from criminal investigation and prosecution.
He's been protected from the results of both his entire life.
posted by Harry Caul at 7:04 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
He's been protected from the results of both his entire life.
posted by Harry Caul at 7:04 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Trump won't resign. He'll be shouting as the door to his cell slams shut that it was all a "rigged witch hunt," nobody in history is as innocent and very brilliant as he is, that he was betrayed by the Deep State, and that Hillary Clinton is the real criminal.
posted by Foosnark at 7:09 AM on October 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Foosnark at 7:09 AM on October 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
But would it serve Putin's needs to offer him sanctuary, or to leave him in America to do as much damage as possible on the way down?
posted by acb at 7:09 AM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by acb at 7:09 AM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
He's been protected from the results of both his entire life.
...while he was a pretentious businessman and a reality show loudmouth and before he started making life unpleasant for the rest of the country. He may have eked out an electoral college victory, but even in 2016 he lost the popularity contest by almost three million votes, and he's done nothing to endear himself to loyal Americans since -- quite the contrary.
We swept a Democratic House into office to put a check on Trump's behavior, and Democrats and loyal Americans will not be in a forgiving mood once Trump's stench is purged from office.
posted by Gelatin at 7:10 AM on October 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
...while he was a pretentious businessman and a reality show loudmouth and before he started making life unpleasant for the rest of the country. He may have eked out an electoral college victory, but even in 2016 he lost the popularity contest by almost three million votes, and he's done nothing to endear himself to loyal Americans since -- quite the contrary.
We swept a Democratic House into office to put a check on Trump's behavior, and Democrats and loyal Americans will not be in a forgiving mood once Trump's stench is purged from office.
posted by Gelatin at 7:10 AM on October 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
He's been protected from the results of both his entire life.
In large part because the NY state government has been a corrupt mess built around a backroom deal that codified power sharing between the Democrats and Republicans. That deal has more or less been blown up, with several of the men involved - most notably Shelly Silver - winding up in jail over it. The current NY AG, Letisha James, would love nothing more than to nail Trump’s hide to the wall; and Manhattan DA Cy Vance (whose ass is in a sling of his own making) also would like an orange trophy, if only to save his own hide.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:13 AM on October 11, 2019 [24 favorites]
In large part because the NY state government has been a corrupt mess built around a backroom deal that codified power sharing between the Democrats and Republicans. That deal has more or less been blown up, with several of the men involved - most notably Shelly Silver - winding up in jail over it. The current NY AG, Letisha James, would love nothing more than to nail Trump’s hide to the wall; and Manhattan DA Cy Vance (whose ass is in a sling of his own making) also would like an orange trophy, if only to save his own hide.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:13 AM on October 11, 2019 [24 favorites]
Trump predicts senators will quash impeachment. His allies aren’t so sure. (Politico)
It’s a prospect that may seem far-fetched. Senate Republican officials say the party still foresees an almost entirely partisan outcome in a potential impeachment trial. And Republicans — especially those up for election in 2020 — have long been afraid of losing Trump’s base if he turns on them. They’ve rarely defected from the president in large numbers for key votes.DeSantis disgorges campaign donations tied to indicted Giuliani associates (Politico)
But the landscape could shift quickly if fresh details emerge that help Democrats make their case that Trump must go, said Michael Steel, a longtime GOP operative and aide to former House Speaker John Boehner. “If the Democrats are able to make an argument that’s clear and captures the public imagination … then you start thinking more seriously about what a Senate trial could look like and whether you could get to that possibility,” Steel said of a scenario in which enough GOP senators defect to remove Trump. [...]
Caught in the spotlight, Senate Republicans are treating their comments on the Democrat-led impeachment inquiry with the utmost care, aware that the president could end their careers. Last year, Trump took down Florida Republican Adam Putnam with a tweet during the state’s gubernatorial primary, putting his weight behind the eventual winner, Ron DeSantis, who took pains to get close to Trump.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has ordered his political committee to turn over $50,000 to the federal government, money his campaign received last year from a shell corporation that is now at the heart of an indictment against two foreign-born associates of Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer.posted by katra at 7:21 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
[...] The Miami Herald reported this week that Parnas was a host for two DeSantis fundraisers last year. The newspaper described one as a small event held at a “South Florida residence with fewer than 30 people attending, including the governor. The other gathering was headlined by Donald Trump Jr.”
I keep remembering that the Watergate burglars were all from South Florida.
posted by mbrubeck at 7:24 AM on October 11, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by mbrubeck at 7:24 AM on October 11, 2019 [16 favorites]
So many crazy things have happened that the future seems impossible to predict, but I tend to believe Individual 1 will not resign and will hang on until the proverbial bitter end. With state charges in New York waiting for him as soon as he's not President any more, he's going to want to put that off for as long as possible.
One issue that hasn't been discussed much here is, should the House focus only on the Ukraine scandal and issue just one article of impeachment, or should they include other things and impeach on multiple counts?
I understand the desire to move quickly, and that one simple count would be easier for the average citizen/voter to understand. But there have been so many crimes, abuses of power, and acts of corruption that it seems like it would be a bad idea to let them slide.
It doesn't have to be a "kitchen sink" thing, but IMO the Democrats should consider including:
- the Ukraine scandal (aka campaign finance crime #1, or "aid for dirt," as MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace is now calling it.)
- emoluments - specifically prohibited in the Constitution, and there are hundreds, if not thousands, of violations that can be documented just by looking at the records of I-1's hotels & resorts
- hush money payments, aka campaign finance crime #2. Michael Cohen already is serving time for this, and the case is well-documented, with I-1 already named as an un-indicted co-conspirator.
- obstruction of justice - as already documented in the Mueller Report.
- obstruction of Congress - new & public instances of this are happening on daily basis (and it was one of the articles that would have been brought against Nixon, had things gotten that far.)
- misuse of emergency powers - both the highly unpopular tariffs/trade war and the stealing of money already appropriated for other purposes to fund the border wall are being implemented by using emergency powers, as invoked by I-1, when there's no actual emergency. This is a little harder to explain than the other articles, but it definitely should be impeachable.
These charges shouldn't require too much additional hearing time, and ultimately, I think having multiple grounds for impeachment does make the case stronger.
posted by Nat "King" Cole Porter Wagoner at 7:27 AM on October 11, 2019 [18 favorites]
One issue that hasn't been discussed much here is, should the House focus only on the Ukraine scandal and issue just one article of impeachment, or should they include other things and impeach on multiple counts?
I understand the desire to move quickly, and that one simple count would be easier for the average citizen/voter to understand. But there have been so many crimes, abuses of power, and acts of corruption that it seems like it would be a bad idea to let them slide.
It doesn't have to be a "kitchen sink" thing, but IMO the Democrats should consider including:
- the Ukraine scandal (aka campaign finance crime #1, or "aid for dirt," as MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace is now calling it.)
- emoluments - specifically prohibited in the Constitution, and there are hundreds, if not thousands, of violations that can be documented just by looking at the records of I-1's hotels & resorts
- hush money payments, aka campaign finance crime #2. Michael Cohen already is serving time for this, and the case is well-documented, with I-1 already named as an un-indicted co-conspirator.
- obstruction of justice - as already documented in the Mueller Report.
- obstruction of Congress - new & public instances of this are happening on daily basis (and it was one of the articles that would have been brought against Nixon, had things gotten that far.)
- misuse of emergency powers - both the highly unpopular tariffs/trade war and the stealing of money already appropriated for other purposes to fund the border wall are being implemented by using emergency powers, as invoked by I-1, when there's no actual emergency. This is a little harder to explain than the other articles, but it definitely should be impeachable.
These charges shouldn't require too much additional hearing time, and ultimately, I think having multiple grounds for impeachment does make the case stronger.
posted by Nat "King" Cole Porter Wagoner at 7:27 AM on October 11, 2019 [18 favorites]
Can the Democrats line up these multiple counts, such that, if the Ukraine count gets voted forward and dies in the Senate, they load the impeachment cannon with emoluments, then obstructions, and so on?
It would take a lot of party discipline, but it would increase the pressure by giving every count media exposure. Which would make this stretch past the election.
Trump doesn't want to resign, but I doubt he has the stamina to keep this up indefinitely.
Secondly, if Trump were to look for the exits, were there any he would be willing to risk, as in, he thinks he could step down and not go to jail?
Pence would take care of federal charges with a pardon...would Trump ever think it possible he could lawyer his way out of state charges?
posted by emjaybee at 7:36 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
It would take a lot of party discipline, but it would increase the pressure by giving every count media exposure. Which would make this stretch past the election.
Trump doesn't want to resign, but I doubt he has the stamina to keep this up indefinitely.
Secondly, if Trump were to look for the exits, were there any he would be willing to risk, as in, he thinks he could step down and not go to jail?
Pence would take care of federal charges with a pardon...would Trump ever think it possible he could lawyer his way out of state charges?
posted by emjaybee at 7:36 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
New revelations about Trump test Pelosi’s narrow impeachment strategy (WaPo)
“We’re basically getting like three new impeachable offenses a day, so it suggests that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg on what’s happening,” said Daniel Pfeiffer, a former Obama strategist who hosts “Pod Save America” and has been pushing Democrats to expand their probes.posted by katra at 7:37 AM on October 11, 2019 [7 favorites]
Multiple senior Democratic officials tracking the impeachment inquiry said there is no plan to broaden their investigation to include Trump’s unorthodox request to Tillerson, which the former secretary of state rejected and considered illegal. Nor are Democrats readying a new impeachment probe of Trump’s request last week that China dig up dirt on Biden, which one official said was a public declaration so it didn’t need to be investigated.
Some Democrats, however, indicated that the strategy could change.
While Trump has blocked numerous administration officials from testifying, Tillerson, who was ousted by Trump, has been willing to participate in previous Democratic inquiries, even secretly answering questions for the House Foreign Affairs Committee last spring. Should Democrats call him to testify, he could be a fruitful witness.
Questions about next steps are expected to dominate a Friday afternoon conference call between Pelosi and members of her Democratic caucus. The discussion comes as the White House has pressured Pelosi to hold a formal House vote for an impeachment inquiry, a dare the speaker has no intention of responding to, according to senior Democrats close to the speaker — at least not now.
Gelatin Speculation about Trump resigning misses the obvious fact that holding the office of president is the only think shielding him from criminal investigation and prosecution.
That statement seems to be totally at odds with the entire history of America in general and specifically the history of America and rich white politicians.
Everyone seems oddly confident that somehow, this time, it will be different and that Trump will be prosecuted, but no one ever seems to be able to articulate exactly why they think it will be different which makes me suspect it's just that we really, desperately, want it to be different not that there's any reason to think it will be.
And I totally get that, I too desperately want it to be different this time. But I don't see why it will be.
I also have a suspicion that people are putting far too much faith in the idea that a Presidential pardon can't cover state crimes, all it takes is a 5-4 decision by the Republicans on the Court following a seance where they commune with the ghosts of Alexander hamilton and George Washington and determine that the original intent of the Constitution was that of course Presidential pardons cover state crimes, possibly with a Bush v Gore style codicil saying it's a one off decision that sets no precedent and can never be cited by anyone.
I don't think Trump will resign, but I don't think it's fear of prosecution that drives his urge to hold office.
posted by sotonohito at 7:38 AM on October 11, 2019 [17 favorites]
That statement seems to be totally at odds with the entire history of America in general and specifically the history of America and rich white politicians.
Everyone seems oddly confident that somehow, this time, it will be different and that Trump will be prosecuted, but no one ever seems to be able to articulate exactly why they think it will be different which makes me suspect it's just that we really, desperately, want it to be different not that there's any reason to think it will be.
And I totally get that, I too desperately want it to be different this time. But I don't see why it will be.
I also have a suspicion that people are putting far too much faith in the idea that a Presidential pardon can't cover state crimes, all it takes is a 5-4 decision by the Republicans on the Court following a seance where they commune with the ghosts of Alexander hamilton and George Washington and determine that the original intent of the Constitution was that of course Presidential pardons cover state crimes, possibly with a Bush v Gore style codicil saying it's a one off decision that sets no precedent and can never be cited by anyone.
I don't think Trump will resign, but I don't think it's fear of prosecution that drives his urge to hold office.
posted by sotonohito at 7:38 AM on October 11, 2019 [17 favorites]
Trump lost his 2nd Circuit appeal to stop his tax returns being released.
Not sure if they've lifted the stay or if Trump is going to appeal to SCOTUS.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:52 AM on October 11, 2019 [14 favorites]
Not sure if they've lifted the stay or if Trump is going to appeal to SCOTUS.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:52 AM on October 11, 2019 [14 favorites]
Everyone seems oddly confident that somehow, this time, it will be different and that Trump will be prosecuted, but no one ever seems to be able to articulate exactly why they think it will be different
The history of rich white guys avoiding prosecution also involves those rich white guys not even being investigated. The vast majority of white-collar crime is just flat-out ignored, not handwaved away in the courts. By the time you're at the Circuit Court level arguing that you shouldn't be prosecuted, you're already being prosecuted.
Will Donald Trump definitely die in prison for crimes conducted before 2016? Nah. But it's a lot more likely that it happens today than it was in 2015.
posted by Etrigan at 7:53 AM on October 11, 2019 [12 favorites]
The history of rich white guys avoiding prosecution also involves those rich white guys not even being investigated. The vast majority of white-collar crime is just flat-out ignored, not handwaved away in the courts. By the time you're at the Circuit Court level arguing that you shouldn't be prosecuted, you're already being prosecuted.
Will Donald Trump definitely die in prison for crimes conducted before 2016? Nah. But it's a lot more likely that it happens today than it was in 2015.
posted by Etrigan at 7:53 AM on October 11, 2019 [12 favorites]
Everyone seems oddly confident that somehow, this time, it will be different and that Trump will be prosecuted, but no one ever seems to be able to articulate exactly why they think it will be different
"Confident" is a bit of an overstatement. We're desperately hoping, and there are various ways to put this into words.
posted by Namlit at 7:59 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
"Confident" is a bit of an overstatement. We're desperately hoping, and there are various ways to put this into words.
posted by Namlit at 7:59 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
Everyone seems oddly confident that somehow, this time, it will be different and that Trump will be prosecuted, but no one ever seems to be able to articulate exactly why they think it will be different which makes me suspect it's just that we really, desperately, want it to be different not that there's any reason to think it will be.
Okay, I'll give you one - Cyrus Vance, district attorney for the Borough of Manhattan, will very likely lose his job if he doesn't prosecute Trump. This is due to his numerous failures on high profile cases, which has put him in the spotlight of reformers targeting district attorneys.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:59 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
Okay, I'll give you one - Cyrus Vance, district attorney for the Borough of Manhattan, will very likely lose his job if he doesn't prosecute Trump. This is due to his numerous failures on high profile cases, which has put him in the spotlight of reformers targeting district attorneys.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:59 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
The only way Trump resigns is if it's somehow part of a deal to protect him from any and all further consequences, which would almost certainly include ratting everyone out. It doesn't matter that it doesn't work like that; his whole deal is thinking the rules don't apply to him, because they never have. Remember that tape of him in a deposition? The second he's beat he turns obsequious and pliant.
What could bring that about? I have no idea. But if he does it he'll turn on the GOP on the way down, too, and that, THAT, will be fucking glorious.
posted by schadenfrau at 8:00 AM on October 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
What could bring that about? I have no idea. But if he does it he'll turn on the GOP on the way down, too, and that, THAT, will be fucking glorious.
posted by schadenfrau at 8:00 AM on October 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
I'll give you one - Cyrus Vance, district attorney for the Borough of Manhattan, will very likely lose his job if he doesn't prosecute Trump
yeah I think this is the only way, honestly: justice-by-SAW-logic. Pit them all against each other for survival, watch them tear each other to pieces.
posted by schadenfrau at 8:01 AM on October 11, 2019 [7 favorites]
yeah I think this is the only way, honestly: justice-by-SAW-logic. Pit them all against each other for survival, watch them tear each other to pieces.
posted by schadenfrau at 8:01 AM on October 11, 2019 [7 favorites]
Everyone seems oddly confident that somehow, this time, it will be different and that Trump will be prosecuted, but no one ever seems to be able to articulate exactly why they think it will be different
I did, and so did NoxAeternum. Democratic voters are not in a forgiving mood at all, and the situation in New York has changed to favor prosecution. Barr is corrupt, sure, but presumably there are Federal prosecutors who would be willing -- if not eager -- to bring Trump to justice for the crimes they've witnessed throughout his tenure.
And as I've said before, if Trump were so sure of his impunity, he wouldn't be working so hard to hide the evidence (such as his tax returns).
posted by Gelatin at 8:04 AM on October 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
I did, and so did NoxAeternum. Democratic voters are not in a forgiving mood at all, and the situation in New York has changed to favor prosecution. Barr is corrupt, sure, but presumably there are Federal prosecutors who would be willing -- if not eager -- to bring Trump to justice for the crimes they've witnessed throughout his tenure.
And as I've said before, if Trump were so sure of his impunity, he wouldn't be working so hard to hide the evidence (such as his tax returns).
posted by Gelatin at 8:04 AM on October 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
What could bring that about?
The balance between him bargaining for protections, and his narcissistic need to avoid losing an election. The timing on impeachment will impact this I think. He'll resign before he'd lose an election. As it looks more likely he'll be impeached (or worse) and less likely he'd win reelection, I think he would resign.
posted by Harry Caul at 8:17 AM on October 11, 2019
The balance between him bargaining for protections, and his narcissistic need to avoid losing an election. The timing on impeachment will impact this I think. He'll resign before he'd lose an election. As it looks more likely he'll be impeached (or worse) and less likely he'd win reelection, I think he would resign.
posted by Harry Caul at 8:17 AM on October 11, 2019
> Government in this country is fundamentally broken and Trump is going to take the country down with him. Not much anyone can do but stand back and watch.
Nope. Nope. Nope. Trump's done a lot of damage. He'll continue to do damage to our country and the people who live here as long as he's in office. I plan on voting for the Democratic candidate in the primaries I think is most capable of cleaning up the mess he's leaving us. It won't be easy, or quick. It's easier to tear down than to build. I don't expect Trump's successor to wave a magic wand and make everything 'alright' again. But repairing and rebuilding is what we're going to have to do.
This is my country. I was born here. I live here. I can't afford to take a 'not much anyone can do' attitude. Most of us can't just fly off to someplace else if this doesn't work out.
posted by nangar at 8:34 AM on October 11, 2019 [74 favorites]
Nope. Nope. Nope. Trump's done a lot of damage. He'll continue to do damage to our country and the people who live here as long as he's in office. I plan on voting for the Democratic candidate in the primaries I think is most capable of cleaning up the mess he's leaving us. It won't be easy, or quick. It's easier to tear down than to build. I don't expect Trump's successor to wave a magic wand and make everything 'alright' again. But repairing and rebuilding is what we're going to have to do.
This is my country. I was born here. I live here. I can't afford to take a 'not much anyone can do' attitude. Most of us can't just fly off to someplace else if this doesn't work out.
posted by nangar at 8:34 AM on October 11, 2019 [74 favorites]
Trump lost his 2nd Circuit appeal to stop his tax returns being released.
DC Circuit (dealing with the House subpoena), not 2nd Circuit (New York law that involves his state taxes). The 2nd Circuit is not likely to rule before the end of the month.
Also, note the truly shameless bullshitting by Judge Neomi Rao, formerly a chief regulatory official for the Trump administration, in dissent. She not only says that Congress can only investigate misconduct by the president in the context of impeachment, but implies that the courts can determine the scope of impeachable offenses. She might as well have just written "President Trump, if you give me Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat I will let you get away with literally anything" and left it at that.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:38 AM on October 11, 2019 [26 favorites]
DC Circuit (dealing with the House subpoena), not 2nd Circuit (New York law that involves his state taxes). The 2nd Circuit is not likely to rule before the end of the month.
Also, note the truly shameless bullshitting by Judge Neomi Rao, formerly a chief regulatory official for the Trump administration, in dissent. She not only says that Congress can only investigate misconduct by the president in the context of impeachment, but implies that the courts can determine the scope of impeachable offenses. She might as well have just written "President Trump, if you give me Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat I will let you get away with literally anything" and left it at that.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:38 AM on October 11, 2019 [26 favorites]
She not only says that Congress can only investigate misconduct by the president in the context of impeachment
Typically Republican -- that claim presumes that the House will decide in advance they intend to impeach and then go on a fishing expedition for evidence. Which is, in typical projection, what the Republicans are accusing the Democrats of doing, but they're obviously terrified of the evidence an investigation could uncover that could lead to impeachment (and/or criminal charges) -- which is true of any investigation the House undertakes.
posted by Gelatin at 8:46 AM on October 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
Typically Republican -- that claim presumes that the House will decide in advance they intend to impeach and then go on a fishing expedition for evidence. Which is, in typical projection, what the Republicans are accusing the Democrats of doing, but they're obviously terrified of the evidence an investigation could uncover that could lead to impeachment (and/or criminal charges) -- which is true of any investigation the House undertakes.
posted by Gelatin at 8:46 AM on October 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
My understanding was that Trump can't be pardoned after impeachment.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:47 AM on October 11, 2019
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:47 AM on October 11, 2019
He can't be pardoned of impeachment.
He can certainly be pardoned for anything else he may have done, as was Nixon before him.
posted by davros42 at 8:50 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
He can certainly be pardoned for anything else he may have done, as was Nixon before him.
posted by davros42 at 8:50 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
The impeachment conviction, which would remove him from office and possibly also disallow him from seeking it again, cannot be pardoned. He can still be pardoned for the many acts uncovered during the impeachment proceedings that, lacking such pardon, would have been the basis for later criminal and civil trials.
posted by solotoro at 8:50 AM on October 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by solotoro at 8:50 AM on October 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
The impeachment can't be pardoned away -- that is, Pence couldn't say "I pardon Donald Trump and therefore he is the President again." That doesn't mean he can't be pardoned for other stuff, or even the stuff for which he was impeached.
posted by Etrigan at 8:51 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 8:51 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
I don't expect Trump's successor to wave a magic wand and make everything 'alright' again. But repairing and rebuilding is what we're going to have to do.
Flagged as fantastic.
And any Democratic successor to Trump needs to make absolutely clear that they're cleaning up a Republican mess, and do so all the time. Too often the Republicans, aided by a media more concerned with "balance" than objectivity, try to pretend that they had nothing to do with the current disaster and that difficult work done by Democrats should somehow count against them. It's why Republicans go on a tax-but-and-spending binge every time they're in charge and then insist that Democrats make hard choices to balance the budget.
We can't afford to forgive or forget until the damage done by Trump is undone, and assigning blame for malice and complicity is part of that process. Let the Republican Senators who hope they can enjoy their cushy positions if they keep their heads down sweat a little for a change.
posted by Gelatin at 8:53 AM on October 11, 2019 [20 favorites]
Flagged as fantastic.
And any Democratic successor to Trump needs to make absolutely clear that they're cleaning up a Republican mess, and do so all the time. Too often the Republicans, aided by a media more concerned with "balance" than objectivity, try to pretend that they had nothing to do with the current disaster and that difficult work done by Democrats should somehow count against them. It's why Republicans go on a tax-but-and-spending binge every time they're in charge and then insist that Democrats make hard choices to balance the budget.
We can't afford to forgive or forget until the damage done by Trump is undone, and assigning blame for malice and complicity is part of that process. Let the Republican Senators who hope they can enjoy their cushy positions if they keep their heads down sweat a little for a change.
posted by Gelatin at 8:53 AM on October 11, 2019 [20 favorites]
And any Democratic successor to Trump needs to make absolutely clear that they're cleaning up a Republican mess, and do so all the time.
IMO this was my biggest complaint about the Obama administration during the financial meltdown. He didn't have to go on the attack, but instead said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The GOP filled the vacuum with their own message and look what it got us.
posted by JoeZydeco at 9:01 AM on October 11, 2019 [41 favorites]
IMO this was my biggest complaint about the Obama administration during the financial meltdown. He didn't have to go on the attack, but instead said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The GOP filled the vacuum with their own message and look what it got us.
posted by JoeZydeco at 9:01 AM on October 11, 2019 [41 favorites]
IMO this was my biggest complaint about the Obama administration during the financial meltdown. He didn't have to go on the attack, but instead said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The GOP filled the vacuum with their own message and look what it got us.
Sometimes I wonder if Democratic politicians have bought into the Republicans' "liberal media" con as much as Republican voters and the media themselves have. That is, Republicans' responsibility for the financial crisis was so obvious, he may have expected the media to present an accurate picture, or at the very least, not allow them to air Republicans blasting Obama for bailing out the banks when the bailout was passed under Bush's watch. Their failure is in presuming many reporters consider their job as informing the American people as opposed to getting quotes from both sides and calling it a day.
posted by Gelatin at 9:05 AM on October 11, 2019 [18 favorites]
Sometimes I wonder if Democratic politicians have bought into the Republicans' "liberal media" con as much as Republican voters and the media themselves have. That is, Republicans' responsibility for the financial crisis was so obvious, he may have expected the media to present an accurate picture, or at the very least, not allow them to air Republicans blasting Obama for bailing out the banks when the bailout was passed under Bush's watch. Their failure is in presuming many reporters consider their job as informing the American people as opposed to getting quotes from both sides and calling it a day.
posted by Gelatin at 9:05 AM on October 11, 2019 [18 favorites]
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT decision in Trump v Mazars. (134 pages)
posted by mikelieman at 9:09 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by mikelieman at 9:09 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
Not to abuse the edit window, one interesting thing about that Decision is that it validates Congress' subpoena authority.
posted by mikelieman at 9:10 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by mikelieman at 9:10 AM on October 11, 2019 [6 favorites]
Marie Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine, is testifying in closed session today. Here's her opening statement.
...With respect to Mayor Giuliani, I have had only minimal contacts with him—a total of three that I recall. None related to the events at issue. I do not know Mr. Giuliani’s motives for attacking me. But individuals who have been named in the press as contacts of Mr.Giuliani may well have believed that their personal financial ambitions were stymied by our anti-corruption policy in Ukraine.posted by theodolite at 9:12 AM on October 11, 2019 [47 favorites]
Finally, after being asked by the Department in early March to extend my tour until 2020, I was then abruptly told in late April to come back to Washington from Ukraine “on the next plane.” You will understandably want to ask why my posting ended so suddenly. I wanted to learn that too, and I tried to find out. I met with the Deputy Secretary of State, who informed me of the curtailment of my term. He said that the President had lost confidence in me and no longer wished me to serve as his ambassador. He added that there had been a concerted campaign against me, and that the Department had been under pressure from the President to remove me since the Summer of 2018. He also said that I had done nothing wrong and that this was not like other situations where he had recalled ambassadors for cause. I departed Ukraine for good this past May.
Although I understand that I served at the pleasure of the President, I was nevertheless incredulous that the U.S. government chose to remove an Ambassador based, as best as I can tell, on unfounded and false claims by people with clearly questionable motives. To make matters worse, all of this occurred during an especially challenging time in bilateral relations with a newly elected Ukrainian president. This was precisely the time when continuity in the Embassy in Ukraine was most needed.
Trump Records Must Be Given to the House, Appeals Court Says (Bloomberg/Yahoo)
“Disputes between Congress and the president are a recurring plot in our national story,” U.S. Circuit Judge David Tatel wrote in the majority’s 66-page opinion. “And that is precisely what the Framers intended.” He quoted the late Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, who said that the purpose of the separation of powers was “to save the people from autocracy.” [...]posted by katra at 9:12 AM on October 11, 2019 [20 favorites]
“At bottom, this subpoena is a valid exercise of the legislative oversight authority because it seeks information important to determining the fitness of legislation to address potential problems within the Executive Branch and the electoral system,” the appeals court said. “It does not seek to determine the President’s fitness for office.”
Mod note: Let's drop the doomsaying and dire predictions, please. They're useless to the conversation and trust me, we've heard all variations before.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 9:20 AM on October 11, 2019 [38 favorites]
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 9:20 AM on October 11, 2019 [38 favorites]
I just listened to a video clip with Trump repeating "the call [to Zelensky] was perfect" over and over again and it occurred to me why he would use that word. He was coached not to make an explicit quid pro quo and he managed to do what he was told, ergo the call was "perfect."
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 9:22 AM on October 11, 2019 [27 favorites]
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 9:22 AM on October 11, 2019 [27 favorites]
Barr is corrupt, sure, but presumably there are Federal prosecutors who would be willing -- if not eager -- to bring Trump to justice for the crimes they've witnessed throughout his tenure.
I don't have more experience than being in the same social place as federal law enforcement for a couple of days, but it doesn't take long to figure out that these people are serious about their shit. While there is a force of chain-of-command, I feel it's a lot to expect them to take a stance like "hey, Barr and Trump are our bosses now so it's OK to do cocaine at lunch now."
posted by rhizome at 9:26 AM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
I don't have more experience than being in the same social place as federal law enforcement for a couple of days, but it doesn't take long to figure out that these people are serious about their shit. While there is a force of chain-of-command, I feel it's a lot to expect them to take a stance like "hey, Barr and Trump are our bosses now so it's OK to do cocaine at lunch now."
posted by rhizome at 9:26 AM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
He was coached not to make an explicit quid pro quo and he managed to do what he was told, ergo the call was "perfect."
My theory is that he mangled a talking point given to him by his lawyers; he was told to say the call was "perfectly legal" but his pudding brain only latched onto the 'perfect' part.
posted by Atom Eyes at 9:31 AM on October 11, 2019 [18 favorites]
My theory is that he mangled a talking point given to him by his lawyers; he was told to say the call was "perfectly legal" but his pudding brain only latched onto the 'perfect' part.
posted by Atom Eyes at 9:31 AM on October 11, 2019 [18 favorites]
More Potential Whistleblowers Are Contacting Congress (Daily Beast)
The first two officials who came forward about the president’s pressure campaign on Ukraine seem to be just the beginning, according to Hill sources.
The first two officials who came forward about the president’s pressure campaign on Ukraine seem to be just the beginning, according to Hill sources.
Congressional investigators are currently vetting the new accounts they’ve received for credibility. Accordingly, knowledgeable sources would not discuss where in the government these new would-be whistleblowers come from, nor what they purport to have to say. [...]posted by katra at 9:39 AM on October 11, 2019 [24 favorites]
One knowledgeable source said that the daily accumulation of revelations about Trump’s willingness to use U.S. foreign relations for his personal political benefit has prompted more people to approach Congress.
And any Democratic successor to Trump needs to make absolutely clear that they're cleaning up a Republican mess, and do so all the time.
Also: preserve the ICE detention facilities as a monument to how evil can happen here and make it a requirement for all American schoolchildren to visit them in a tour group, to inoculate future generations against complacency at the potential of evil in the here and now. (That approach seems to have worked in Germany.)
posted by acb at 9:43 AM on October 11, 2019 [23 favorites]
Also: preserve the ICE detention facilities as a monument to how evil can happen here and make it a requirement for all American schoolchildren to visit them in a tour group, to inoculate future generations against complacency at the potential of evil in the here and now. (That approach seems to have worked in Germany.)
posted by acb at 9:43 AM on October 11, 2019 [23 favorites]
coached not to make an explicit quid pro quo
mangled a talking point
I think the here-visible overall methodology for finding safer formulations, which is to take away context, is something he must have trained from the day of his first foray into his mum's pantry (symbolically spoken). I doubt whether he needs any coaching in this skill at this point.
posted by Namlit at 9:46 AM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
mangled a talking point
I think the here-visible overall methodology for finding safer formulations, which is to take away context, is something he must have trained from the day of his first foray into his mum's pantry (symbolically spoken). I doubt whether he needs any coaching in this skill at this point.
posted by Namlit at 9:46 AM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
The Senate is likelier to remove Trump after impeachment than you think (David Priess, WaPo Perspective)
The history of past acquittals isn’t as helpful to Trump as naysayers believe
The history of past acquittals isn’t as helpful to Trump as naysayers believe
While getting rid of the president this way remains far from certain, it’s more likely than most observers will admit. And it’s becoming a stronger possibility day by day as Trump’s foreign policy stumbles remind GOP senators that speaking out against the president doesn’t have to be political suicide. [...]posted by katra at 9:50 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
Political momentum has odd properties. When tides turn, they often turn quickly and harshly. While the basic math still points to a Senate acquittal, this week nevertheless brings to mind Winston Churchill’s words after the British victory at El Alamein in 1942: “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”
Giuliani dealings with associates scrutinized as part of investigation (CNN)
ABC News confirms: Rudy Giuliani's relationship with arrested men is subject of criminal investigation: Sources
ABC News confirms: Rudy Giuliani's relationship with arrested men is subject of criminal investigation: Sources
The business relationship between President Donald Trump's private lawyer Rudy Giuliani and the men charged Thursday in a campaign finance scheme is a subject of the ongoing criminal investigation being conducted by federal authorities in New York, according to two sources familiar with the matter. [...] The investigation is being conducted by the FBI's New York field office and prosecutors in the Southern District of New York, the same U.S. Attorney's office Giuliani ran before he became mayor of New York.posted by katra at 10:10 AM on October 11, 2019 [15 favorites]
Somebody should set up a website named hasrudygiulianibeenarrested.com, which shows either “Not yet” or “Yes” followed by details of his arrest, including charges, pleas and sentences as they come in.
posted by acb at 10:30 AM on October 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by acb at 10:30 AM on October 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
The investigation is being conducted by the FBI's New York field office and prosecutors in the Southern District of New York, the same U.S. Attorney's office Giuliani ran before he became mayor of New York.
But also the same New York FBI office that leaked anti-Hillary info to Guiliani a week before the election.
posted by JackFlash at 10:38 AM on October 11, 2019 [7 favorites]
But also the same New York FBI office that leaked anti-Hillary info to Guiliani a week before the election.
posted by JackFlash at 10:38 AM on October 11, 2019 [7 favorites]
The point being it's been 30 years since Guiliani worked in the US attorneys district office. It is not the same people. On the other hand, the New York FBI is much the same as the day of the election three years ago
posted by JackFlash at 10:56 AM on October 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 10:56 AM on October 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
Atom Eyes: he was told to say the call was "perfectly legal" but his pudding brain only latched onto the 'perfect' part.
That seems likely. The signature part of his administration, the wall, was basically a memory aid. I'm sure a lot of what he harps on originated as a dumbed-down way for him to address an issue.
katra: More Potential Whistleblowers Are Contacting Congress
One of the things I have been thinking over the past few days: there are plenty of folks in the intelligent, law enforcement, and diplomacy communities who are aware of shady stuff he's done. Basically, they waited until he did something that was a more black-and-white thing (Ukraine), and someone to go first. As more whistleblowers appear and support for impeachment grows, more will appear, confirming what has been said and bringing other dealings to light.
posted by MrGuilt at 10:57 AM on October 11, 2019 [14 favorites]
That seems likely. The signature part of his administration, the wall, was basically a memory aid. I'm sure a lot of what he harps on originated as a dumbed-down way for him to address an issue.
katra: More Potential Whistleblowers Are Contacting Congress
One of the things I have been thinking over the past few days: there are plenty of folks in the intelligent, law enforcement, and diplomacy communities who are aware of shady stuff he's done. Basically, they waited until he did something that was a more black-and-white thing (Ukraine), and someone to go first. As more whistleblowers appear and support for impeachment grows, more will appear, confirming what has been said and bringing other dealings to light.
posted by MrGuilt at 10:57 AM on October 11, 2019 [14 favorites]
Somebody should set up a website named hasrudygiulianibeenarrested.com
I'd prefer a modular webservice that provided that information for all administration members.
You could call it an ArRESTful API and serve it from SOAP.THESWAMP.ORG
posted by snuffleupagus at 11:10 AM on October 11, 2019 [16 favorites]
I'd prefer a modular webservice that provided that information for all administration members.
You could call it an ArRESTful API and serve it from SOAP.THESWAMP.ORG
posted by snuffleupagus at 11:10 AM on October 11, 2019 [16 favorites]
As more whistleblowers appear and support for impeachment grows, more will appear, confirming what has been said and bringing other dealings to light.
Disclosures suggest Trump’s White House politicized pretty much everything — and there are lots of witnesses (WaPo)
Disclosures suggest Trump’s White House politicized pretty much everything — and there are lots of witnesses (WaPo)
The White House served notice this week that it would not cooperate with House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry in any way. And we’re starting to learn perhaps why.posted by katra at 11:15 AM on October 11, 2019 [15 favorites]
Disclosures on Thursday suggest a White House that took very little care to separate official business from political and personal advantage and often circumvented established channels to benefit President Trump.
This isn’t exactly a revelation, but the speed of the new disclosures and the brazenness of the actions suggest there are plenty of people who bore witness to this and who could speak to it, if willing and/or allowed. [...] there seems to be a quickly gathering critical mass here, and there figure to be many people who saw or heard about things being handled in a suspicious manner. The growing leaks about these things — including another Post report Thursday that at least four national security officials raised concerns about the Ukraine situation before and immediately after Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky — indicate there’s plenty to be uncovered.
Disclosures suggest Trump’s White House politicized pretty much everything
I'd like to see a clearer separation in discussion of politics and partisanship. Everything the White House and its occupant do is political, but what Trump is doing is upping the partisan-ness of it by tying everything to "This has to be good for Republicans generally and Trump specifically."
posted by Etrigan at 11:32 AM on October 11, 2019 [25 favorites]
I'd like to see a clearer separation in discussion of politics and partisanship. Everything the White House and its occupant do is political, but what Trump is doing is upping the partisan-ness of it by tying everything to "This has to be good for Republicans generally and Trump specifically."
posted by Etrigan at 11:32 AM on October 11, 2019 [25 favorites]
You could call it an ArRESTful API and serve it from SOAP.THESWAMP.ORG
Or perhaps a deck of cards, like the one the Bush administration had for Saddam Hussein's lieutenants, only in this case most of them would be jokers and low-value cards.
posted by acb at 11:57 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Or perhaps a deck of cards, like the one the Bush administration had for Saddam Hussein's lieutenants, only in this case most of them would be jokers and low-value cards.
posted by acb at 11:57 AM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Are Fox News and rightwing news making plans for a post-Trump future? (Guardian)
It’s tempting to frame Fox News as playing a subservient roll to the president, but in truth it’s always been more of a symbiotic partnership, with the popularity of one bolstering the other and vice versa. As fractures within the Fox network have grown, and many of their news anchors have become more stridently critical of Trump following the revelations of the impeachment inquiry, it may well be that Fox News, and other conservative media, are starting to wonder if it might be wise to make plans for a post-Trump future.posted by katra at 11:57 AM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
Outside of Fox News, another arbiter of the prevailing political winds on the right has long been Matt Drudge, whose website is a major driver of traffic to rightwing news sources. As CNN noted, Drudge has become particularly aggressive in covering news of the impeachment inquiry of late, including giving prominence to stories about Fox News personalities like Andrew Napolitano – who called Trump’s actions “criminal and impeachable” and Shepard Smith’s suggestion Trump may have broken the law.
Even Tucker Carlson took to the pages of the website he founded, The Daily Caller, to criticize Trump for pressuring a foreign leader for his own personal political gain this week. There is “no way to spin this as a good idea,” he wrote. Carlson remains a staunch supporter of Trump on his Fox News program, but here, he’s hedging his bets. [...]
Previous reports of the demise of the Trump Fox marriage may have been greatly exaggerated, but there does seem to be something different this time around. [...] For all their manifold faults, Fox News as an institution is nothing if not savvy arbiters of the shifting political winds.
[...] How it will be received by the audience remains to be seen, but the existence of the conservative electorate and ratings do not rest wholly on the success of one man.
Guardian: The Democratic chairmen of the committees leading the impeachment inquiry said that the White House had directed the state department to block Marie Yovanovitch from testifying. [...]
Guardian: The news will not stop coming today. A federal court has just ruled that Trump violated the law by declaring a national emergency at the US-Mexico border to get his wall built.
posted by katra at 12:21 PM on October 11, 2019 [38 favorites]
Rachael Bade (@rachaelmbade)The signature part of his administration, the wall, was basically a memory aid. I'm sure a lot of what he harps on originated as a dumbed-down way for him to address an issue.
Of NOTE: Dems for months hoped Don McGahn and other witnesses in the Mueller probe would do exactly this: comply with their subpoenas even after the WH said not to.
Yovanovitch is the FIRST to follow this path. W/Sondland around the corner next week, she may not be the last. https://t.co/c56adu23d3
October 11, 2019
Guardian: The news will not stop coming today. A federal court has just ruled that Trump violated the law by declaring a national emergency at the US-Mexico border to get his wall built.
posted by katra at 12:21 PM on October 11, 2019 [38 favorites]
Even Tucker Carlson took to the pages of the website he founded, The Daily Caller, to criticize Trump for pressuring a foreign leader for his own personal political gain this week. There is “no way to spin this as a good idea,” he wrote. Carlson remains a staunch supporter of Trump on his Fox News program, but here, he’s hedging his bets. [...]
I predicted Republicans would try to pretend that they were never all in for Trump in order to avoid being tagged with the stench that he spewed all over their Party.
Democrats and loyal Americans must not be fooled. Maybe some can get credit if they choose to actively and visibly oppose Trump -- but that'll mean voting against him and telling his supporters the truths they don't want to hear. So far, we've seen precious little of that kind of courage, and until then, Republicans remain complicit and willingly so.
posted by Gelatin at 12:25 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
I predicted Republicans would try to pretend that they were never all in for Trump in order to avoid being tagged with the stench that he spewed all over their Party.
Democrats and loyal Americans must not be fooled. Maybe some can get credit if they choose to actively and visibly oppose Trump -- but that'll mean voting against him and telling his supporters the truths they don't want to hear. So far, we've seen precious little of that kind of courage, and until then, Republicans remain complicit and willingly so.
posted by Gelatin at 12:25 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
The cover of next week's New York Magazine is just peachy.
posted by monospace at 12:29 PM on October 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by monospace at 12:29 PM on October 11, 2019 [13 favorites]
I've got a feeling Guiliani is going to come to regret this video at the Trump Hotel.
posted by JackFlash at 12:43 PM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 12:43 PM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
One of the things I have been thinking over the past few days: there are plenty of folks in the intelligent, law enforcement, and diplomacy communities who are aware of shady stuff he's done. Basically, they waited until he did something that was a more black-and-white thing (Ukraine), and someone to go first. As more whistleblowers appear and support for impeachment grows, more will appear, confirming what has been said and bringing other dealings to light.
A significant bulk of this will even just be simple CYA behavior. If you were involved in criminal wrongdoing, had knowledge of it, or even were just in the vicinity of it you could be looking at huge repercussions. Even just simply from legal fees if you get pulled into the house investigation.
People are going to be looking to get out in front of this before their lives, reputations or finances are destroyed.
The dam isn't even close to bursting but when it does....
Previous Republican presidents who engaged in shenanigans inspired loyalty among a lot of hardcore traditional and career professional republicans. This one?
posted by srboisvert at 12:46 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
A significant bulk of this will even just be simple CYA behavior. If you were involved in criminal wrongdoing, had knowledge of it, or even were just in the vicinity of it you could be looking at huge repercussions. Even just simply from legal fees if you get pulled into the house investigation.
People are going to be looking to get out in front of this before their lives, reputations or finances are destroyed.
The dam isn't even close to bursting but when it does....
Previous Republican presidents who engaged in shenanigans inspired loyalty among a lot of hardcore traditional and career professional republicans. This one?
posted by srboisvert at 12:46 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Democrats and loyal Americans must not be fooled.
Your phrasing suggests that these are two different groups of people. Elected officials who are members of the Democratic party are most definitely the people behaving as Americans who truly believe the principles elucidated by our Constitution right now. (I think it's important not to otherize--even unintentionally--those representatives who are trying to do right by the people.)
posted by LooseFilter at 12:55 PM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
Your phrasing suggests that these are two different groups of people. Elected officials who are members of the Democratic party are most definitely the people behaving as Americans who truly believe the principles elucidated by our Constitution right now. (I think it's important not to otherize--even unintentionally--those representatives who are trying to do right by the people.)
posted by LooseFilter at 12:55 PM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
Your phrasing suggests that these are two different groups of people.
The phrasing "Democrats and loyal Americans" is meant to suggest that Republican tribalism means they are loyal to party, not country.
posted by Gelatin at 1:04 PM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
The phrasing "Democrats and loyal Americans" is meant to suggest that Republican tribalism means they are loyal to party, not country.
posted by Gelatin at 1:04 PM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
They are ALL going to pivot away from Trump and try to rewrite the past and gaslight the rest of us. The entire 27%. From Tucker Carlson all the way down to your racist uncle, they will all claim that they meant for something else to happen, not this train wreck, and that Trump sold them out in some way. After a while, they will all claim that they knew he was terrible, but nobody would listen.
posted by Horkus at 1:25 PM on October 11, 2019 [34 favorites]
posted by Horkus at 1:25 PM on October 11, 2019 [34 favorites]
That cover makes me want to eat a lot of peaches.
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:39 PM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:39 PM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
I listened to Preet Bharara interview George Conway yesterday. Conway published an article in the Atlantic detailing his scathing analysis of trump's mental condition and character. He also (reluctantly by his account) voted for Trump. I had the infuriating feeling of 'NOW you're convinced of all the things we were saying two years ago and you're presenting it like it's your discovery??'
posted by Mei's lost sandal at 1:40 PM on October 11, 2019 [14 favorites]
posted by Mei's lost sandal at 1:40 PM on October 11, 2019 [14 favorites]
George Conway is quite awful, but right now he's also quite useful.
posted by mcstayinskool at 1:44 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by mcstayinskool at 1:44 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
They are ALL going to pivot away from Trump and try to rewrite the past and gaslight the rest of us. The entire 27%. From Tucker Carlson all the way down to your racist uncle, they will all claim that they meant for something else to happen, not this train wreck, and that Trump sold them out in some way. After a while, they will all claim that they knew he was terrible, but nobody would listen.
This is exactly what happened with Bush. Bush had something like 80 percent popularity, and being the least bit skeptical got you labelled a terrorist sympathizer and a traitor, which is a strange thing to be called on a college campus in the ass end of nowhere. Later, when Bush was down to like, 25 percent popularity, you couldn't find anyone who'd ever been on his side.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:47 PM on October 11, 2019 [30 favorites]
This is exactly what happened with Bush. Bush had something like 80 percent popularity, and being the least bit skeptical got you labelled a terrorist sympathizer and a traitor, which is a strange thing to be called on a college campus in the ass end of nowhere. Later, when Bush was down to like, 25 percent popularity, you couldn't find anyone who'd ever been on his side.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:47 PM on October 11, 2019 [30 favorites]
Fruman runs an import/export business and a boutique hotel in Odessa, Ukraine, according to a profile by Buzzfeed. He also invested in a milk-canning plant in Ukraine that went bankrupt after going nearly $25 million in debt.
From later in the same article:
While Parnas has a long trail of lawsuits, less is known about Fruman. However, a lengthy court docket shows a messy divorce from model Yelyzaveta Naumova. She did not respond to phone calls.
Divorce records are often sealed, but their separation has been before the courts since December 2017. Fruman sought several orders for drug testing on his wife, and she sought via subpoena details of his finances and bank accounts. In addition to fighting over custody, the couple was fighting over a Collins Avenue luxury condo with a $3 million mortgage.
Among those receiving subpoenas were Oleksandr Kurinnyi, a cryptocurrency entrepreneur.
Ok, so I was going to post this last night and draw the conclusion of import/export business in South Florida>Odessa hotel>probable money-laundering bankruptcy>model wife>shady finances>cryptocurrency = the import/export business probably imports teenagers, but figured it was such wild speculation that it would be taken down immediately....but yeah 'Mafia Rave' nightclub for models (mafia rave Ukrainian fashion show linked in the tweet...also it may be a modelling agency too) yep...there's an Epstein connection here, there's gotta be. If so, it would go a looong way in explaining Rudy's undying loyalty to dear leader. It may be total speculation, but I'm going to dig into it and see what I find.
posted by sexyrobot at 2:01 PM on October 11, 2019 [24 favorites]
From later in the same article:
While Parnas has a long trail of lawsuits, less is known about Fruman. However, a lengthy court docket shows a messy divorce from model Yelyzaveta Naumova. She did not respond to phone calls.
Divorce records are often sealed, but their separation has been before the courts since December 2017. Fruman sought several orders for drug testing on his wife, and she sought via subpoena details of his finances and bank accounts. In addition to fighting over custody, the couple was fighting over a Collins Avenue luxury condo with a $3 million mortgage.
Among those receiving subpoenas were Oleksandr Kurinnyi, a cryptocurrency entrepreneur.
Ok, so I was going to post this last night and draw the conclusion of import/export business in South Florida>Odessa hotel>probable money-laundering bankruptcy>model wife>shady finances>cryptocurrency = the import/export business probably imports teenagers, but figured it was such wild speculation that it would be taken down immediately....but yeah 'Mafia Rave' nightclub for models (mafia rave Ukrainian fashion show linked in the tweet...also it may be a modelling agency too) yep...there's an Epstein connection here, there's gotta be. If so, it would go a looong way in explaining Rudy's undying loyalty to dear leader. It may be total speculation, but I'm going to dig into it and see what I find.
posted by sexyrobot at 2:01 PM on October 11, 2019 [24 favorites]
How is he useful, mcstayinskool?
George Conway has a very long history as an extremely conservative player in the D.C. circuit. He's in the Federalist Society, and was a key part of pushing for Brett Kavanaugh on to SCOTUS. He's the husband of one of the most shameless, soulless people of this travesty of an administration. He sucks.
Given that, if George Conway writes a big article about how the president* is mentally unfit to be President, that's useful if it changes some "independent" minds. He's been beating this drum for a long time now, but never this loudly. I don't really care if he's two years late in diagnosing the malignant narcissism and then taking credit for it if it helps, in any small way, change public opinion.
posted by mcstayinskool at 2:14 PM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
George Conway has a very long history as an extremely conservative player in the D.C. circuit. He's in the Federalist Society, and was a key part of pushing for Brett Kavanaugh on to SCOTUS. He's the husband of one of the most shameless, soulless people of this travesty of an administration. He sucks.
Given that, if George Conway writes a big article about how the president* is mentally unfit to be President, that's useful if it changes some "independent" minds. He's been beating this drum for a long time now, but never this loudly. I don't really care if he's two years late in diagnosing the malignant narcissism and then taking credit for it if it helps, in any small way, change public opinion.
posted by mcstayinskool at 2:14 PM on October 11, 2019 [8 favorites]
Mod note: Folks, the Shep Smith story needs to be in its own thread.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 2:20 PM on October 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 2:20 PM on October 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
he's two years late in diagnosing the malignant narcissism and then taking credit for it if it helps, in any small way, change public opinion.
Just how is he supposed to change the opinion of the public if he can't even change the opinion of his own spouse. Seems his powers of persuasion are severely limited.
posted by JackFlash at 2:28 PM on October 11, 2019 [10 favorites]
Just how is he supposed to change the opinion of the public if he can't even change the opinion of his own spouse. Seems his powers of persuasion are severely limited.
posted by JackFlash at 2:28 PM on October 11, 2019 [10 favorites]
Conway is there to run cover for his wife. Trump has fired people for way less an indiscretion than their spouse calling him mentally unfit in an op-ed.
posted by PenDevil at 2:28 PM on October 11, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by PenDevil at 2:28 PM on October 11, 2019 [10 favorites]
Seems his powers of persuasion are severely limited.
You know that. I know that. Not everyone knows that.
posted by mcstayinskool at 2:35 PM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
You know that. I know that. Not everyone knows that.
posted by mcstayinskool at 2:35 PM on October 11, 2019 [1 favorite]
Consider How Paul Manafort's Fate May Have Affected Marie Yovanovitch (Marcy Wheeler, emptywheel)
When she asked Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan why she had been withdrawn with almost no notice, he told her Trump had been pressuring State to do so since Summer 2018. [...] It is true that these events would have shortly followed the first efforts from Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman to cultivate Trump and his “free” lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, whom Trump “hired” (for free) in April.posted by katra at 2:49 PM on October 11, 2019 [15 favorites]
At almost precisely that time, in April 2018, Ukraine stopped cooperating with Mueller on the Manafort prosecution, possibly in response to the approval of an export license for Javelin missiles, one of the same things Trump used again this summer to extort Ukraine.
Nevertheless, Trump’s efforts to fire Yovanovitch took place even while — in spite of Ukraine’s halt to their cooperation — things started going south for the President’s former campaign manager. [...] Throughout that period, Trump expressed real worry that Manafort would really flip on him.
As I will show, virtually everything we know about Manafort’s purported cooperation effort connects, in some way, to this Ukraine affair. Plus, we know that Rudy Giuliani was consulting with Manafort as he pursued his schemes. And Manafort’s lawyer Kevin Downing — the same one coordinating on these issues with Rudy — represented Parnas and Fruman in their EDVA appearance yesterday.
This Ukraine story is nothing more than the continuation of the Russian story, and much of it goes through Paul Manafort. Thus, it’s not surprising that as it looked increasingly likely that Manafort would pay for his crimes, and might implicate Trump in them, Trump tried to shut down one area of pressure.
Parnas and Fruman are likely just facilitators to make that happen.
This is exactly what happened with Bush. Bush had something like 80 percent popularity, and being the least bit skeptical got you labelled a terrorist sympathizer and a traitor, which is a strange thing to be called on a college campus in the ass end of nowhere. Later, when Bush was down to like, 25 percent popularity, you couldn't find anyone who'd ever been on his side.
Except now there are social media receipts. Which means will probably double down harder than they ever have before in history.
posted by srboisvert at 2:53 PM on October 11, 2019 [7 favorites]
Except now there are social media receipts. Which means will probably double down harder than they ever have before in history.
posted by srboisvert at 2:53 PM on October 11, 2019 [7 favorites]
Maybe. The prediction has often been that they will have to double down because of the massive ego investment that they've made. But I think that underestimates how SHAMELESS they are. When the tide turns on Trump, they'll turn with it. They'll just say, "I didn't mean it like that"/"I was being ironic"/"you misunderstood"/"you didn't really think I meant that literally, did you?"/"you're crazy". Probably all in one breath.
As soon as it's clear that they aren't getting away with taking the country for their right-wing fascist death cult they will back away so fast it will leave the rest of us wondering if we imagined it.
Note to future self: we didn't.
posted by Horkus at 3:09 PM on October 11, 2019 [7 favorites]
As soon as it's clear that they aren't getting away with taking the country for their right-wing fascist death cult they will back away so fast it will leave the rest of us wondering if we imagined it.
Note to future self: we didn't.
posted by Horkus at 3:09 PM on October 11, 2019 [7 favorites]
[Folks, the Shep Smith story needs to be in its own thread. ]
Shep Smith thread.
posted by ZeusHumms at 3:21 PM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
Shep Smith thread.
posted by ZeusHumms at 3:21 PM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
This Ukraine story is nothing more than the continuation of the Russian story, and much of it goes through Paul Manafort.
And the Turkey story goes through Michael Flynn.
And the Russia story goes through Michael Cohen.
It's curious how all of Trump's foreign policies seem to be tied up with convicted felons.
posted by JackFlash at 3:38 PM on October 11, 2019 [23 favorites]
And the Turkey story goes through Michael Flynn.
And the Russia story goes through Michael Cohen.
It's curious how all of Trump's foreign policies seem to be tied up with convicted felons.
posted by JackFlash at 3:38 PM on October 11, 2019 [23 favorites]
Indicted Giuliani associate attended private ‘16 election night party for ‘friend’ Trump (Politico)
Lev Parnas' relationship with the president might have begun years earlier than previously reported.
Miami Herald: "In June of 2018, they gave the Friends of Ron DeSantis political committee $50,000 through a company called Global Energy Producers. They made the contribution one day before Trump endorsed DeSantis for Florida governor." The Miami Herald also reports: "In the spring of 2018, the duo lobbied at least one member of Congress, Carlos Curbelo, now a former Republican from Florida, on marijuana issues. “They stood out a little bit. They had an air of flamboyance to them,” Curbelo said Thursday on MSNBC, adding that they boasted of White House ties and being “frequent guests at Mar-a-Lago.” Though President Trump said Thursday he did not know them, photos have circulated widely showing the men with Trump and Giuliani."
posted by katra at 4:00 PM on October 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
Lev Parnas' relationship with the president might have begun years earlier than previously reported.
Donald Trump tried to distance himself from the latest scandal that threatens his presidency on Thursday by saying he didn’t know either of the foreign-born Rudy Giuliani associates that his own Justice Department had just indicted for alleged campaign finance violations.> The Miami Herald reported this week that Parnas was a host for two DeSantis fundraisers last year. The newspaper described one as a small event held at a “South Florida residence with fewer than 30 people attending, including the governor. The other gathering was headlined by Donald Trump Jr.”
But that’s not what one of the men said three years ago — while attending Trump’s invite-only 2016 election night party in New York. [...] Parnas arrived at Trump’s November 2016 election night party, which was held in a ballroom at the Midtown Hilton, with two other men in suits and their heavily made-up wives, according to a forgotten but newly relevant dispatch from the event published at the time in Le Figaro, France’s oldest daily newspaper. [...]
Parnas posted a photo of himself with Trump at the White House on May 1, 2018, with a caption describing an “incredible dinner and even better conversation,” according to a screenshot captured by The Campaign Legal Center. Another picture Parnas posted from May 21, 2018, shows him with Fruman and Donald Trump Jr. in Beverly Hills, with the caption “Power Breakfast!!!”
Miami Herald: "In June of 2018, they gave the Friends of Ron DeSantis political committee $50,000 through a company called Global Energy Producers. They made the contribution one day before Trump endorsed DeSantis for Florida governor." The Miami Herald also reports: "In the spring of 2018, the duo lobbied at least one member of Congress, Carlos Curbelo, now a former Republican from Florida, on marijuana issues. “They stood out a little bit. They had an air of flamboyance to them,” Curbelo said Thursday on MSNBC, adding that they boasted of White House ties and being “frequent guests at Mar-a-Lago.” Though President Trump said Thursday he did not know them, photos have circulated widely showing the men with Trump and Giuliani."
posted by katra at 4:00 PM on October 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
Rudy Giuliani is still Trump's attorney but won't deal with Ukraine matters, source says (CNN)
Earlier on Friday, Trump wouldn't say whether Giuliani was still his personal attorney. "Well, I don't know. I haven't spoken to Rudy. I spoke to him yesterday briefly. He's a very good attorney and he has been my attorney, yeah, sure," he said.posted by katra at 4:32 PM on October 11, 2019 [4 favorites]
When asked later by CNN if he was still Trump's attorney, Giuliani responded, "Yes." He added, "There are no Ukraine issues. I finished that in March. I'm still representing him." [...]
There are growing concerns in Trump's orbit that Giuliani is increasingly becoming a political and potentially legal liability, even before two of his clients were arrested. These aides have told Trump that Giuliani was only damaging his defense -- and after Thursday's arrests, Trump has raised his own questions privately about Giuliani's culpability, according to people familiar with his concerns.
Trump has raised his own questions privately about Giuliani's culpability, according to people familiar with his concerns.
Keep an eye out for the bus, Rudy.
posted by JackFlash at 4:41 PM on October 11, 2019 [22 favorites]
Keep an eye out for the bus, Rudy.
posted by JackFlash at 4:41 PM on October 11, 2019 [22 favorites]
Keep an eye out for the bus, Rudy.
The one solitary upside of the Trump administration is that we get to see the worst people in the world be abused by the worst boss in the world.
posted by Sauce Trough at 4:48 PM on October 11, 2019 [60 favorites]
The one solitary upside of the Trump administration is that we get to see the worst people in the world be abused by the worst boss in the world.
posted by Sauce Trough at 4:48 PM on October 11, 2019 [60 favorites]
White House accidentally sends Ukraine talking points to Democrats again:
"The White House accidentally sent Democrats a list of talking points related to ex-Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch’s Friday House deposition, two sources with knowledge of the email told The Hill, the second time in a month the administration has sent its Ukraine talking points to Democrats.
The email included guidance for Republicans seeking to defend the president from potentially damaging witness testimony from an ambassador who was removed from her post in May under controversial circumstances.
In copies of the guidance shared with The Hill, the White House encouraged Republicans to adopt a series of messages designed to turn the tables back on Democrats, including attacks on House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff’s (D-Calif.) handling of the investigation."
posted by soundguy99 at 4:55 PM on October 11, 2019 [32 favorites]
"The White House accidentally sent Democrats a list of talking points related to ex-Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch’s Friday House deposition, two sources with knowledge of the email told The Hill, the second time in a month the administration has sent its Ukraine talking points to Democrats.
The email included guidance for Republicans seeking to defend the president from potentially damaging witness testimony from an ambassador who was removed from her post in May under controversial circumstances.
In copies of the guidance shared with The Hill, the White House encouraged Republicans to adopt a series of messages designed to turn the tables back on Democrats, including attacks on House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff’s (D-Calif.) handling of the investigation."
posted by soundguy99 at 4:55 PM on October 11, 2019 [32 favorites]
Indicted Giuliani associate worked on behalf of Ukrainian oligarch Firtash (Reuters)
Lev Parnas, one of the two associates of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, served as a translator for lawyers representing oligarch Dmytro Firtash. [...] Both men had worked in an unspecified capacity for Firtash before Parnas joined the Ukrainian’s legal team, according to a person familiar with the Florida men’s business dealings with Firtash.posted by katra at 4:58 PM on October 11, 2019 [10 favorites]
The Floridians’ connection to indicted oligarch Firtash injects an intriguing new character into the rapidly unfolding drama surrounding the effort to impeach Trump. [...]
Firtash, one of Ukraine’s wealthiest businessmen, is battling extradition by U.S. authorities on bribery charges from Vienna, where he has lived for five years. Federal prosecutors in Illinois said in court papers in 2017 that Firtash was an “upper-echelon” associate of Russian organized crime. He was indicted in 2013 and charged with bribing Indian officials for access to titanium mines. Firtash has denied any wrongdoing.
Firtash was “financing” the activities of Parnas and Fruman, the source familiar with their business dealings said. The source did not detail their specific work for the oligarch or how much money he had paid them and over what period.
Keep an eye out for the bus, Rudy.
Asked and answered.
Rudy is unaware of any large conveyance approaching from a direction to which he may be thrust.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:02 PM on October 11, 2019 [19 favorites]
Asked and answered.
Rudy is unaware of any large conveyance approaching from a direction to which he may be thrust.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:02 PM on October 11, 2019 [19 favorites]
Rachel Maddow speculates about those tickets to Vienna; there's someone who was previously one of the major Russian oligarchs working in Ukraine, Dmytro Firtash, who happens to be under house arrest in Vienna.
Maddow just released a book last week, primarily about the oil industry and natural gas and corruption, and Russia and Ukraine get a lot of pagetime, and it has a lot of good background for the current ........... mess. She seems like one of the few journalists who's really up to speed on this whole thing.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 5:42 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Maddow just released a book last week, primarily about the oil industry and natural gas and corruption, and Russia and Ukraine get a lot of pagetime, and it has a lot of good background for the current ........... mess. She seems like one of the few journalists who's really up to speed on this whole thing.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 5:42 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Rudy is indeed a criminal lawyer.
posted by benzenedream at 5:45 PM on October 11, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by benzenedream at 5:45 PM on October 11, 2019 [17 favorites]
NYT, Giuliani Is Said to Be Under Investigation for Ukraine Work
Federal prosecutors in Manhattan are investigating whether President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani broke lobbying laws in his dealings in Ukraine, according to two people familiar with the inquiry.
…
The investigators are examining Mr. Giuliani’s efforts to undermine the American ambassador to Ukraine, Marie L. Yovanovitch, one of the people said.
…
A criminal investigation of Mr. Giuliani raises the stakes of the Ukraine scandal for the president, whose dealings with the country are already the subject of an impeachment inquiry. It is also a stark turn for Mr. Giuliani, who now finds himself under scrutiny from the same United States attorney’s office he led in the 1980s, when he first rose to prominence as a tough-on-crime prosecutor and later ascended to two terms as mayor of New York.
…
Mr. Giuliani said that federal prosecutors had no grounds to charge him with foreign lobbying disclosure violations because he said he was acting on behalf of Mr. Trump, not the Ukrainian prosecutor, Yuriy Lutsenko, when he collected the information on Ms. Yovanovitch and the others and relayed it to the American government and the news media.
…
The lobbying disclosure law contains an exemption for legal work, and Mr. Giuliani said his efforts to unearth information and push both for investigations in Ukraine and for news coverage of his findings originated with his defense of Mr. Trump in the special counsel’s investigation.
posted by jocelmeow at 7:01 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
Federal prosecutors in Manhattan are investigating whether President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani broke lobbying laws in his dealings in Ukraine, according to two people familiar with the inquiry.
…
The investigators are examining Mr. Giuliani’s efforts to undermine the American ambassador to Ukraine, Marie L. Yovanovitch, one of the people said.
…
A criminal investigation of Mr. Giuliani raises the stakes of the Ukraine scandal for the president, whose dealings with the country are already the subject of an impeachment inquiry. It is also a stark turn for Mr. Giuliani, who now finds himself under scrutiny from the same United States attorney’s office he led in the 1980s, when he first rose to prominence as a tough-on-crime prosecutor and later ascended to two terms as mayor of New York.
…
Mr. Giuliani said that federal prosecutors had no grounds to charge him with foreign lobbying disclosure violations because he said he was acting on behalf of Mr. Trump, not the Ukrainian prosecutor, Yuriy Lutsenko, when he collected the information on Ms. Yovanovitch and the others and relayed it to the American government and the news media.
…
The lobbying disclosure law contains an exemption for legal work, and Mr. Giuliani said his efforts to unearth information and push both for investigations in Ukraine and for news coverage of his findings originated with his defense of Mr. Trump in the special counsel’s investigation.
posted by jocelmeow at 7:01 PM on October 11, 2019 [5 favorites]
A criminal investigation of Mr. Giuliani raises the stakes of the Ukraine scandal for the presidentYeah, I don't think this president could survive his personal lawyer going to jail for breaking campaign finance laws and then conspiring to cover it up.
posted by mbrubeck at 7:34 PM on October 11, 2019 [26 favorites]
@nycsouthpaw Retweeted @jonallendc This is the president’s lawyer saying the president directed him to engage in the scheme at the heart of the impeachment. Just to be clear. From NYT. https://nyti.ms/2MzIxwD
posted by katra at 7:47 PM on October 11, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by katra at 7:47 PM on October 11, 2019 [16 favorites]
RE: the comments upthread, here’s the story in question:
Unfit for Office – Donald Trump’s narcissism makes it impossible for him to carry out the duties of the presidency in the way the Constitution requires, The Atlantic, George Conway, October 3, 2019.
The primary goal now is to get Trump removed from office before he does any further damage to the United States or the world. Thatmay will mean allying with strange bedfellows (at least temporarily). After that’s done, both sides can get back to haggling over everything else.
posted by cenoxo at 7:57 PM on October 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
Unfit for Office – Donald Trump’s narcissism makes it impossible for him to carry out the duties of the presidency in the way the Constitution requires, The Atlantic, George Conway, October 3, 2019.
The primary goal now is to get Trump removed from office before he does any further damage to the United States or the world. That
posted by cenoxo at 7:57 PM on October 11, 2019 [2 favorites]
Everyone seems oddly confident that somehow, this time, it will be different and that Trump will be prosecuted, but no one ever seems to be able to articulate exactly why they think it will be different.
Trump after Mueller Report: TOTALLY EXONERATED. NO COLLUSION! FAKE NEWS!
Trump after Ukraine Report: DAMN RIGHT I DID IT! LAWS DON'T APPLY TO ME!
Trump is impeaching himself. He's practically forcing Democrats and Republicans alike to impeach him against their will.
posted by xammerboy at 8:56 PM on October 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
Trump after Mueller Report: TOTALLY EXONERATED. NO COLLUSION! FAKE NEWS!
Trump after Ukraine Report: DAMN RIGHT I DID IT! LAWS DON'T APPLY TO ME!
Trump is impeaching himself. He's practically forcing Democrats and Republicans alike to impeach him against their will.
posted by xammerboy at 8:56 PM on October 11, 2019 [9 favorites]
Hypothetically, if the acting secretary for the DHS were to have stepped down tonight, that seems like it might be relevant to the disintegration of a presidential administration facing impeachment
in theory All Hands Abandon Ship (Picard, ST:TNG)
Congress might be able to foil the White House’s stonewalling (Harry Litman, WaPo Opinion)
in theory All Hands Abandon Ship (Picard, ST:TNG)
Congress might be able to foil the White House’s stonewalling (Harry Litman, WaPo Opinion)
[...] Consider, too, a number of former senior officials who are in the wings as possible dangerous wild-card witnesses: former national security adviser John Bolton, former secretary of state Rex Tillerson (whom Trump tried to persuade to free a Giuliani client being prosecuted for allegedly violating Iran sanctions) [...]posted by katra at 8:57 PM on October 11, 2019 [3 favorites]
Trump is impeaching himself. He's practically forcing Democrats and Republicans alike to impeach him against their will.
The Impeachable Tweets (Tom Nichols, Atlantic)
Trump’s admissions on social media alone provide enough material for Congress to remove him.
The Impeachable Tweets (Tom Nichols, Atlantic)
Trump’s admissions on social media alone provide enough material for Congress to remove him.
From abuse of power to witness intimidation, from attempts to benefit from foreign payments—emoluments, one might call them—to a betrayal of his oath to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, Trump’s tweets and public outbursts offer more than enough material to draw up multiple articles of impeachment. [...]posted by katra at 9:04 PM on October 11, 2019 [16 favorites]
Trump and nuance are complete strangers to each other, but that didn’t stop the president’s enablers from claiming that Trump was kidding, that he had to be kidding, because obviously, any president with a lick of sense wouldn’t incriminate himself. Trump’s courtiers argued, in effect, that it would indeed be a gross abuse of power for the president to ask China to investigate Biden, and therefore the president could not possibly have been asking China to investigate Biden. QED.
But what about witness intimidation, or violations of federal law that’s meant to protect whistle-blowers? How about inciting violence against the constitutional order of the United States itself? Only a fool would admit to such offenses, or even hint at thinking about committing them. And yet Trump has admitted to all of these things.
The logical conclusion is not that Trump is innocent, but that Trump is a fool.
Krugman/NYTimes: Luckily, Trump Is an Unstable Non-Genius
I don’t mean that Trump is stupid; a stupid man couldn’t have managed to defraud so many people over so many years. Nor do I mean that he’s crazy, although his speeches and tweets (“my great and unmatched wisdom”; the Kurds weren’t there on D-Day) keep sounding loonier.posted by mumimor at 11:23 PM on October 11, 2019 [16 favorites]
He is, however, lazy, utterly incurious and too insecure to listen to advice or ever admit to a mistake. And given that he is in fact what he accuses others of being — an enemy of the people — we should be thankful for his flaws.
The news item that got me thinking along these lines was, oddly, the latest budget review from the Congressional Budget Office, projecting a fiscal 2019 deficit of almost a trillion dollars — up by more than $300 billion from the deficit Trump inherited.
Never mind the clear demonstration that the G.O.P.’s Obama-era hyperventilating about deficits was completely hypocritical. The more important point is that $300 billion is a lot of money, and it should have been enough to buy Trump a lot of political gain.
Not quite sure if this is the right thread to post this, but here’s an interview with Mike Pompeo done by Nancy Amons at local Nashville-area tv station (WSMV).
Scroll down for the full, unedited seven minute interview. Well worth watching. He clearly didn’t know what he was in for (so pissed). Very well done.
(Hat tip to Rachel Maddow’s Twitter feed).
posted by AwkwardPause at 12:35 AM on October 12, 2019 [14 favorites]
Scroll down for the full, unedited seven minute interview. Well worth watching. He clearly didn’t know what he was in for (so pissed). Very well done.
(Hat tip to Rachel Maddow’s Twitter feed).
posted by AwkwardPause at 12:35 AM on October 12, 2019 [14 favorites]
Is there a link for non-us located folks? That one blocks me from UK.
posted by affectionateborg at 3:48 AM on October 12, 2019
posted by affectionateborg at 3:48 AM on October 12, 2019
I wonder how long Pompeo will stay on. He is a hard right Republican, with all that entails. But he doesn't seem like someone who would find joy in the unbridled criminality of the Trump family.
posted by mumimor at 5:45 AM on October 12, 2019
posted by mumimor at 5:45 AM on October 12, 2019
I'm waiting for the headline "Last Days of Pompeo."
It was a dark and stormy night...
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:25 AM on October 12, 2019 [16 favorites]
It was a dark and stormy night...
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:25 AM on October 12, 2019 [16 favorites]
Meh, the inner core of Trumpworld is now in the “hang together or hang separately” phase. Pompeo has nowhere to go.
posted by spitbull at 6:25 AM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by spitbull at 6:25 AM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
He will hang on until it is completely unavoidable to let go, at which point he will shake his head ruefully and note to anyone who will listen how he had Serious Concerns about Trump's erratic nature and decisions all along.
He will have lots of company.
posted by delfin at 7:33 AM on October 12, 2019 [8 favorites]
He will have lots of company.
posted by delfin at 7:33 AM on October 12, 2019 [8 favorites]
To steal from Twitter, don't be surprised if the White House thanksgiving turkeys this year are named Donald John Trump and Rudolph William Louis Giuliani.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:01 AM on October 12, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:01 AM on October 12, 2019 [4 favorites]
Starting about 5:03 in Nancy Amon's YT interview with Pompeo, she simply asks if he met with Giuliani during the February 2019 Warsaw Conference. He pauses for a moment, then parries with newspeak blather instead of directly answering her question.
It's no big secret that Rudy was at the same conference (and gave a presentation: As Giuliani Calls for Regime Change in Iran, Netanyahu Raises the Specter of “War”, The Intercept, Robert Mackey, February 13, 2019), as was VP Mike Pence (front row, left), and Jared Kushner. It's a very small assumption to conclude that Trump survivors-thus-far Pompeo, Pence, and Giuliani met at some point, and probably reviewed his presentation.
Perhaps Pompeo doesn't want to reinforce the idea that Minister without Portfolio Rudy Giuliani works with the State Department to represent U.S. interests internationally.
posted by cenoxo at 8:07 AM on October 12, 2019 [7 favorites]
It's no big secret that Rudy was at the same conference (and gave a presentation: As Giuliani Calls for Regime Change in Iran, Netanyahu Raises the Specter of “War”, The Intercept, Robert Mackey, February 13, 2019), as was VP Mike Pence (front row, left), and Jared Kushner. It's a very small assumption to conclude that Trump survivors-thus-far Pompeo, Pence, and Giuliani met at some point, and probably reviewed his presentation.
Perhaps Pompeo doesn't want to reinforce the idea that Minister without Portfolio Rudy Giuliani works with the State Department to represent U.S. interests internationally.
posted by cenoxo at 8:07 AM on October 12, 2019 [7 favorites]
Lutsenko is unnamed Ukrainian who led plot to oust Yovanovitch, says official (NBC News)
Lutsenko is the Ukrainian official who prosecutors say urged 2 Giuliani associates to push for the ouster of Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador.
Lutsenko is the Ukrainian official who prosecutors say urged 2 Giuliani associates to push for the ouster of Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador.
"They sought political influence not only to advance their own financial interests, but to advance the political interests of at least one foreign official — a Ukrainian government official who sought the dismissal of the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine," Geoffrey Berman, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said at a Thursday news conference. [...]posted by katra at 8:17 AM on October 12, 2019 [5 favorites]
Federal prosecutors didn't detail in the indictment or at a press conference why the unnamed Ukrainian official or officials allegedly urged Parnas and Fruman to scheme to push out Yovanovitch. But two former U.S. officials said Lutsenko had sharp disagreements with Yovanovitch over his handling of corruption cases, and was also seeking to curry favor with the Trump administration.
Yovanovitch's ouster is now at the center of an impeachment inquiry by House Democrats, who accuse President Donald Trump of abusing his power by pressuring Ukraine to launch an investigation of Joe Biden, his political rival, and Biden's son. [...] When approached by Giuliani and his associates, Parnas and Fruman, Lutsenko was facing an uncertain political future. The Giuliani team saw U.S. Ambassador Yovanovitch as an obstacle to their objectives — digging up derogatory information on former vice president Biden and smoothing the way for a possible natural gas deal in Ukraine, former officials said. [...]
Lutsenko told NBC News last month that he's known Giuliani for "many years" and met with him while vacationing in New York. Lutsenko said he counted Giuliani as a friend and has spoken to him "maybe 10 times." Lutsenko said they discussed former Vice President Biden and his son, Hunter, and talked "about our system, about some of our law enforcement divisions and possibilities to cooperate."
Rudy Giuliani is Donald Trump’s real secretary of state (Lloyd Green, Guardian Opinion)
From the looks of things, Rudy Giuliani has been the real secretary of state from Day One of the Trump administration. From Ukraine to Turkey to Iran to Foggy Bottom, Giuliani has left his mark. [...] Along with supreme court justice, secretary of state was the job Rudy coveted, and it was the job Trump wanted to give him but didn’t or couldn’t, according to Michael Wolff’s 2018 blockbuster, Fire & Fury [...]posted by katra at 8:47 AM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
But Giuliani is learning, as others have before, there is no brass ring when it comes to Trump. Giuliani wanted to be tapped as secretary of state, and it looks like he got more than he bargained for. Globetrotting has begotten congressional scrutiny and the media’s glare.
Once remembered as a face of courage amid the ruins of 9/11, Giuliani has now been forced to lawyer up as the prospect of impeachment tightens it grip around Trump and his minions. As the saying goes, answered prayers are the most dangerous.
• Mayor Rudy Giuliani speaks at Iranian opposition rally in Warsaw (YT), February 13, 2019. "My government..." he says.
• In 2018, he spoke at a MEK rally in Paris: Rudy Giuliani calls for Iran regime change at rally linked to extreme group, The Guardian, June 30, 2018.
• From The American Conservative, Daniel Larison, July 14, 2019: Giuliani’s Cuckoo Praise for the MEK reports on Rudy's appearance at a MEK rally in Albania.
Quite a bit more about MEK (Mojahedin-e Khalq) at Wikipedia.
posted by cenoxo at 9:15 AM on October 12, 2019 [5 favorites]
• In 2018, he spoke at a MEK rally in Paris: Rudy Giuliani calls for Iran regime change at rally linked to extreme group, The Guardian, June 30, 2018.
• From The American Conservative, Daniel Larison, July 14, 2019: Giuliani’s Cuckoo Praise for the MEK reports on Rudy's appearance at a MEK rally in Albania.
Quite a bit more about MEK (Mojahedin-e Khalq) at Wikipedia.
posted by cenoxo at 9:15 AM on October 12, 2019 [5 favorites]
The Impeachment Loophole No One’s Talking About
posted by kirkaracha at 9:42 AM on October 12, 2019 [57 favorites]
The Constitution doesn’t indicate that removal from office requires two-thirds of the Senate. It requires two-thirds of senators present for the proceedings.Trumpum delenda est
...
There’s also a more stark scenario. Recently, former Senator Jeff Flake speculated that at least 30 Republican senators would cast their vote for impeachment against Trump—but only if it were held on a secret ballot. (Flake went further, suggesting the number might be as high as 35.)
But suppose those 30 senators were seeking a way, as Flake suggested, to remove Trump while avoiding the rage of his base. They might boycott the proceedings—or, when the big day of the vote arrived, mysteriously not show up. With 70 members now present, the number of senators required to convict Trump is no longer 67. It’s 47: exactly the number of seats Democrats and independents currently hold in the Senate.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:42 AM on October 12, 2019 [57 favorites]
That would be a ninja-level move, though - I would truly fear civil war in this country if a partisan, mathematical minority of the Senate removed Tr*mp.
posted by PhineasGage at 10:10 AM on October 12, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 10:10 AM on October 12, 2019 [5 favorites]
Anatomy of the phone call now imperiling Trump’s presidency (AP)
One individual with firsthand knowledge of how the Trump calls with foreign leaders are handled said the president “hates” such “pre-briefs” and frequently has refused to do them. Trump doesn’t like written background materials either, preferring to handle the calls himself, often in the morning from the residence. Occasionally, while on the phone with foreign heads of state, Trump has handed the receiver to his daughter, Ivanka Trump, so she can talk with the leader, according to this individual.posted by katra at 10:15 AM on October 12, 2019 [32 favorites]
The person said a six-page pre-brief with attachments was once prepared for Trump before a call to a foreign leader. But that turned out to be too long, as did a single-page version. Preparing pre-brief note cards that offered about three talking points for Trump to make on a call was the norm, according to this person, who feared retribution for describing this process and spoke on condition of anonymity.
The individual said that when Trump is done with the note cards, he often rips them up and tosses them in a burn bag. Staff who handle records have had to retrieve the burn bags from the residence, put the papers out on a table and tape them back together to preserve them as official presidential records, this person said.
I don't have the same fear of actual civil war. Yes we will continue to have assholes with guns doing shootings till we get our shit together on guns. But a whole lot of Trump supporters are just average people, not trained military types that could form any kind of threat to the elected government. They will talk big and yell a lot but they're not going to put> their own asses in the line of fire.
We don't need to handicap possible solutions to this crisis out of this fear, is what I'm saying.
posted by emjaybee at 10:17 AM on October 12, 2019 [33 favorites]
We don't need to handicap possible solutions to this crisis out of this fear, is what I'm saying.
posted by emjaybee at 10:17 AM on October 12, 2019 [33 favorites]
They might boycott the proceedings—or, when the big day of the vote arrived, mysteriously not show up
I would be very surprised if the base didn't treat this as a vote for impeachment.
posted by bardophile at 10:25 AM on October 12, 2019 [4 favorites]
I would be very surprised if the base didn't treat this as a vote for impeachment.
posted by bardophile at 10:25 AM on October 12, 2019 [4 favorites]
Looks like Trump himself drafted that ridiculous 8-page letter to the House, complaining about how unfair the impeachment hearings were. What a surprise.
That Trump has leaned so heavily on his own intuition in crafting the legal response to his impeachment crisis has come as no surprise to those who know him. The president has—however misguidedly—long thought of himself as more keen and cunning than his advisers.posted by suelac at 10:46 AM on October 12, 2019 [11 favorites]
The president has—however misguidedly—long thought of himself as more keen and cunning than his advisers.
In short: "long thought" but not "thought long."
I am surprised that he drafted that letter, it sounded to official-ly (officialoid, is that a word?) Perhaps the people around him saw this as an easy possibility to let him fall faster, and helped him with the grammar.
posted by Namlit at 10:52 AM on October 12, 2019
In short: "long thought" but not "thought long."
I am surprised that he drafted that letter, it sounded to official-ly (officialoid, is that a word?) Perhaps the people around him saw this as an easy possibility to let him fall faster, and helped him with the grammar.
posted by Namlit at 10:52 AM on October 12, 2019
The Cipollone Letter: Trouble in the White House Counsel’s Office (Bob Bauer, Lawfare)
Cipollone prescriptively claims for the president all of these “rights” in principle, though he is presumably well aware that the House majority controls these proceedings and the definition of any such “rights.” The Constitution leaves it to the House, in its exercise of the “sole power to impeach,” to develop as it sees fit the procedural safeguards in an impeachment inquiry. These issues of due process do have institutional significance for the president—for any president, not just Donald Trump—and so it falls to the White House to make a serious argument for appropriate protections and to press the House to recognize them. Cipollone makes no such argument.posted by katra at 11:00 AM on October 12, 2019 [8 favorites]
It is hard to see why it is to the presidency’s enduring advantage to have the counsel make a show of concern for due process and then cut off further dialogue, summarily refusing any cooperation. His message—“Do what you want”—may work for Trump. But it is surpassingly strange for this to be the position of the White House counsel, who has a duty to look after the presidency’s long-term interests. [...]
The White House counsel might reasonably have contended that the House would impair the Senate in the conduct of the trial by voting for articles of impeachment on an incomplete, slanted record. This was a major issue in the Clinton impeachment trial: The House had conducted no fact-finding and relied entirely on the referral from Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr. The Starr Report was highly controversial; irregularities and inadequacies in Starr’s conduct of his investigation became a leading, if not the central, line of defense mounted by the Clinton legal team. [...] It would have been entirely appropriate for Cipollone to point to this precedent as a warning—if he had chosen to do so.
One might argue that Cipollone was boxed in: If the president is adamantly opposed to any openness to cooperation, perhaps the counsel believed that he has no choice but to communicate to Congress an unyielding rejection of any proceeding. On this theory about the motivation behind this letter, Trump’s intransigence required Cipollone to assert due process “rights” not as an invitation to negotiation, but as a cover for rejecting any engagement with the House.
Soo...I did some digging last night into a possible Igor Fruman/Jeffrey Epstein connection and typed 'Mafia Rave' (Fruman's Odessa nightclub) into YouTube and...wow. So many models. It's apparently one of the main venues for Odessa Fashion Week. There's someone in the audience at nearly every show (front row center, left side) who looks a lot like Ghislaine Maxwell...but it's hard to be sure...the camera doesn't linger and the bangs seem wrong (she's really big on bangs (or 'fringe' in the UK)) but if all these shows are from the same week in 2017 it could just be a hairstyle. I will go through again at higher resolution after work, but for now it's a maaaybe(?). Oh...and half the shows (at a nightclub, but during the day) are for kids clothing. So a whole bunch of teen, tween, and younger models. Like a whole lot. Like yikes. A bunch of the other shows are lingerie and done in a very Victorias Secret style (where Maxwell worked with models for some time) including wings on the models...Maxwell's influence maybe?
Aaaand now I feel like a crazy Qanon person, but the way all these crimers crime together I'm leaning towards "where there's smoke..." I guess the next step is trying to get ahold of the guest lists...anybody speak Russian?
posted by sexyrobot at 12:22 PM on October 12, 2019 [11 favorites]
Aaaand now I feel like a crazy Qanon person, but the way all these crimers crime together I'm leaning towards "where there's smoke..." I guess the next step is trying to get ahold of the guest lists...anybody speak Russian?
posted by sexyrobot at 12:22 PM on October 12, 2019 [11 favorites]
Looks like Trump himself drafted that ridiculous 8-page letter to the House
Hold on. You're telling me that Donald J. Trump, the guy who notoriously won't sit still for a briefing longer than two pages, who spends 20 minutes crafting a misspelled 240-character tweet, that guy sat his ass down at a computer and pecked out an eight page document? That must be more writing than he's done in decades, he's gotta be terrified.
posted by contraption at 12:38 PM on October 12, 2019 [30 favorites]
Hold on. You're telling me that Donald J. Trump, the guy who notoriously won't sit still for a briefing longer than two pages, who spends 20 minutes crafting a misspelled 240-character tweet, that guy sat his ass down at a computer and pecked out an eight page document? That must be more writing than he's done in decades, he's gotta be terrified.
posted by contraption at 12:38 PM on October 12, 2019 [30 favorites]
The President's Joint Defense Agreement with the Russian Mob (Marcy Wheeler, emptywheel)
Once [John Dowd's October 3 letter] was sent, under penalty of prosecution for false statements to Congress, it became fact: Parnas and Fruman do work for Rudy Giuliani in the service of the President of the United States covered by privilege, Rudy does work for them covered by privilege, and they also do work for Joseph Di Genova and Victoria Toensing about this matter that is covered by privilege. [...]posted by katra at 12:46 PM on October 12, 2019 [30 favorites]
It all might have worked, too, if Parnas and Fruman hadn’t gotten arrested before they managed to flee the country, headed for what seems to have been a planned meeting a day later with their sometime attorney Rudy Giuliani in Vienna, just one day after a lunch meeting with him at Trump Hotel across the street from the Department of Justice [...]
I mean, it still could work. Trump is still the President and DOJ, at least, will give some consideration to the attorney-client claims, so long as Rudy and Trump can maintain the illusion that Rudy is and was really doing legal work for the President.
But something that Dowd may not have considered, before he sent a letter to Congress laying out an incestuous nest of ethical atrocities, is that by the time he sent the letter, DiGenova and Toensing were on the record as representing Dmitry Firtash, a Ukrainian oligarch who was named in some of the early search warrants targeting Paul Manafort. And in March, Rudy Giuliani went on the record to explain that Firtash was, “one of the close associates of [Semion] Mogilevich, who is the head of Russian organized crime, who is Putin’s best friend.” Yesterday, Reuters closed the circle, making it clear that Parnas and Fruman work for Firtash, the former as a translator for DiGenova and Toensing’s representation of Firtash.
[...] In other words, the President’s former lawyer asserted to Congress that the President and his current lawyer are in some kind of JDA from hell with the Russian mob, almost certainly along with the President’s former campaign manager, who apparently gets consulted (via Kevin Downing) on these matters in prison.
no he ranted for 20 minutes while stomping around the room, and his staff cleaned it up a bit
posted by ryanrs at 12:47 PM on October 12, 2019 [37 favorites]
posted by ryanrs at 12:47 PM on October 12, 2019 [37 favorites]
I don’t know that of all the batshit stuff in all of this, this is what made me jaw drop.
Staff who handle records have had to retrieve the burn bags from the residence, put the papers out on a table and tape them back together to preserve them as official presidential records, this person said.
He has absolutely no idea what it means to be a president and be beholden to the country. He is probably only finding out now that his “burn bag” has not been being burned and is presidential record.
He truly truly does not understand any of this.
posted by affectionateborg at 12:47 PM on October 12, 2019 [34 favorites]
Staff who handle records have had to retrieve the burn bags from the residence, put the papers out on a table and tape them back together to preserve them as official presidential records, this person said.
He has absolutely no idea what it means to be a president and be beholden to the country. He is probably only finding out now that his “burn bag” has not been being burned and is presidential record.
He truly truly does not understand any of this.
posted by affectionateborg at 12:47 PM on October 12, 2019 [34 favorites]
in russian white house, torn up evidence burns you
posted by ryanrs at 12:51 PM on October 12, 2019 [110 favorites]
posted by ryanrs at 12:51 PM on October 12, 2019 [110 favorites]
I half expect that eventually we'll have an Impeach@Home effort where you can donate CPU power to reconstructing shredded evidence of Trump's malfeasance.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:03 PM on October 12, 2019 [21 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:03 PM on October 12, 2019 [21 favorites]
What CPU? They just send you a baggie of shreds and you do what you can to reassemble it on your kitchen table.
posted by bink at 1:10 PM on October 12, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by bink at 1:10 PM on October 12, 2019 [2 favorites]
That Giuliani wouldn't know whether he is Trump's lawyer is just one more cloud of smoke from the bullshit factory stacks. Attorney engagement letters are mandatory in New York and have been since 2002 [cite]. If you are claiming privilege, produce a copy of the engagement letter or go home.
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 1:13 PM on October 12, 2019 [34 favorites]
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 1:13 PM on October 12, 2019 [34 favorites]
Just a note in passing that within 48 hours of Attorney General William Barr meeting with Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch, Fox journalist and notable Trump critic abruptly quit his job in the middle of his contract.
posted by Sublimity at 1:34 PM on October 12, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Sublimity at 1:34 PM on October 12, 2019 [4 favorites]
Mod note: Quick note, there's a dedicated thread about Shepherd Smith leaving Fox News, so better to take that over there.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 1:36 PM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 1:36 PM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
Jonathan Coulton has a Schoolhouse Rock-style video about impeachment that's pretty cool. I wish it were a bit clearer, maybe, but it's the sort of thing that deserves to be in heavy rotation.
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:35 PM on October 12, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:35 PM on October 12, 2019 [12 favorites]
Once they start being revealed, the length, width, and depth of collusion, conspiracy, and corruption of Donald Trump's network of cronies is like a gigantic rat king. Hopefully, their tails are so entangled that they can be caught and rendered powerless.
...just saying.
posted by cenoxo at 2:37 PM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
...just saying.
posted by cenoxo at 2:37 PM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
I half expect that eventually we'll have an Impeach@Home effort where you can donate CPU power to reconstructing shredded evidence of Trump's malfeasance.
They can borrow the Fraunhofer Institute's code used for reconstructing shredded Stasi documents.
posted by acb at 2:51 PM on October 12, 2019 [10 favorites]
They can borrow the Fraunhofer Institute's code used for reconstructing shredded Stasi documents.
posted by acb at 2:51 PM on October 12, 2019 [10 favorites]
Impeachment takeaways: Another week of big developments (Politico)
Five of POLITICO’s reporters who have been covering Trump’s presidency and the impeachment inquiry share their thoughts on where we stand.
Five of POLITICO’s reporters who have been covering Trump’s presidency and the impeachment inquiry share their thoughts on where we stand.
What stood out to you as the biggest development of a crazy week?posted by katra at 2:53 PM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
Natasha Bertrand, national security reporter: Definitely that two associates of Rudy Giuliani who are in many ways at the heart of this Ukraine scandal — Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman — were indicted on campaign finance charges. [...] It also signals an intensifying crackdown on illicit campaign contributions, at a moment when Trump’s inaugural committee is under criminal investigation for potentially receiving donations from illegal foreign sources. [...]
Kyle Cheney, congressional reporter: [...] I think will be most consequential is former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s decision to defy the State Department to testify in the House’s impeachment investigation. With her decision, she set a template for other witnesses to come forward even if they’ve been ordered not to [...]
Josh Gerstein, legal affairs reporter: [...] the most significant impeachment development of the week was Trump’s decision to have U.S. troops stand aside as Turkey invades Syria. [...] Why anyone in the political fight of his life would piss off his closest friends is hard to fathom. [...]
Can Rudy go on as Trump’s lawyer?
[...] Kyle: Trump may need him to. Rudy knows everything about everything and he’s intertwined with all of Trump world. Though I wouldn’t expect to see Giuliani on TV quite as often as the president’s emissary, it’ll be hard to excommunicate him from the inner circle completely, even if his commentary has alienated other Republicans and seems to embroil the president in more legal trouble every time he speaks.
Al-Jazeera: Semyon Kislin, a business associate of Donald Trump who is due to give evidence at the US president's impeachment inquiry on October 14, tried to obtain millions of dollars that Ukrainian prosecutors deemed stolen.
Kislin is a long-time friend of Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.
posted by adamvasco at 4:04 PM on October 12, 2019 [10 favorites]
Kislin is a long-time friend of Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.
posted by adamvasco at 4:04 PM on October 12, 2019 [10 favorites]
. . also campaign donor to Chuck Schumer's campaigns in the 90s . . while Kislin was being investigated by FBI for money laundering.
posted by Harry Caul at 4:23 PM on October 12, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 4:23 PM on October 12, 2019 [5 favorites]
That Giuliani wouldn't know whether he is Trump's lawyer is just one more cloud of smoke from the bullshit factory stacks
My understanding is he claimed not to know whether he was still Trump's lawyer. And the letter of engagement requirement is only about opening a relationship. (Also that he's working "for free" (!), which avoids the need for any letter of engagement.)
posted by sourcejedi at 4:29 PM on October 12, 2019 [1 favorite]
My understanding is he claimed not to know whether he was still Trump's lawyer. And the letter of engagement requirement is only about opening a relationship. (Also that he's working "for free" (!), which avoids the need for any letter of engagement.)
posted by sourcejedi at 4:29 PM on October 12, 2019 [1 favorite]
Working pro bono does not obviate the need for a letter of engagement. Moreover, just throwing in my own 22 years of practice as an attorney as evidence here, you simply would not terminate an engagement orally. There would be a writing somewhere saying "You're fired!" That letter might be written by the client or the lawyer. The issue of whether or not you are my client and I am your lawyer is one of the biggest issues in legal ethics, second only to whether I have stolen money from my client. You just don't leave any aspect of that relationship to chance, nor do you base any of it on a handshake oral agreement. It all gets written down.
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 4:46 PM on October 12, 2019 [35 favorites]
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 4:46 PM on October 12, 2019 [35 favorites]
Not to abuse the edit window, my original point was that Trump and Giuliani can only claim attorney-client privilege for communications made between them while Giuliani was engaged as Trump's attorney. When did that engagement begin? When did it end (assuming it has)? A letter of engagement PLUS any writing terminating that agreement would seem dispositive here.
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 5:01 PM on October 12, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 5:01 PM on October 12, 2019 [4 favorites]
Well our boy Rudy is definitely a smart and ethics-concerned lawyer who is good at covering his own ass, so I'm sure he has written documentation of his attorney-client status re: the President
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:01 PM on October 12, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:01 PM on October 12, 2019 [1 favorite]
That would consist of a letter signed by Trump accepting the engagement. So I would like to see it. Especially if Trump is denying the fact of the engagement. It's simply a delicious moment in time where whatever they have is damning for one reason or another.
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 5:05 PM on October 12, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 5:05 PM on October 12, 2019 [3 favorites]
...also campaign donor to Chuck Schumer's campaigns in the 90s...
if schumer's dirty, fuck 'im. IMHO, make this moment a reckoning for corruption and shady big-money hijinx.
posted by j_curiouser at 5:09 PM on October 12, 2019 [38 favorites]
if schumer's dirty, fuck 'im. IMHO, make this moment a reckoning for corruption and shady big-money hijinx.
posted by j_curiouser at 5:09 PM on October 12, 2019 [38 favorites]
You have a real clash of interests here. For Guiliani, to avoid prosecution for unregistered foreign lobbying, he needs to claim he was working for the government at the direction of the State Department. For Trump's impeachment defense, on the other hand, he needs to argue that Guiliani was freelancing and that Guiliani's the quid quo pro discussions were not on behalf of the government.
And at the same time Trump is equivocating because he wants to distance himself from any Guiliani criminal lawyering, but at the same time claim client-attorney privilege. Oh, what a mess he has found himself in.
posted by JackFlash at 5:15 PM on October 12, 2019 [40 favorites]
And at the same time Trump is equivocating because he wants to distance himself from any Guiliani criminal lawyering, but at the same time claim client-attorney privilege. Oh, what a mess he has found himself in.
posted by JackFlash at 5:15 PM on October 12, 2019 [40 favorites]
If you want to claim attorney-client privilege, then don't instruct or allow your attorney to commit fraud or crimes on your behalf. As a good attorney, Rudy should have informed his client of the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege and tsk-tsked his attempts to circumvent it (or better yet, fired his client upon learning his intent to go forward with fraud and crimes). As I said before, this is a delicious moment in time.
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 5:36 PM on October 12, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by JimInLoganSquare at 5:36 PM on October 12, 2019 [9 favorites]
As a good attorney, Rudy should have...
Objection, assumes facts not in evidence.
posted by bcd at 5:41 PM on October 12, 2019 [33 favorites]
Objection, assumes facts not in evidence.
posted by bcd at 5:41 PM on October 12, 2019 [33 favorites]
WaPo, Trump’s envoy who denied quid pro quo now says he isn’t certain: "The U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, intends to tell Congress this week that the content of a text message he wrote denying a quid pro quo with Ukraine was relayed to him directly by President Trump in a phone call, according to a person familiar with his testimony.
Sondland plans to tell lawmakers he has no knowledge of whether the president was telling him the truth at that moment. "
posted by jocelmeow at 6:35 PM on October 12, 2019 [33 favorites]
Sondland plans to tell lawmakers he has no knowledge of whether the president was telling him the truth at that moment. "
posted by jocelmeow at 6:35 PM on October 12, 2019 [33 favorites]
Another bus a'comin. And Sondland paid over $1 million for his fare.
posted by JackFlash at 6:47 PM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 6:47 PM on October 12, 2019 [6 favorites]
Gee, I wonder why Trump didn't text it to him?
posted by xammerboy at 6:48 PM on October 12, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by xammerboy at 6:48 PM on October 12, 2019 [1 favorite]
Sondland also appears to be trying to claim innocence (same WaPo link) while confirming his role in a 'quid pro quo'
Sondland is expected to say that for months before the Sept. 9 message, he worked at the direction of Rudolph W. Giuliani, Trump’s personal attorney, to secure what he would call in another text message the “deliverable” sought by Trump: a public statement from Ukraine that it would investigate corruption, including mentioning Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, by name. In exchange for the statement, the president would grant Ukraine’s new president a coveted White House audience. [...]posted by katra at 6:49 PM on October 12, 2019 [7 favorites]
Sondland appears poised to say that he and other diplomats did not know that the request to mention Burisma was really an effort to impugn the reputations of Biden and his son Hunter, who had served as a Burisma board member. Sondland contends that he didn’t know about the Biden connection until a whistleblower complaint and transcript surfaced in late September.
To trust Sondland’s testimony, members of Congress will have to believe Sondland had not seen televised appearances by Giuliani over the spring and summer, or numerous newspaper and magazine articles questioning whether Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma could prove to be a drag on his father’s presidential campaign.
Cool to be working at the direction of Trump's personal attorney on government business.
posted by xammerboy at 6:59 PM on October 12, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 6:59 PM on October 12, 2019 [10 favorites]
Trump is now saying he is going to sue Schiff and Pelosi for statements calling for his impeachment. Trump seems to be unaware of the Constitution's Article 1 Section 6 which prevents suing members of congress for their speech.
He also suggests impeaching Schiff and Pelosi. Trump seems to be unaware of Article 1 Section 5 which says that members can only be removed by a two-thirds vote of congress members.
Says Trump White House lawyer Jay Sekulow "No President should be subjected to this political theater" as he engages in the ridiculous political theater.
posted by JackFlash at 7:09 PM on October 12, 2019 [33 favorites]
He also suggests impeaching Schiff and Pelosi. Trump seems to be unaware of Article 1 Section 5 which says that members can only be removed by a two-thirds vote of congress members.
Says Trump White House lawyer Jay Sekulow "No President should be subjected to this political theater" as he engages in the ridiculous political theater.
posted by JackFlash at 7:09 PM on October 12, 2019 [33 favorites]
Trump has literally only had Article II read to him (and that only recently, based on his public statements) -- he has no idea what's in Article I -- and also Jay Sekulow is a fucking asshole who has been a parasite on the worst impulses of the Christian right for 40 fucking years now. I'm honestly ever so slightly impressed he managed to fail up into a position of national prominence (if not importance) because I spent my whole college career watching him try to get on the suing-shit-for-reactionary-Catholics gravy train (IT IS A VERY GENEROUS GRAVY TRAIN THAT WILL PAY THE WORST BOTTOM FEEDERS, BUT NOT JAY SEKULOW), and failing repeatedly.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 7:14 PM on October 12, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 7:14 PM on October 12, 2019 [19 favorites]
How two Soviet-born emigres made it into elite Trump circles — and the center of the impeachment storm (WaPo)
Lev Parnas, a Ukrainian-born emigre, appeared at a dark time in Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. Less than a month before the election, major GOP donors had been spooked by the revelation that Trump boasted about grabbing women during a recording of the television show “Access Hollywood.”posted by katra at 7:20 PM on October 12, 2019 [9 favorites]
Parnas had never been a player in national Republican politics. But the onetime stockbroker chose that moment to deliver a $50,000 donation to Trump’s campaign and the Republican Party, and it quickly opened doors. [...]
By spring 2018, the two men had dined with Trump, breakfasted with his son and attended exclusive events at Mar-a-Lago and the White House, all while jetting around the world and spending lavishly, particularly at Trump hotels in New York and Washington. That May, a pro-Trump super PAC reported receiving a $325,000 donation from an energy company the duo had recently formed. [...]
Their new lawyer, John Dowd — who also previously served as a personal attorney for Trump — declined to respond to a number of questions about the two men, writing only in an email, “You publish at your peril.”
Indeed, how will he get out of this one? - odinsdream.
Stay tuned: same batshit time, same batshit channel.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:43 PM on October 12, 2019 [12 favorites]
Stay tuned: same batshit time, same batshit channel.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:43 PM on October 12, 2019 [12 favorites]
Gee, I wonder why Trump didn't text it to him?
Signal? WhatsApp?
posted by j_curiouser at 7:55 PM on October 12, 2019 [2 favorites]
Signal? WhatsApp?
posted by j_curiouser at 7:55 PM on October 12, 2019 [2 favorites]
Another bus a'comin. And Sondland paid over $1 million for his fare.
Sondland just ripped the emergency pullstring right out of the ceiling
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:22 PM on October 12, 2019 [5 favorites]
Sondland just ripped the emergency pullstring right out of the ceiling
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:22 PM on October 12, 2019 [5 favorites]
Trump renews claim that he is immune from criminal investigation in effort to block Manhattan DA probe (WaPo)
However:
posted by katra at 9:28 PM on October 12, 2019 [8 favorites]
However:
The Justice Department also filed a brief in support of the president, though it stopped short of endorsing Trump’s precedent-breaking assertion that he has absolute immunity from investigation.WaPo notes "Vance has subpoenaed the records from Trump’s longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA, as part of an investigation that appears targeted at possible falsification of business records related to a scheme to silence two women who alleged that they had affairs with Trump."
Instead, the Justice Department conceded that there were some instances when a local prosecutor might legally seek a president’s documents — but this was not one of them.
“Presidential materials ‘should not be treated as just another source of Information,’ ” the Justice Department said, quoting a prior ruling to explain how presidential subpoenas might be permitted, but only in extraordinary circumstances. “A subpoena directed at a President’s records should be permitted only ‘as a last resort.’ ”
The department said Vance needed to show a “demonstrated, specific need” for the data in Trump’s tax returns, as well as to demonstrate that he had already tried to obtain the same facts through other means. “The court should be ordered to stay enforcement of the subpoena as to the President’s personal records unless and until — at a minimum — the District Attorney is able to make the required showing of particularized need,” the Justice Department wrote.
posted by katra at 9:28 PM on October 12, 2019 [8 favorites]
ha ha ha: that man
has not sat through a reading
of article ii.
(& didn't write that
letter & hasn't sat through
a reading of it).
posted by 20 year lurk at 9:59 PM on October 12, 2019 [7 favorites]
has not sat through a reading
of article ii.
(& didn't write that
letter & hasn't sat through
a reading of it).
posted by 20 year lurk at 9:59 PM on October 12, 2019 [7 favorites]
Surely this. For various values of this.
posted by Devonian at 4:42 AM on October 13, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Devonian at 4:42 AM on October 13, 2019 [8 favorites]
Vance isn’t subpoenaing presidential records though. He’s subpoenaing records that were made when a person currently serving as president was a private individual.
Isn’t that a distinction? Everything 45 did prior to the election is not suddenly “presidential”. If it were, it would all be part of much larger record for public visibility, like the briefing notes he thinks are being burned.
I’m making assumptions here and could be wrong.
posted by affectionateborg at 5:53 AM on October 13, 2019 [17 favorites]
Isn’t that a distinction? Everything 45 did prior to the election is not suddenly “presidential”. If it were, it would all be part of much larger record for public visibility, like the briefing notes he thinks are being burned.
I’m making assumptions here and could be wrong.
posted by affectionateborg at 5:53 AM on October 13, 2019 [17 favorites]
If a presidential candidate is part of a criminal conspiracy (and its investigation) prior to their election, do they become immune to further investigation, indictments, and prosecution after they take the oath of office?
posted by cenoxo at 6:41 AM on October 13, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by cenoxo at 6:41 AM on October 13, 2019 [1 favorite]
The obvious idiocy of these positions is what makes them effective. It serves to demoralize anyone seeking common ground or operating in good faith.
posted by jon1270 at 6:59 AM on October 13, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by jon1270 at 6:59 AM on October 13, 2019 [10 favorites]
Attorney engagement letters are mandatory in New York and have been since 2002 [cite]
I comment because I looked at the cited source, and it said "Section 1215.2 exempts three categories of matters: (1) matters in which the legal fees are expected to be under $3,000".
posted by sourcejedi at 7:29 AM on October 13, 2019 [6 favorites]
I comment because I looked at the cited source, and it said "Section 1215.2 exempts three categories of matters: (1) matters in which the legal fees are expected to be under $3,000".
posted by sourcejedi at 7:29 AM on October 13, 2019 [6 favorites]
If a presidential candidate is part of a criminal conspiracy (and its investigation) prior to their election...
Well Vice President Spiro Agnew was forced to resign. "In 1973, Agnew was investigated by the United States Attorney for the District of Maryland on suspicion of criminal conspiracy, bribery, extortion and tax fraud. Agnew took kickbacks from contractors during his time as Baltimore County Executive and Governor of Maryland...he pleaded guilty to a single felony charge of tax evasion" (wiki) and then spent the rest of his very comfortable life bitching about it.
posted by TWinbrook8 at 7:32 AM on October 13, 2019 [7 favorites]
Well Vice President Spiro Agnew was forced to resign. "In 1973, Agnew was investigated by the United States Attorney for the District of Maryland on suspicion of criminal conspiracy, bribery, extortion and tax fraud. Agnew took kickbacks from contractors during his time as Baltimore County Executive and Governor of Maryland...he pleaded guilty to a single felony charge of tax evasion" (wiki) and then spent the rest of his very comfortable life bitching about it.
posted by TWinbrook8 at 7:32 AM on October 13, 2019 [7 favorites]
If a presidential candidate is part of a criminal conspiracy (and its investigation) prior to their election...
A crime is a crime only if Republicans care for it to be. If you're a Democrat, they'll talk about jailing you for putting mustard on a hamburger. If you're a Republican, there's no line you can't cross. The entire system (e.g. courts, media, etc.) is tilted in their favor.
posted by xammerboy at 7:52 AM on October 13, 2019 [17 favorites]
A crime is a crime only if Republicans care for it to be. If you're a Democrat, they'll talk about jailing you for putting mustard on a hamburger. If you're a Republican, there's no line you can't cross. The entire system (e.g. courts, media, etc.) is tilted in their favor.
posted by xammerboy at 7:52 AM on October 13, 2019 [17 favorites]
> Quite a bit more about MEK (Mojahedin-e Khalq) at Wikipedia.
Correct link.
posted by cenoxo at 8:56 AM on October 13, 2019 [1 favorite]
Correct link.
posted by cenoxo at 8:56 AM on October 13, 2019 [1 favorite]
ha ha ha: that man
has not sat through a reading
of article ii.
(& didn't write that
letter & hasn't sat through
a reading of it).
Well he seems to have appointed some judges who will back him up by using the Constitution as toilet paper. How many of Trump's judges have sworn a loyalty oath to him as a prerequisite for their appointments?
posted by benzenedream at 8:58 AM on October 13, 2019 [2 favorites]
has not sat through a reading
of article ii.
(& didn't write that
letter & hasn't sat through
a reading of it).
Well he seems to have appointed some judges who will back him up by using the Constitution as toilet paper. How many of Trump's judges have sworn a loyalty oath to him as a prerequisite for their appointments?
posted by benzenedream at 8:58 AM on October 13, 2019 [2 favorites]
Donald Trump: xenophobe in public, international mobster in private (Robert Reich, Guardian Opinion)
The founding fathers said betraying America to foreign powers was an impeachable offense. The president must go
The founding fathers said betraying America to foreign powers was an impeachable offense. The president must go
Trump withdrew American troops from the Syrian-Turkish border, leaving our Kurdish allies to be slaughtered and opening the way for a resurgent Islamic State. Trump’s rationale? He promised to bring our soldiers home.posted by katra at 8:59 AM on October 13, 2019 [18 favorites]
There could be another reason. Trump never divested from his real estate business, and the Trump Towers Istanbul is the Trump Organization’s first and only office and residential building in Europe. Businesses linked to the Turkish government are also major patrons of the Trump Organization. Which may be why Trump has repeatedly sided with the Turkish strongman Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has been intent on eliminating the Kurds.
[...] Meanwhile, even as Trump spews conspiracy theories about the Biden family, his own children are openly profiting from foreign deals. Eric and Don Jr have projects in the works in Ireland, India, Indonesia, Uruguay, Turkey and the Philippines.
Trump is pocketing money from foreign governments eager to curry favor by staying at his hotels. The practice has become so routine that during Trump’s 25 July phone call, the Ukrainian president assured him that the “last time I traveled to the United States, I stayed in New York near Central Park and I stayed at the Trump Tower”.
According to a former Trump Organization official, foreign governments spent more than a million dollars at Trump businesses in 2018, mostly at the Trump International hotel in Washington. Trump will make even more money if he carries out his plan to host next year’s G7 meeting at his Doral golf resort, in Florida.
All of this is precisely what the founding fathers sought to prevent. [...] You don’t have to be an originalist to see the dangers to democracy when a president seeks or receives personal favors from foreign governments. There is no limit to how far a foreign power might go to help a president enlarge his political power and wealth, in exchange for selling out America.
cenoxo:
posted by Cogito at 9:07 AM on October 13, 2019 [8 favorites]
If a presidential candidate is part of a criminal conspiracy (and its investigation) prior to their election, do they become immune to further investigation, indictments, and prosecution after they take the oath of office?What Trump Can Teach Us About Con Law entitled "Prosecuting a President" examines the history of this question. Also, the podcast overall is excellent and fascinating
posted by Cogito at 9:07 AM on October 13, 2019 [8 favorites]
(Robert Reich, Guardian Opinion)
It's just going to be a constant parade of familiar names from the past 5 administrations, isn't it? Not sure who Mr. Reich, who I like, thinks he's convincing here.
Trump is pocketing money from foreign governments eager to curry favor by staying at his hotels
Horrors. Can we move the discourse along now? Hey everybody, we landed on the moon!
I know there's a certain risk in being with-it on the news to believe that information is more established in the public consciousness than it is, but the badness of Trump continually regenerates itself. There are newer, worse Presidential acts that are just as easily understandable, so reusing the first thing over and over is just lazy.
Maybe if Trump's 307th day at a Trump property was something people were responding to, it would be a good event to use in a foundation of sentiment against him, but if nobody except wonks and the over-connected has been talking about it for the past three years...find something newer and more relatable.
posted by rhizome at 11:00 AM on October 13, 2019
It's just going to be a constant parade of familiar names from the past 5 administrations, isn't it? Not sure who Mr. Reich, who I like, thinks he's convincing here.
Trump is pocketing money from foreign governments eager to curry favor by staying at his hotels
Horrors. Can we move the discourse along now? Hey everybody, we landed on the moon!
I know there's a certain risk in being with-it on the news to believe that information is more established in the public consciousness than it is, but the badness of Trump continually regenerates itself. There are newer, worse Presidential acts that are just as easily understandable, so reusing the first thing over and over is just lazy.
Maybe if Trump's 307th day at a Trump property was something people were responding to, it would be a good event to use in a foundation of sentiment against him, but if nobody except wonks and the over-connected has been talking about it for the past three years...find something newer and more relatable.
posted by rhizome at 11:00 AM on October 13, 2019
...find something newer and more relatable.
... like how this pattern and practice of graft and corruption is now resulting in genocide?
posted by katra at 11:17 AM on October 13, 2019 [7 favorites]
... like how this pattern and practice of graft and corruption is now resulting in genocide?
posted by katra at 11:17 AM on October 13, 2019 [7 favorites]
Gordon Sondland is about to blow a hole in Trump’s Ukraine defense (Aaron Blake, WaPo)
The implosion of this particular Trump defense epitomizes the broader problem his supporters have here. The vast majority of Republicans have been unwilling to go to bat for Trump, avoiding the questions or deflecting them and talking about something else (like about how there really is corruption in Ukraine). That appears to be because they have little faith that something more incriminating won’t eventually come out, making their defenses look silly, as this one now has. Trump and Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, simply don’t appear to have taken much care to avoid at least the appearance of soliciting foreign influence on an American election. [...]posted by katra at 11:40 AM on October 13, 2019 [5 favorites]
Sondland’s impending testimony sounds like that of a man covering his own backside and knowing his apparent defense of Trump could quickly fall apart upon further examination.
The sexual assaults don’t move the dial either but that doesn’t mean journalists and detractors shouldn’t return to the subject.
posted by Selena777 at 11:55 AM on October 13, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by Selena777 at 11:55 AM on October 13, 2019 [15 favorites]
Ted Cruz: 'Of course' Trump was wrong to ask China to probe Bidens (NBC News)
Asked on CBS's "Face the Nation" whether Trump's comments were "appropriate," Cruz said "of course not."posted by katra at 12:04 PM on October 13, 2019 [3 favorites]
"Elections in the U.S. should be decided by Americans and it's not the business of foreign countries, any foreign countries, to be interfering in our elections," he said.
"Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan then asked if it was improper for Trump to ask Ukraine to probe the Bidens, as he did in a July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy — a call that is now at the center of an impeachment inquiry.
"Listen, foreign countries should stay out of American elections," Cruz said. "That's true for Russia. That's true for Ukraine. That's true for China. That's true for all of them. It should be the American people deciding elections. I don't know what [Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani has] been saying. I do know though that we should decide our elections. It should be the American people making those decisions."
But Cruz added that it would make "sense" for Giuliani, who is at the center of the president's campaign to have Ukraine investigate the Bidens, testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has already invited Giuliani to do so. "I'd like to see Rudy testify," Cruz said. "Yes."
Protecting whistleblower’s identity is ‘our primary interest,’ Schiff says (WaPo)
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) said Sunday that protecting the identity of the whistleblower who raised the alarm about President Trump’s communications with Ukraine is “our primary interest,” in a sign that House Democrats may not press the individual to testify before Congress. [...] “Given that we already have the call record, we don’t need the whistleblower who wasn’t on the call to tell us what took place during the call,” Schiff said. “We have the best evidence of that.” [...]posted by katra at 12:19 PM on October 13, 2019 [8 favorites]
Trump and other Republicans have argued that Democrats should hold public hearings rather than hear witness testimony behind closed doors. But Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), who sits on the Intelligence Committee, argued Sunday that Democrats have several reasons for conducting closed-door depositions.
The “most important reason,” Himes said on ABC News’s “This Week,” is that “when you’re talking to ambassadors and other U.S. government officials who have regularly had access to classified information, you need to be able to talk about that information and then go back and say hey, this conversation has to be redacted because it involves classified information.”
The second reason, he said, is that lawmakers don’t want witnesses to be able to coordinate testimony. “These are a group of people who have shown that they have no problem whatsoever lying, if they think it serves their interest,” Himes said. “And so, you don’t want to give them the opportunity to look at what they are saying and therefore coordinate their stories.”
He added that “all transcripts will eventually be scrubbed for classified information and made available for the American public to see.”
At lot of people are attributing things to Sondland that he has not yet testified about. Don't get your hopes up. Sondland certainly is going to try to cover his ass, but he is also highly motivated to cover Trump's ass as well. After all, he gave Trump $1 million. There's a lot of nuance that Sondland can put into his testimony to provide ambiguity about the quid pro quo.
There are a lot of other avenues regarding Sondland that would be interesting to explore.
How did Sondland end up becoming ambassador to the EU? He did not support Trump in the election saying he did not share his values, but in an abrupt turnaround, after Trump won, he contributed over a million dollars to the Trump inauguration party. While he is under oath would be a great time to ask him if there was a quid pro quo of a million dollars in exchange for the ambassador appointment. It is common for presidents to reward big contributors, but it's not usually an explicit, this for that. Under oath, he could be questioned if there was ever an explicit discussion of the EU ambassadorship prior to his million dollar donation.
posted by JackFlash at 12:27 PM on October 13, 2019 [25 favorites]
There are a lot of other avenues regarding Sondland that would be interesting to explore.
How did Sondland end up becoming ambassador to the EU? He did not support Trump in the election saying he did not share his values, but in an abrupt turnaround, after Trump won, he contributed over a million dollars to the Trump inauguration party. While he is under oath would be a great time to ask him if there was a quid pro quo of a million dollars in exchange for the ambassador appointment. It is common for presidents to reward big contributors, but it's not usually an explicit, this for that. Under oath, he could be questioned if there was ever an explicit discussion of the EU ambassadorship prior to his million dollar donation.
posted by JackFlash at 12:27 PM on October 13, 2019 [25 favorites]
The sexual assaults don’t move the dial either but that doesn’t mean journalists and detractors shouldn’t return to the subject.
That's not my point, I'm saying the conversation doesn't have to be continually hung upon persistent topics.
... like how this pattern and practice of graft and corruption is now resulting in genocide?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. Decimated Kurds are easily hung around Trump's neck, but for the timidity of the media and press at the gaggles.
posted by rhizome at 12:36 PM on October 13, 2019
That's not my point, I'm saying the conversation doesn't have to be continually hung upon persistent topics.
... like how this pattern and practice of graft and corruption is now resulting in genocide?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. Decimated Kurds are easily hung around Trump's neck, but for the timidity of the media and press at the gaggles.
posted by rhizome at 12:36 PM on October 13, 2019
But Cruz added that it would make "sense" for Giuliani, who is at the center of the president's campaign to have Ukraine investigate the Bidens, testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has already invited Giuliani to do so. "I'd like to see Rudy testify," Cruz said. "Yes."
What is this about. Getting the dirt on Biden out despite all the concern mouth motions?
posted by angrycat at 12:42 PM on October 13, 2019 [2 favorites]
What is this about. Getting the dirt on Biden out despite all the concern mouth motions?
posted by angrycat at 12:42 PM on October 13, 2019 [2 favorites]
It’s about Cruz’s intention to still be coasting along as a career GOP pol long after Trump is dead.
posted by snuffleupagus at 12:55 PM on October 13, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by snuffleupagus at 12:55 PM on October 13, 2019 [11 favorites]
Re: House Intelligence Committee and the whistleblower:
Trump and other Republicans have argued that Democrats should hold public hearings rather than hear witness testimony behind closed doors.
A reminder that Junior testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee in June about the Moscow Trump Tower deal and Hillary dirt and he was able to do so behind closed doors.
Have googled briefly but haven't come across the transcript yet.
posted by TWinbrook8 at 12:57 PM on October 13, 2019 [1 favorite]
Trump and other Republicans have argued that Democrats should hold public hearings rather than hear witness testimony behind closed doors.
A reminder that Junior testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee in June about the Moscow Trump Tower deal and Hillary dirt and he was able to do so behind closed doors.
Have googled briefly but haven't come across the transcript yet.
posted by TWinbrook8 at 12:57 PM on October 13, 2019 [1 favorite]
What is this about. Getting the dirt on Biden out despite all the concern mouth motions?
In theory, yes, from Politico on October 8:
posted by katra at 1:02 PM on October 13, 2019
In theory, yes, from Politico on October 8:
“I have heard on numerous occasions disturbing allegations by Rudy Giuliani about corruption in Ukraine and the many improprieties surrounding the firing of former Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin," Graham said in a statement. “Given the House of Representatives’ behavior, it is time for the Senate to inquire about corruption and other improprieties involving Ukraine."But:
"I welcome the opportunity to question Rudy Giuliani under oath about his role in seeking the Ukrainian government’s assistance to investigate one of the president’s political rivals," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the committee. "Democratic members have plenty of questions for Mr. Giuliani and this would give us an opportunity to help separate fact from fiction for the American people."And in related news: "Giuliani signaled he was unlikely to appear before the committee. "Love Lindsey, but I am still a lawyer and I will have to deal with privilege," he told CNN."
posted by katra at 1:02 PM on October 13, 2019
It’s pretty easy to make a legitimate argument that congress should get the last several years of Trump’s tax returns. Per the constitution, the only emolument a president is allowed to receive is their salary (which cannot increase through their term). Emoluments from foreign entities and governments are only allowable with the permission of congress.
Since Trump did not divest his holdings or put them in a blind trust outside his control, congress has the right to examine his finances and determine if he is receiving emoluments outside his salary and if so, whether said emoluments are/are not permissible. Due to his extensive financial holdings and likely complex structure of his businesses, congress needs historical records to make those determinations regarding his current state of business affairs.
There is no reason this must be part of an impeachment proceeding, either. Congress could determine hisextensive graft and personal enrichment schemes business dealings are acceptable but they have an obligation to first review his financial records in order to make that call.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 1:06 PM on October 13, 2019 [33 favorites]
Since Trump did not divest his holdings or put them in a blind trust outside his control, congress has the right to examine his finances and determine if he is receiving emoluments outside his salary and if so, whether said emoluments are/are not permissible. Due to his extensive financial holdings and likely complex structure of his businesses, congress needs historical records to make those determinations regarding his current state of business affairs.
There is no reason this must be part of an impeachment proceeding, either. Congress could determine his
posted by Big Al 8000 at 1:06 PM on October 13, 2019 [33 favorites]
Except that Trump's lawyers are arguing that Congress does not have the right to investigate anything that is not related to making new law or an impeachment inquiry.
Btw, I know someone that teaches constitutional law, and the class does discuss the emoluments clause and Trump. It goes like this: The class reads the emoluments clause. They are told of Trump's business dealings. They sit in stunned confusion trying to figure out how anyone could think he's not violating the emoluments clause.
It's sort of funny, because they're expecting to dig in to some complicated questions, and instead are reading something along the lines of "The president can't take anything of value from a foreign power, not even one cent, under any circumstances. The end."
posted by xammerboy at 3:19 PM on October 13, 2019 [37 favorites]
Btw, I know someone that teaches constitutional law, and the class does discuss the emoluments clause and Trump. It goes like this: The class reads the emoluments clause. They are told of Trump's business dealings. They sit in stunned confusion trying to figure out how anyone could think he's not violating the emoluments clause.
It's sort of funny, because they're expecting to dig in to some complicated questions, and instead are reading something along the lines of "The president can't take anything of value from a foreign power, not even one cent, under any circumstances. The end."
posted by xammerboy at 3:19 PM on October 13, 2019 [37 favorites]
I'm feeling depressed today about the whole situation. My husband spent the weekend bartending for people who could only be called "Trump's base" (i.e. Southern wealthy conservative football fans). And apparently, according to them: "Trump has just done SO MUCH for this country. I can't remember the last time a president has accomplished so much. He's just done so much good."
Like, none of this has touched their opinions at all. This, in particular, is an attitude I don't understand. Because what in the WORLD has he accomplished? Other than tax cuts. Which I'm sure they love because these people had money. But...sigh.
posted by threeturtles at 3:32 PM on October 13, 2019 [16 favorites]
Like, none of this has touched their opinions at all. This, in particular, is an attitude I don't understand. Because what in the WORLD has he accomplished? Other than tax cuts. Which I'm sure they love because these people had money. But...sigh.
posted by threeturtles at 3:32 PM on October 13, 2019 [16 favorites]
Because what in the WORLD has he accomplished? Other than tax cuts.
Denuded regulatory agencies, vitiated the State Department, packed the McConnell court vacancies with ideological mediocrities.
posted by thelonius at 3:36 PM on October 13, 2019 [23 favorites]
Denuded regulatory agencies, vitiated the State Department, packed the McConnell court vacancies with ideological mediocrities.
posted by thelonius at 3:36 PM on October 13, 2019 [23 favorites]
"Love Lindsey, but I am still a lawyer and I will have to deal with privilege," he told CNN."
Like, none of this has touched their opinions at all. This, in particular, is an attitude I don't understand. Because what in the WORLD has he accomplished? Other than tax cuts. Which I'm sure they love because these people had money. But...sigh.
That's the thing. His accomplishment is the wholesale discarding of shame from white men. He's turning back the clock to where white boss men could pat their secretaries on the ass and call them "doll face" without shame and that's just how business was. Even if women complain, they have their #metoo moments, so what? Don't resign, attack, attack, attack, just know that you're the powerful one and you're going to make it because you're white and male and failing upwards is your birthright.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 3:38 PM on October 13, 2019 [31 favorites]
“I’m not acting as a lawyer. I’m acting as someone who has devoted most of his life to straightening out government,” he continued, sounding out of breath. “Anything I did should be praised.”It's amazing what a difference a couple of weeks makes.
Like, none of this has touched their opinions at all. This, in particular, is an attitude I don't understand. Because what in the WORLD has he accomplished? Other than tax cuts. Which I'm sure they love because these people had money. But...sigh.
That's the thing. His accomplishment is the wholesale discarding of shame from white men. He's turning back the clock to where white boss men could pat their secretaries on the ass and call them "doll face" without shame and that's just how business was. Even if women complain, they have their #metoo moments, so what? Don't resign, attack, attack, attack, just know that you're the powerful one and you're going to make it because you're white and male and failing upwards is your birthright.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 3:38 PM on October 13, 2019 [31 favorites]
McMaster wasn't aware of White House's foreign call "lockdowns" (Axios)
Three former administration officials tell Axios that former national security adviser H.R. McMaster did not authorize and was not aware of the "locking down" of transcripts of conversations between President Trump and foreign leaders that were politically damaging but didn't pose national security risks.House Democrats' impeachment roadmap (Axios)
Ahead of this week's subpoenas and depositions, new documents obtained by Axios show how Democrats are taking the impeachment inquiry in two tightly focused directions: Ukraine and obstruction of justice.posted by katra at 4:15 PM on October 13, 2019 [4 favorites]
Why it matters: There are new temptations for Democrats to broaden the scope of their inquiry after developments last week including President Trump's gift to Turkey, new questions about coordination with the Chinese over Hunter Biden, and the dramatic airport arrests of two of Rudy Giuliani's associates with Eastern European backgrounds and their indictments on campaign finance violations.
But for now, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appears to be sticking with her instincts to keep the probe tight and as simple as possible for Americans to understand.
Schiff Says Secret Testimony Aimed at Keeping Trump in the Dark (Bloomberg/Yahoo)
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff defended holding testimony behind closed doors in the impeachment inquiry he’s heading up against President Donald Trump, likening this phase of the investigation to a “grand jury.”posted by katra at 4:51 PM on October 13, 2019 [9 favorites]
“We want to make sure that we meet the needs of the investigation and not give the president or his legal minions the opportunity to tailor their testimony and in some cases fabricate testimony to suit their interests,” the California Democrat said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”
How did Sondland end up becoming ambassador to the EU?
Polo ponies and private planes: Trump impeachment fight deepens a rift among ambassadors (Politico)
The congressional investigation into Trump has unearthed findings that are leading some diplomats to demand a revamp of how ambassadors are appointed.
Polo ponies and private planes: Trump impeachment fight deepens a rift among ambassadors (Politico)
The congressional investigation into Trump has unearthed findings that are leading some diplomats to demand a revamp of how ambassadors are appointed.
The group’s president, Eric Rubin, said in a statement to POLITICO that the Foreign Service Act of 1980 specifies ambassadorships should “normally be accorded to career members of the Service,” with only occasional exceptions for qualified outsiders.posted by katra at 5:26 PM on October 13, 2019 [13 favorites]
“AFSA does not believe that asking to follow the law is a radical position,” Rubin said, adding that the Trump-era numbers are “dismaying.”
[...] The ongoing investigation has uncovered evidence that the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, was operating outside the usual State Department chain of command to pressure the Ukrainian government to launch investigations that could help Trump in the 2020 election.
Sondland is a hotel owner who reportedly donated $1 million for Trump’s inauguration and had no notable diplomatic experience before being named to the Brussels-based post. Ukraine is not a member of the EU, making Sondland’s involvement in its affairs even more odd. But the envoy, like a handful of other political appointee ambassadors, is known to have a direct line to Trump, another reason congressional investigators are keen to understand his activities. [...]
Under Trump, many of the political appointees “have absolutely no understanding of U.S. government policy and State Department policy. They don’t know what the hell they’re doing,” one former U.S. ambassador said, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue.
Schiff Says Secret Testimony Aimed at Keeping Trump in the Dark
He does know that Devin Nunes is still on the committee too though, right?
posted by p3t3 at 6:15 PM on October 13, 2019 [11 favorites]
He does know that Devin Nunes is still on the committee too though, right?
posted by p3t3 at 6:15 PM on October 13, 2019 [11 favorites]
Ukraine is not a member of the EU, making Sondland’s involvement in its affairs even more odd.
Just so you are prepared for the argument, which is sure to come out, there is the Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement signed in 2014 which has the goal of tying the two parties together politically and economically, with the eventual goal of integration of Ukraine into the EU. So you could say that Sondland was within his scope as Ambassador to the EU.
But whether Sondland was working to help Ukraine gain EU membership or helping Putin prevent EU membership is another matter.
posted by JackFlash at 6:16 PM on October 13, 2019 [7 favorites]
Just so you are prepared for the argument, which is sure to come out, there is the Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement signed in 2014 which has the goal of tying the two parties together politically and economically, with the eventual goal of integration of Ukraine into the EU. So you could say that Sondland was within his scope as Ambassador to the EU.
But whether Sondland was working to help Ukraine gain EU membership or helping Putin prevent EU membership is another matter.
posted by JackFlash at 6:16 PM on October 13, 2019 [7 favorites]
Except that Trump's lawyers are arguing that Congress does not have the right to investigate anything that is not related to making new law or an impeachment inquiry.
Right, but it’s a total loser argument. This is the perfect moment to bring out some prime quotes from Antonio Scalia about “plain text” reading of the constitution. There is no reasonable counter-argument. Emoluments are the Achilles heel of Trump’s arguments for a theory of the unitary executive.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:36 PM on October 13, 2019 [16 favorites]
Right, but it’s a total loser argument. This is the perfect moment to bring out some prime quotes from Antonio Scalia about “plain text” reading of the constitution. There is no reasonable counter-argument. Emoluments are the Achilles heel of Trump’s arguments for a theory of the unitary executive.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:36 PM on October 13, 2019 [16 favorites]
Press organization condemns violence against journalists depicted at pro-Trump event (Politico)
The White House Correspondents’ Association on Sunday night condemned “a video reportedly shown” at a pro-Trump event held at a Trump resort in Miami that depicted graphic violence against journalists and various political figures. “The WHCA is horrified by a video reportedly shown over the weekend at a political conference organized by the President’s supporters at the Trump National Doral in Miami,“ said the statement, issued in the name of WHCA president Jonathan Karl.posted by katra at 9:15 PM on October 13, 2019 [30 favorites]
“All Americans should condemn this depiction of violence directed toward journalists and the President’s political opponents. We have previously told the President his rhetoric could incite violence. Now we call on him and everybody associated with this conference to denounce this video and affirm that violence has no place in our society.”
The WHCA statement followed a report Sunday in the New York Times of a graphic video shown to Trump supporters at a conference at the Florida facility. The Times report said: “The video, which includes the logo for Mr. Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign, comprises a series of internet memes. The most violent clip shows Mr. Trump’s head superimposed on the body of a man opening fire inside the ‘Church of Fake News‘ on parishioners who have the faces of his critics or the logos of media organizations superimposed on their bodies.“ POLITICO was among the news organizations shown as targets of the Trump violence.
Besides journalists, other targets depicted include the late John McCain, California Reps. Adam Schiff and Maxine Waters, Sen. Mitt Romney, and former Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. The Trump character in the video shoots, stab and beats his victims; at one point, he sets Bernie Sanders’ head on fire.
Well, that all sounds completely sane.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:34 PM on October 13, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 9:34 PM on October 13, 2019 [17 favorites]
former Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. The Trump character in the video shoots, stab and beats his victims
The secret service needs to investigate the sitting president’s re-election campaign for terroristic threats made against former presidents.
posted by nathan_teske at 10:57 PM on October 13, 2019 [93 favorites]
The secret service needs to investigate the sitting president’s re-election campaign for terroristic threats made against former presidents.
posted by nathan_teske at 10:57 PM on October 13, 2019 [93 favorites]
The White House Correspondents’ Association on Sunday night condemned “a video reportedly shown” at a pro-Trump event held at a Trump resort in Miami that depicted graphic violence against journalists and various political figures.
That description really does the video a disservice. It's the ultra violent church scene from Kingsman where everyone (including Harry) goes insane. I saw the video in question and holy shit, it toes right up to the line of inciting imminent lawless action.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 4:13 AM on October 14, 2019 [10 favorites]
That description really does the video a disservice. It's the ultra violent church scene from Kingsman where everyone (including Harry) goes insane. I saw the video in question and holy shit, it toes right up to the line of inciting imminent lawless action.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 4:13 AM on October 14, 2019 [10 favorites]
Rudy Giuliani Welcomes You To Eastern Europe By Peter Pomerantsev /NYTimes Opinion
Mr. Pomerantsev is the author of “This Is Not Propaganda: Adventures in the War Against Reality.”
Mr. Pomerantsev is the author of “This Is Not Propaganda: Adventures in the War Against Reality.”
The message of much of Kremlin propaganda is not to showcase Russia as a beacon of progress, but to prove that Western politics is just as rotten as President Vladimir Putin’s. We may have corruption, the argument goes, but so does the West; our democracy is rigged, but so is theirs.posted by mumimor at 4:54 AM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
The latest scandal surrounding President Trump and his dealings with Ukraine is, for this reason, a godsend for the Kremlin: The son of an American presidential candidate is suspected of using his father’s reputation to get himself a $50,000-a-month job at a Ukrainian gas company; the president of the United States is accused of acting like a geopolitical gangster, extorting kompromat about a political rival. American politics have become enmeshed in Russian and Ukrainian corruption, and much about the Trump administration seems pulled from the playbook of a post-Soviet kleptocracy. The Kremlin couldn’t have put together a better script.
As I follow the news coming from America at my home in Britain, the political culture and language in the thing once known as “the West” reminds me of my years in Moscow, where I lived in the first decade of the 21st century. Perhaps in nothing more so than in its relationship to the truth.
Boingboing has a link to the video. Instead of posting it, here's (best I could do with one watching) a list of the people and media organizations that get a mention:
ABC, BBC News, Bloomberg, CBS, CNBC, CNN, Global News, MSNBC (well, Mika Brzezinski), NBC, NPR, PBS, Univision, the Washington Post, The New Yorker, The Guardian, Buzzfeed, TheHill, Huffpost, Politico, Slate, Talking Points Memo, Vice News, Vox, The Young Turks, Yahoo News, Antifa, Black Lives Matter, a feminist logo, Organizing for Action, and somebody with a D-in-a-blue-circle logo that I couldn't quite place. I didn't recognize all the people, but they included Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Adam Schiff, Maxine Waters, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Rosie O'Donnell, and Kathy Griffin.
Best I could tell, they left out the NYT, Vanity Fair, and Teen Vogue.
posted by box at 5:14 AM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
ABC, BBC News, Bloomberg, CBS, CNBC, CNN, Global News, MSNBC (well, Mika Brzezinski), NBC, NPR, PBS, Univision, the Washington Post, The New Yorker, The Guardian, Buzzfeed, TheHill, Huffpost, Politico, Slate, Talking Points Memo, Vice News, Vox, The Young Turks, Yahoo News, Antifa, Black Lives Matter, a feminist logo, Organizing for Action, and somebody with a D-in-a-blue-circle logo that I couldn't quite place. I didn't recognize all the people, but they included Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Adam Schiff, Maxine Waters, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Rosie O'Donnell, and Kathy Griffin.
Best I could tell, they left out the NYT, Vanity Fair, and Teen Vogue.
posted by box at 5:14 AM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
The message of much of Kremlin propaganda is not to showcase Russia as a beacon of progress, but to prove that Western politics is just as rotten as President Vladimir Putin’s. We may have corruption, the argument goes, but so does the West; our democracy is rigged, but so is theirs.
This sounds very familiar. We're very used to crooks being in power in our part of the world. And for all the hostility towards the US about foreign policy, there's been a sense that US government worked in the interest of the USA. From conversations I've had in Pakistan around the impeachment inquiry, it's pretty clear that if this President and his cronies are not held accountable, the old perception of "they might have a terrible foreign policy, but their internal systems work to their benefit" will break down and there will be a good bit of schadenfreude in the breakdown.
posted by bardophile at 5:16 AM on October 14, 2019
This sounds very familiar. We're very used to crooks being in power in our part of the world. And for all the hostility towards the US about foreign policy, there's been a sense that US government worked in the interest of the USA. From conversations I've had in Pakistan around the impeachment inquiry, it's pretty clear that if this President and his cronies are not held accountable, the old perception of "they might have a terrible foreign policy, but their internal systems work to their benefit" will break down and there will be a good bit of schadenfreude in the breakdown.
posted by bardophile at 5:16 AM on October 14, 2019
Not to mention ((((((George))) (((Soros)))))).
posted by acb at 5:16 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by acb at 5:16 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
...and somebody with a D-in-a-blue-circle logo...
aka The Democrats
posted by PenDevil at 5:18 AM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
aka The Democrats
posted by PenDevil at 5:18 AM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
Pompeo suggests reporter 'working for Democrats' after impeachment grilling (Guardian, with video)
Titans of American journalism Rather and Mitchell join praise of Nancy Amons after Nashville reporter stuns secretary of state
Titans of American journalism Rather and Mitchell join praise of Nancy Amons after Nashville reporter stuns secretary of state
With Pompeo’s irritation increasingly visible, Amons asked if he had met Rudy Giuliani on a visit to Warsaw this year. [...]posted by katra at 6:27 AM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
Pompeo chose three times not to answer Amons’ question, instead offering grim-faced variations on a theme: that he went to Warsaw to work on “an important mission … to take down the world’s largest state sponsor of terror, the Islamic Republic of Iran” and it was the “only thing I engaged in while I was there”.
“It sounds like you’re not going to say,” Amons said.
She then asked about text messages between US diplomats, obtained by House Democrats, which show concern that Trump was making the US-Ukraine relationship contingent on help with investigating the Bidens.
“Were you aware that this was happening?” she asked.
“You’ve got your facts wrong,” Pompeo said. “It sounds like you’re working, at least in part, for the Democratic National Committee when you phrase the predicate of a question in that way.
“It’s unfortunate and it does a real disservice to the employees and the team at the United States Department of State. Our team was incredibly focused, we wanted a good relationship with Ukraine.”
With Pompeo’s irritation increasingly visible, Amons asked if he had met Rudy Giuliani on a visit to Warsaw this year. [...] [emphasis added]
The station also engaged in actual journalism by posting the full, uncut interview, in which it's clear that Pompeo expects just to spout some banal falsehood to be inserted uncritically into the story -- I'm looking at you, NPR -- and has no idea how to handle the impertinence of a journalist who actually notices he didn't answer her question and correctly infers that his reluctance to do so means there's a story there ("Pompeo refuses to say whether he met with Giuliani in Warsaw").
posted by Gelatin at 6:37 AM on October 14, 2019 [33 favorites]
The station also engaged in actual journalism by posting the full, uncut interview, in which it's clear that Pompeo expects just to spout some banal falsehood to be inserted uncritically into the story -- I'm looking at you, NPR -- and has no idea how to handle the impertinence of a journalist who actually notices he didn't answer her question and correctly infers that his reluctance to do so means there's a story there ("Pompeo refuses to say whether he met with Giuliani in Warsaw").
posted by Gelatin at 6:37 AM on October 14, 2019 [33 favorites]
Mod note: The violent video thing is shocking, but this isn't a megathread for All The Things, so let's continue discussing impeachment here, please.
posted by taz (staff) at 6:44 AM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by taz (staff) at 6:44 AM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
Former Trump Aide to Testify on Pressure to Oust Ambassador to Ukraine (NYT)
Fiona Hill, President Trump’s former top Russia and Europe adviser, headed to Capitol Hill on Monday morning where she is prepared to testify that she and other officials objected strenuously to the removal of the ambassador to Ukraine, only to be disregarded. Ms. Hill, who stepped down from the White House’s National Security Council staff over the summer, viewed the recall of Ambassador Marie L. Yovanovitch from Kiev as an egregious abuse of the system by allies of Mr. Trump who were seeking to remove a perceived obstacle, according to a person familiar with Ms. Hill’s account. [...]posted by katra at 7:31 AM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
Ms. Hill will be the first person who worked in the White House to be deposed by House investigators and is appearing despite the White House declaration last week that it would refuse to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry or allow its staff to do so. The White House has not attempted to stop Ms. Hill from testifying, according to the person familiar with her account, but White House lawyers have exchanged letters with Ms. Hill’s lawyer about precedents regarding the confidentiality of presidential communications. [...]
She turned over her duties to her successor on July 15 and left on July 19, just days before the July 25 telephone call [...] Ms. Hill is prepared to testify that she opposed the idea of the phone call because she did not understand its purpose. While it was described as a congratulatory call following parliamentary elections in Ukraine, Mr. Trump had already made a congratulatory call to Mr. Zelensky in April following his own election. Ms. Hill will testify that while she was the president’s top adviser on Russia and Ukraine, she was cut out of the loop as Mr. Giuliani and others ran a shadow diplomacy intended to benefit Mr. Trump’s political position, according to the person informed about her account.
[...] she will confirm that the administration leveraged a coveted White House invitation for Mr. Zelensky to a commitment to investigate corruption, which was seen as code for investigating Democrats.
Trump says ‘treason.’ His fans invoke violence. How attacks against Schiff are escalating online. (WaPo)
As Trump and his allies have aimed increasingly caustic language at Schiff in recent days, the attacks have been echoed by supporters on social media who often take the message a step further — invoking physical violence against one of the most prominent Democrats overseeing the inquiry that now threatens Trump’s presidency. [...]posted by katra at 7:51 AM on October 14, 2019 [9 favorites]
Analysts say the pattern resulting in the violent rhetoric targeting Schiff makes evident the radicalizing effect of social media, which Trump uses to incite his followers against his perceived enemies.
The White House has not attempted to stop Ms. Hill from testifying ...
How could they? She doesn't work for the White House anymore. There is absolutely nothing they can do to prevent her testimony.
... but White House lawyers have exchanged letters with Ms. Hill’s lawyer about precedents regarding the confidentiality of presidential communications.
It's all bluff and intimidation.
posted by JackFlash at 7:55 AM on October 14, 2019 [4 favorites]
How could they? She doesn't work for the White House anymore. There is absolutely nothing they can do to prevent her testimony.
... but White House lawyers have exchanged letters with Ms. Hill’s lawyer about precedents regarding the confidentiality of presidential communications.
It's all bluff and intimidation.
posted by JackFlash at 7:55 AM on October 14, 2019 [4 favorites]
Guardian: There was a brief moment of drama just now during the closed-door testimony of Fiona Hill, Trump’s former top adviser on Russia, in the impeachment inquiry. Representative Matt Gaetz, a Republican of Florida and a staunch ally of Trump’s, demanded to sit in on Hill’s testimony even though he is not a member of the three panels conducting the interview.
Alex Moe (@AlexNBCNews) Rep Gaetz is not on Intel or Oversight or Foreign Affairs Cmte and was kicked out of the deposition. Argues that he is on Judiciary and his committee has jurisdiction on impeachment and should have been let in. pic.twitter.com/LRt8YvEOa9posted by katra at 8:22 AM on October 14, 2019 [17 favorites]
October 14, 2019
Re: Fiona Hill, could the White House claim, after her testimony, that she disclosed information that should have remained confidential, and have the Justice Dept bring charges? Obviously that would be stupid, but would they have arguable standing to do so?
posted by Kelrichen at 8:24 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Kelrichen at 8:24 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
You can beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride. They may not have standing to do so, but that’s not the point. The process of having charges thrown out is exhausting and expensive. That’s the threat.
posted by kerf at 8:33 AM on October 14, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by kerf at 8:33 AM on October 14, 2019 [4 favorites]
They’re basically threatening to SLAAPP her.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong but don’t claims of presidential privilege require willing participation on the part of the person being questioned? Confidential information is not the same as classified information.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 8:42 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
Someone correct me if I’m wrong but don’t claims of presidential privilege require willing participation on the part of the person being questioned? Confidential information is not the same as classified information.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 8:42 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
Representative Matt Gaetz, a Republican of Florida and a staunch ally of Trump’s
...who has seen fit to publicly intimidate other witnesses to Trump's wrongdoing, don't forget.
posted by Gelatin at 8:47 AM on October 14, 2019 [19 favorites]
...who has seen fit to publicly intimidate other witnesses to Trump's wrongdoing, don't forget.
posted by Gelatin at 8:47 AM on October 14, 2019 [19 favorites]
Re: Fiona Hill, could the White House claim, after her testimony, that she disclosed information that should have remained confidential, and have the Justice Dept bring charges?
It's a closed hearing. Members of Congress do not require security clearances. They automatically have authorization for classified information as a result of their election. Therefore she would not be disclosing any information congress members are not authorized to hear.
posted by JackFlash at 8:57 AM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
It's a closed hearing. Members of Congress do not require security clearances. They automatically have authorization for classified information as a result of their election. Therefore she would not be disclosing any information congress members are not authorized to hear.
posted by JackFlash at 8:57 AM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
Executive privilege is a claim by the president. It depends on the cooperation of the witness as an employee of the president. There is no law or punishment that can be applied to an employee who decides not to cooperate other than firing them. And there is certainly nothing the president can do to a former employee.
posted by JackFlash at 9:07 AM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 9:07 AM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
It depends on the cooperation of the witness as an employee of the president. There is no law or punishment that can be applied to an employee who decides not to cooperate other than firing them.
That sounds like an awkward litmus test to decide on for a tyrannical paranoid self serving President. Too bad for him.
posted by Harry Caul at 10:00 AM on October 14, 2019
That sounds like an awkward litmus test to decide on for a tyrannical paranoid self serving President. Too bad for him.
posted by Harry Caul at 10:00 AM on October 14, 2019
Why is nobody calling Trump out on ramping up his appalling use of words like "shifty" and "greasy". Surely history has taught us something?
posted by Namlit at 10:08 AM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Namlit at 10:08 AM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
Re: Fiona Hill, could the White House claim, after her testimony, that she disclosed information that should have remained confidential, and have the Justice Dept bring charges?
What would the White House know about her closed-door testimony?
posted by rhizome at 10:14 AM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
What would the White House know about her closed-door testimony?
posted by rhizome at 10:14 AM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
What would the White House know about her closed-door testimony?
Whatever Jim Jordan texts to them.
posted by Harry Caul at 10:30 AM on October 14, 2019 [8 favorites]
Whatever Jim Jordan texts to them.
posted by Harry Caul at 10:30 AM on October 14, 2019 [8 favorites]
I think Matt Gaetz needs something to help focus his mind back towards the real needs of his constituents in FA-01.
Perhaps a donation to his (D) opponent Phil Ehr would help? I don't know Phil and am mostly completely ignorant of Florida politics, but he appears to be quite progressive from a quick read of his "Issues" page.
[Floridians or anyone with more knowledge: I'm also open to suggestions for more progressive candidates! Phil Ehr I'd never heard of until reading the FA-01 2020 Ballotpedia page.]
posted by ButteryMales at 10:32 AM on October 14, 2019 [5 favorites]
Perhaps a donation to his (D) opponent Phil Ehr would help? I don't know Phil and am mostly completely ignorant of Florida politics, but he appears to be quite progressive from a quick read of his "Issues" page.
[Floridians or anyone with more knowledge: I'm also open to suggestions for more progressive candidates! Phil Ehr I'd never heard of until reading the FA-01 2020 Ballotpedia page.]
posted by ButteryMales at 10:32 AM on October 14, 2019 [5 favorites]
FA-01 is the west panhandle of Florida and the most conservative district in the state. There's no way that a Republican will lose the general election.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 10:49 AM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by J.K. Seazer at 10:49 AM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
I've been wondering for a while, is there any impulse at all to primary some of these odious Republicans in safe districts from the center? I have to imagine that in a safe districts there might be a decent pool of Democrats who would be willing to join with moderate Republicans to vote in the Republican primary in order to make some of Trump's congressional lickspittles pay a price for opposing impeachment.
posted by Reverend John at 10:58 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Reverend John at 10:58 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
Surely history has taught us something?
History has taught me that history rarely teaches us anything.
posted by biogeo at 10:59 AM on October 14, 2019 [54 favorites]
History has taught me that history rarely teaches us anything.
posted by biogeo at 10:59 AM on October 14, 2019 [54 favorites]
Fusion GPS founders to release book on Trump’s ties with Russia (Guardian)
Simpson and Fritsch founded the Washington intelligence firm Fusion GPS. In summer 2015, it began investigating Trump and Moscow. It hired Steele the following spring, as a contractor.posted by katra at 10:59 AM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
Steele’s contacts reported that the Kremlin had been cultivating Trump for at least five years, and had launched a major and multi-layered espionage operation to help him defeat Hillary Clinton. Steele’s dossier said the Russians held compromising material on Trump, and had spied on him in 2013, in a Moscow hotel together with two prostitutes. [...]
Simpson and Fritsch began their investigation into Trump for a rival Republican candidate. In 2016, the Democrats took over the contract. The authors previously worked for the Wall Street Journal, where they covered Russian organised crime. The book describes how their Trump investigation turned into a major political scandal. Their research was “a march through a mind-boggling trove of lawsuits, bankruptcies and sketchy overseas projects”, publisher Penguin says.
It is understood the book does not identify the human sources behind the dossier. It does argue that Steele’s memos – which were passed to the FBI, which briefed President Obama and Trump – were substantially correct. [...]
The former journalists are critical of the US attorney general, William Barr. They also give short shrift to conspiracy theories promulgated by Rudi Giuliani, the former New York mayor who is commonly described as the president’s personal lawyer. These include claims it was Ukraine rather than Russia that interfered in the 2016 vote, to boost Clinton.
Or rather, that we rarely learn from it.
posted by biogeo at 11:00 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by biogeo at 11:00 AM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
Or that humans are stoopid.
posted by jenfullmoon at 11:26 AM on October 14, 2019
posted by jenfullmoon at 11:26 AM on October 14, 2019
WaPo: 12:20 p.m.: Parscale ramps up anti-impeachment rhetoric: [President Trump’s reelection campaign manager Brad] Parscale ramped up his anti-impeachment rhetoric Monday afternoon, claiming Democrats had launched “a seditious conspiracy” and calling on Pelosi to resign.
posted by katra at 11:39 AM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
“Democrats have crossed over the line of partisan politics and have undertaken a seditious conspiracy to overthrow the people’s president,” Parscale tweeted. “Nancy Pelosi should step down for betraying her oath of office and attempting to overthrow our great Republic.”Guardian: The week could deteriorate rapidly for Trump, whose effort to rally defenders in his own party has been damaged by concerns about a growing disaster in northern Syria, following Trump’s abrupt pullback there, and a sense that major secrets attached to the Ukraine scandal are yet to come out.
posted by katra at 11:39 AM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
What would the White House know about her closed-door testimony?
Whatever Jim Jordan texts to them.
IANAL, but in that case then I think the WH would have a lot of trouble establishing standing.
posted by rhizome at 11:43 AM on October 14, 2019
Whatever Jim Jordan texts to them.
IANAL, but in that case then I think the WH would have a lot of trouble establishing standing.
posted by rhizome at 11:43 AM on October 14, 2019
I think the WH would have a lot of trouble establishing standing.
The White House does not give a warm fart about the legal niceties. They just want to get the people at the rallies fired up about how the Democrats are [insert lie here].
posted by Etrigan at 11:45 AM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
The White House does not give a warm fart about the legal niceties. They just want to get the people at the rallies fired up about how the Democrats are [insert lie here].
posted by Etrigan at 11:45 AM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
Mod note: Impeachment, people, not just any politics. Thanks.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 11:54 AM on October 14, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 11:54 AM on October 14, 2019 [11 favorites]
> Surely history has taught us something?
>> History has taught me that history rarely teaches us anything.
>>> Or rather, that we rarely learn from it.
History has taught all living generations a hell of a lot in the last 100 years, but it needs to keep reminding us every so often.
posted by cenoxo at 11:55 AM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
>> History has taught me that history rarely teaches us anything.
>>> Or rather, that we rarely learn from it.
History has taught all living generations a hell of a lot in the last 100 years, but it needs to keep reminding us every so often.
posted by cenoxo at 11:55 AM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
Today, for the first time the average of polls at 538.com has crested 50% in favor of impeachment. Their numbers are "delayed" by averaging several recent polls as the polls have shown an increase.
Today 50.2% support; 43.9% don't support.
One month ago, today: 39.6% support; 51.3% don't support.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 1:03 PM on October 14, 2019 [35 favorites]
Today 50.2% support; 43.9% don't support.
One month ago, today: 39.6% support; 51.3% don't support.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 1:03 PM on October 14, 2019 [35 favorites]
Today 50.2% support; 43.9% don't support.
One month ago, today: 39.6% support; 51.3% don't support.
This is huge. The process has only just begun!
posted by medusa at 1:09 PM on October 14, 2019 [14 favorites]
One month ago, today: 39.6% support; 51.3% don't support.
This is huge. The process has only just begun!
posted by medusa at 1:09 PM on October 14, 2019 [14 favorites]
Today, for the first time the average of polls at 538.com has crested 50% in favor of impeachment.
The thing I've been trying to decide is which metric (favor impeachment/removal, overall popularity, phase of the moon) and what level moves the GOP in the Senate (or even the House). I think they know what the right thing to do is; they simply don't want to risk their jobs to do it. When does the calculation flip so it's a greater risk not to impeach/remove?
posted by MrGuilt at 1:12 PM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
The thing I've been trying to decide is which metric (favor impeachment/removal, overall popularity, phase of the moon) and what level moves the GOP in the Senate (or even the House). I think they know what the right thing to do is; they simply don't want to risk their jobs to do it. When does the calculation flip so it's a greater risk not to impeach/remove?
posted by MrGuilt at 1:12 PM on October 14, 2019 [1 favorite]
When does the calculation flip so it's a greater risk not to impeach/remove?
The obvious and likely answer is, when > 50% in their district/state support it. National opinion matters not to them, only those who can vote them out directly.
posted by Roommate at 1:17 PM on October 14, 2019 [22 favorites]
The obvious and likely answer is, when > 50% in their district/state support it. National opinion matters not to them, only those who can vote them out directly.
posted by Roommate at 1:17 PM on October 14, 2019 [22 favorites]
This is huge. The process has only just begun!
And 45 is flailing already. It's not going to get any better for him in any way whatsoever, he has nothing to defend himself with except flinging shit like a deranged baboon, he's just hung a huge TRUMP sign on Syria, and the bumper sack of Ukrainian Surprise has barely been opened.
He's not stable on a good day. There are going to be no more good days. Quite terrifying, really, watching those poll numbers rise and knowing there's going to be a critical moment but not wyen, yet it has to be done.
posted by Devonian at 1:32 PM on October 14, 2019 [18 favorites]
And 45 is flailing already. It's not going to get any better for him in any way whatsoever, he has nothing to defend himself with except flinging shit like a deranged baboon, he's just hung a huge TRUMP sign on Syria, and the bumper sack of Ukrainian Surprise has barely been opened.
He's not stable on a good day. There are going to be no more good days. Quite terrifying, really, watching those poll numbers rise and knowing there's going to be a critical moment but not wyen, yet it has to be done.
posted by Devonian at 1:32 PM on October 14, 2019 [18 favorites]
Of course, it's a downward spiral - the worse the picture for him, the crazier the shit he'll pull to cover it up, or distract from it, and the worse the picture will become for him in turn. The problem is that this is a very dangerous game to play with the country, and the world. I could see it spinning out of control in ways that hurt a lot more people than he already has, which is no small number. The senate GOP can see this too, and I wish they would act on it before anything catastrophic happens. Alas, I have no faith that they will.
posted by eclectist at 2:07 PM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by eclectist at 2:07 PM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
when > 50% in their district/state support it.
More specifically, when the majority of the primary voters support it. Enough of the base will show up and vote Republican no matter what, but the dedicated ones control who gets on the ballot in the first place.
posted by Candleman at 2:19 PM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
More specifically, when the majority of the primary voters support it. Enough of the base will show up and vote Republican no matter what, but the dedicated ones control who gets on the ballot in the first place.
posted by Candleman at 2:19 PM on October 14, 2019 [3 favorites]
The White House does not give a warm fart about the legal niceties. They just want to get the people at the rallies fired up about how the Democrats are [insert lie here].
The context was the WH getting access to transcripts of today's testimony based on text messages from someone who was there, someone whose text messages would be laden with conflicts of interest. This may be flaccidly legalistic, but the issue is not WH getting everything they want to fire up the meatheads, but WH getting access to the key where it's locked up.
posted by rhizome at 2:43 PM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
The context was the WH getting access to transcripts of today's testimony based on text messages from someone who was there, someone whose text messages would be laden with conflicts of interest. This may be flaccidly legalistic, but the issue is not WH getting everything they want to fire up the meatheads, but WH getting access to the key where it's locked up.
posted by rhizome at 2:43 PM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
What Candleman says. Opinions (and the intensity thereof) among the primary electorate are the only factor in Republican Senators' thinking right now. Fox is a proxy for/shaper of that, so the big tell will come when not just the 'news' folks (Shep Smith, Chris Wallace) but the opinionistas there start to make "I am troubled" noises about Tr*mp's behavior.
posted by PhineasGage at 2:43 PM on October 14, 2019
posted by PhineasGage at 2:43 PM on October 14, 2019
If the Republicans don't impeach Trump they will be hit by his near-daily rantings and decisions that chip away at what many of their constituents perceive as their core beliefs. Turkey will hurt with the escape of ISIS and the fact that this issue matters to a number of conservatives.
You might say this has already gone on for two-and-a-half years and not much has happened, but the process is accelerating and his buffers are breaking down (Fox and the economy). his mind also seems to be breaking down. Republicans will abandon him for self-preservation.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 3:01 PM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
You might say this has already gone on for two-and-a-half years and not much has happened, but the process is accelerating and his buffers are breaking down (Fox and the economy). his mind also seems to be breaking down. Republicans will abandon him for self-preservation.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 3:01 PM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
IMO, his mind isn't really breaking down more in the past week or so, but he is more cornered, desperate and flailing.
posted by christopherious at 3:26 PM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by christopherious at 3:26 PM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
Manu Raju reports on Twitter that the committee will be hearing a full week of testimony from current & former State Department personnel.
Fiona Hill has been testifying for 9 hours.
posted by suelac at 4:30 PM on October 14, 2019 [41 favorites]
Fiona Hill has been testifying for 9 hours.
posted by suelac at 4:30 PM on October 14, 2019 [41 favorites]
Public Servants Are Starting to Respond to Donald Trump's False Attacks (David Rohde, New Yorker)
On Friday afternoon, James Baker, the former general counsel of the F.B.I., felt a tinge of optimism. Almost two years ago, he was ousted from his position as the Bureau’s top legal official, after President Trump fired the F.B.I.’s director, James Comey. Baker, a career Justice Department official and a longtime Comey ally, had approved the F.B.I.’s Trump-Russia investigation and the monitoring of a former Trump campaign adviser’s communications. Trump welcomed the news of Baker’s removal in a tweet: “Wow, ‘FBI lawyer James Baker reassigned.’ ” In subsequent tweets and retweets, the President accused Baker of lying to Congress and being part of an “Unconstitutional Hoax” and an “attempted coup.”posted by katra at 4:45 PM on October 14, 2019 [20 favorites]
Baker considered Trump’s claims about him to be completely false, but he said nothing publicly at the time. (The Republican-controlled Senate Intelligence Committee investigated the origins of the F.B.I.’s Trump-Russia investigation and found no wrongdoing.) “I believed that, once I was out of the F.B.I., I could resume a normal life and avoid the spotlight,” he told me last week, in his office at the R Street Institute, a conservative and libertarian think tank, where he directs the national-security program. “But that was inaccurate, because the damage had already been done by the President’s tweets and stories about me on Fox News and other outlets.” Baker, once considered one of the government’s most trusted national-security officials, found that Trump’s attacks impacted his ability to find a job. “Certain corporations and law firms thought that I was too controversial and didn’t want to hire me,” Baker recalled. “It surprised me and was dispiriting.” Over time, he became convinced that Trump was improperly using his powers as President to maintain his hold on power. Baker decided to push back. “At a certain point, I became unafraid of Donald Trump,” he said. “I felt, O.K., I can speak out. And also, I have an obligation to speak out.” In May, Baker began publicly attacking what he called Trump’s “false narrative that there was a coup, and a conspiracy, and treason.”
[...] Baker told me that Trump’s failure so far to discredit the whistle-blower had weakened his power to silence current and former officials. “He tried to smash the whistle-blower, and it didn’t work,” Baker said. “One of the things that Donald Trump has trafficked in is fear. And, once people are no longer afraid of him, I think more people will come forward.”
And, once people are no longer afraid of him, I think more people will come forward.Or maybe, eventually, we as a society will learn to believe the NUMEROUS women who were unafraid to come forward already at their own great expense. 🤦♂️
posted by Cogito at 5:55 PM on October 14, 2019 [90 favorites]
Rebecca Ballhaus :"Fiona Hill told House committees that after Sondland brought up investigations in a July 10 meeting w/senior Ukrainian officials, Bolton and others, she and Bolton left the meeting alarmed. Bolton instructed her to talk to Eisenberg."
John Bolton, voice of reason
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:15 PM on October 14, 2019 [18 favorites]
John Bolton, voice of reason
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:15 PM on October 14, 2019 [18 favorites]
Bolton has spent his life figuring out a legal way to genocide entire countries, he's not going to stand for some tyrant fucking it up. "I...worked on this plan for an entire career...and...he just...he tweeted it out."
posted by rhizome at 7:23 PM on October 14, 2019 [18 favorites]
posted by rhizome at 7:23 PM on October 14, 2019 [18 favorites]
Washington Post:
Fiona Hill, the White House’s former top Russia adviser, told impeachment investigators on Monday that Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, ran a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine that circumvented U.S. officials and career diplomats in order to personally benefit President Trump, according to a person familiar with her testimony.posted by octothorpe at 7:30 PM on October 14, 2019 [39 favorites]
WaPo: 9 p.m.: Schiff praises Yovanovitch, Hill
“They are adamantly nonpartisan,” Schiff said. “They are career public servants. And I wish that half the people in the administration or out of the administration would show the courage they’ve shown.”9:20 p.m.: Investigators mull whether to question Bolton
In the interview with moderator Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, Schiff covered a wide range of topics related to the impeachment inquiry. [...] He said that lawmakers “are going to be releasing all of these transcripts” of the depositions.
[...] At one point during the interview, Schiff said he doesn’t known whether there is an audio recording of Trump’s July phone call with Zelensky — on either the U.S. or the Ukranian side. Kristof then joked: “President Zelensky, if you’re watching, send me the audio.”
In a sign the impeachment inquiry is widening, investigators are discussing whether to question Bolton, according to people familiar with the matter. Bolton was Hill’s direct superior at the National Security Council.posted by katra at 8:12 PM on October 14, 2019 [10 favorites]
Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, ran a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine that circumvented U.S. officials and career diplomats in order to personally benefit President Trump
Well this seems bad, what is Rudy thinking? His character arc is beyond Shakespeare.
investigators are discussing whether to question Bolton
Bolton is probably the least reliable narrator in this stew, regardless of what he poops into it.
posted by rhizome at 8:43 PM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
Well this seems bad, what is Rudy thinking? His character arc is beyond Shakespeare.
investigators are discussing whether to question Bolton
Bolton is probably the least reliable narrator in this stew, regardless of what he poops into it.
posted by rhizome at 8:43 PM on October 14, 2019 [2 favorites]
John Bolton, voice of reason.
Bolton, unlike Trump, hates the Russians (and Chinese, by the way), one of the reasons he quit. Bolton could see that Trump and Guiliani's interference was undermining the Europhiles in Ukraine and helping the Putin faction.
It isn't that Bolton is the voice of reason. He could care less about the corruption. It just wasn't the flavor of corruption he liked.
posted by JackFlash at 8:44 PM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
Bolton, unlike Trump, hates the Russians (and Chinese, by the way), one of the reasons he quit. Bolton could see that Trump and Guiliani's interference was undermining the Europhiles in Ukraine and helping the Putin faction.
It isn't that Bolton is the voice of reason. He could care less about the corruption. It just wasn't the flavor of corruption he liked.
posted by JackFlash at 8:44 PM on October 14, 2019 [12 favorites]
Bolton Objected to Ukraine Pressure Campaign, Calling Giuliani ‘a Hand Grenade’
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:49 PM on October 14, 2019 [15 favorites]
“I am not part of whatever drug deal Rudy and Mulvaney are cooking up,” Mr. Bolton, a Yale-trained lawyer, told Ms. Hill to tell White House lawyers, according to the testimony.Uhhhh... What?
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:49 PM on October 14, 2019 [15 favorites]
Trump’s former Russia expert to speak before Congress Monday. Here’s her thoughts about Putin, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Dan Drollette Jr, October 13, 2019:
posted by cenoxo at 9:03 PM on October 14, 2019 [21 favorites]
...*Putin: The one-man show the West doesn’t understand, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Fiona Hill, April 13, 2016. Here's a brief excerpt:
A former Brookings Institution fellow and widely respected national security expert, [Fiona] Hill has sometimes been described as a “Russia hawk” in the press. Or as CNN Politics put it: “Hill’s views sometimes seemed at odds with Trump’s own desire to improve relations with the strongman leader whom Trump, as a candidate, often spoke of admiringly.”
Hill is an expert on the Kremlin, a fluent Russian speaker, and a clear-eyed critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin—whom she profiled in 2013 for a 390-page biography titled “Mr. Putin, Operative in the Kremlin” and co-authored with Clifford G. Gaddy.
While the country waits for her testimony, we thought this a good time to offer readers another chance to read the essay about Putin that Hill wrote for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in April 2016, or about a year before she joined the National Security Council. The opening paragraph:The West is at an inflection point in its relations with Russia; the stakes for having an accurate understanding of its president, Vladimir Putin, have never been higher. A misreading of this man – now one of the most consequential international political figures and challengers to the US-led world order since the end of the Cold War – could have catastrophic consequences. Russia’s 8,000 nuclear weapons (and the vehicles to deliver them to any point on the globe) underscore the huge risks of not understanding who Putin is, what he wants, how he thinks, and why. Where do his ideas and conceptions come from? How does Putin look at the outside world? Why did he annex Crimea in 2014 and intervene in Syria in 2015? What does he know about the West? What does he think about the United States? These are all critical questions.The full essay is available here [*].
Where Putin represents a real break from the Russian or Soviet pasts, and an anomaly in any international context, is the way he approaches running the country. As a former KGB agent, Putin operates very differently from a president who climbed the ranks of a political party – including both of his predecessors, first post-Soviet Russian President Boris Yeltsin and last Secretary General of the Soviet Communist Party and President of the USSR Mikhail Gorbachev. Operatives like Putin usually have political oversight, political handlers, and an institutional frame. Putin himself was subject to these constraints in his previous career.I think The Donald is just a little jealous.
Today, Putin has no such constraints. There are no significant checks and balances on his presidential power. There is no larger institutional arrangement, like a Soviet politburo or political party, standing behind him. The Russian presidency and the Russian constitution are essentially fused, with each guaranteeing the other. Other state institutions, from the cabinet of ministers to the Russian Duma (parliament), have been systematically downgraded to be little more than rubber stamps for presidential proposals. Putin is the political oversight. He is the operative who runs himself.
posted by cenoxo at 9:03 PM on October 14, 2019 [21 favorites]
I do not understand why the news coverage of Trump's abandonment of the Kurds isn't citing Putin's interest in this much more strongly. NYT: Trump Followed His Gut on Syria. WTF? No, he followed Putin's wishes, as channeled through Erdogan. THIS is treasonous, impeachable behavior.
posted by PhineasGage at 9:13 PM on October 14, 2019 [22 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 9:13 PM on October 14, 2019 [22 favorites]
In the Syria and Turkey thread, there is news coverage about Putin's interests, e.g. The Daily 202: Trump hands Putin another win with Syria pullout (WaPo), which rounds up a lot of reports, including:
[...] “Putin likely can't believe his luck,” a Western military official from a NATO member country, who recently served in Syria as part of the anti-ISIS coalition, told Business Insider. [...] “Putin continues to get whatever he wants and generally doesn't even have to do much,” an unnamed NATO official also told Insider. “He got to sit back and watch the Turks and the Americans unravel five years of success and not only did it not cost him anything, he didn't even have to try to make it happen. Small wonder he'd interfere on Trump's side in an election.”posted by katra at 9:24 PM on October 14, 2019 [19 favorites]
[...] “Trump tried to keep his talks with Putin at Helsinki last year secret from his staff and the world, but Russia's president held up the checklist for the cameras. Syria was on it,” Julia Davis recalls in the Daily Beast: “Trump is moving down Putin’s wish list, fulfilling the Kremlin’s aims at a rapid pace. He is chipping away at U.S. sanctions against Russia, deepening America’s internal divisions on the basis of race, faith, sexual orientation and political affiliation, vocally undermining confidence in our elections, intelligence agencies and institutions, all the while empowering our foreign adversaries and undermining NATO alliances. Trump’s claims that Ukraine—not Russia—is somehow responsible for the 2016 election interference fall right in line with conspiracy theories the Kremlin has been propagating for years.
Karen Freifeld and Aram Roston (Reuters): Rudy got half a million dollars from Fraud Guarantee: "The New York Times reported last week that Parnas had told associates he paid Giuliani hundreds of thousands of dollars for what Giuliani said was business and legal advice. Giuliani said for the first time on Monday that the total amount was $500,000."
posted by mbrubeck at 10:19 PM on October 14, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by mbrubeck at 10:19 PM on October 14, 2019 [5 favorites]
Fiona Hill, the White House’s former top Russia adviser, told impeachment investigators on Monday that Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, ran a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine that circumvented U.S. officials and career diplomats in order to personally benefit President Trump, according to a person familiar with her testimony.
Why the hell is this happening behind closed doors?? Unless Democrats think that Senate conviction is really going to happen (no way), the fundamental political benefit of this is holding dramatic hearings that chip away at Trump's approval, a tenth of a point at a time. There is no good reason this should be muffled away behind anonymous summaries, memos, and partial quotations from memory. It's a huge waste of the main political benefit of the impeachment process.
posted by chortly at 10:57 PM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
Why the hell is this happening behind closed doors?? Unless Democrats think that Senate conviction is really going to happen (no way), the fundamental political benefit of this is holding dramatic hearings that chip away at Trump's approval, a tenth of a point at a time. There is no good reason this should be muffled away behind anonymous summaries, memos, and partial quotations from memory. It's a huge waste of the main political benefit of the impeachment process.
posted by chortly at 10:57 PM on October 14, 2019 [6 favorites]
Why the hell is this happening behind closed doors??
NYT: Nick Fandos, who was on Capitol Hill today, explained to me why Democrats are doing so much out of public view:
NYT: Nick Fandos, who was on Capitol Hill today, explained to me why Democrats are doing so much out of public view:
The Democrats are trying to collect as much information as possible as quickly as possible. Big made-for-TV hearings are a chaotic and clunky way to try to build a body of evidence. They allow witnesses to line up their stories in advance and could easily backfire on Democrats trying to build a public narrative in real time.posted by katra at 11:16 PM on October 14, 2019 [46 favorites]
Most congressional veterans would tell you that from a fact-finding point of view, you are better off following the Watergate model: Investigate in private first, then choreograph a series of public hearings that recreate for the public what the investigation found. Republicans, nevertheless, are accusing Democrats of impeaching a president in secret.
Uhhhh... What?
'Drug deal' is a colloquialism in govt and military. It's an off-the-books backscratch deal, usually between organizitions. Primarily implying skirting some established convention for collaborative action, where the convention is bureaucratically, technically, or legally 'complicated', or there is a pressing timeline.
e.g. "We have a server hosted in their ops center, but keep it on the DL. It's a total drug deal."
posted by j_curiouser at 11:20 PM on October 14, 2019 [43 favorites]
'Drug deal' is a colloquialism in govt and military. It's an off-the-books backscratch deal, usually between organizitions. Primarily implying skirting some established convention for collaborative action, where the convention is bureaucratically, technically, or legally 'complicated', or there is a pressing timeline.
e.g. "We have a server hosted in their ops center, but keep it on the DL. It's a total drug deal."
posted by j_curiouser at 11:20 PM on October 14, 2019 [43 favorites]
Big made-for-TV hearings are a chaotic and clunky way to try to build a body of evidence... Investigate in private first, then choreograph a series of public hearings that recreate for the public what the investigation found.
These are two very different rationales. Building up a body of evidence is fine for a trial, but makes much less sense if you think there is no chance of conviction in the Senate and the main payoff is in the House hearings, not the House vote. On the other hand, if they are planning a series of public hearings on a grand scale recapitulating all this with the juiciest tidbits from the more important witnesses, that's great -- but to be honest, I wouldn't entirely trust the leadership to follow through on this even if they were publicly stating that was their intention, much less if that intention is just being inferred by pundits and outsiders. Saving powder and keeping it dry for the grand finale is almost never the best strategy in a rapidly-shifting world.
posted by chortly at 11:41 PM on October 14, 2019 [4 favorites]
These are two very different rationales. Building up a body of evidence is fine for a trial, but makes much less sense if you think there is no chance of conviction in the Senate and the main payoff is in the House hearings, not the House vote. On the other hand, if they are planning a series of public hearings on a grand scale recapitulating all this with the juiciest tidbits from the more important witnesses, that's great -- but to be honest, I wouldn't entirely trust the leadership to follow through on this even if they were publicly stating that was their intention, much less if that intention is just being inferred by pundits and outsiders. Saving powder and keeping it dry for the grand finale is almost never the best strategy in a rapidly-shifting world.
posted by chortly at 11:41 PM on October 14, 2019 [4 favorites]
I would also assume it's easier to get a witness to agree to testify, when their boss (or ex-boss) has ordered them not to, if they aren't worried about said boss watching them live on his TV box. If I were going to stick my neck out the way these witnesses are (despite there being a legal imperative for them to do so) I would feel much more comfortable for safety reasons if it was behind closed doors and not live broadcast to every Trump goon with an assault rifle.
posted by threeturtles at 3:05 AM on October 15, 2019 [23 favorites]
posted by threeturtles at 3:05 AM on October 15, 2019 [23 favorites]
It's the opposite of the Mueller report - focused, short, fast, and as insulated as possible from Republican interference and media spin. I feel like, for once, Democrats are ahead of Republicans in forming the narrative. For once, the facts are coming out too fast for the spin machine to twist.
It's kind of crazy that it needs to be done this way, but when every institution is broken other than the small part of congress doing the investigation, it makes sense. I don't trust the Times to report on open hearings. I don't trust Republicans to comment on proceedings. I don't trust the Justice Department to be a part of this. I don't want to see what Fox News will do.
posted by xammerboy at 6:03 AM on October 15, 2019 [30 favorites]
It's kind of crazy that it needs to be done this way, but when every institution is broken other than the small part of congress doing the investigation, it makes sense. I don't trust the Times to report on open hearings. I don't trust Republicans to comment on proceedings. I don't trust the Justice Department to be a part of this. I don't want to see what Fox News will do.
posted by xammerboy at 6:03 AM on October 15, 2019 [30 favorites]
As far as Syria and impeachment are concerned, mismanagement of foreign affairs is supposed to be off the table as far as impeachment is concerned. The founders considered adding mismanagement to high crimes and misdemeanors but purposefully left it out, thinking it could be easily politically abused.
I still think Pelosi should be calling for Trump to be removed for it. Trump calls for people to be impeached all the time, whether they technically can be in the way he's talking about or not, and it plays politically. If you need to stretch your case, argue that Trump literally sold out Syria for personal interests.
Do something! I'm also confused as to why, instead of reporting that Trump is going on his gut, the NyTimes isn't reporting instead that we don't know why Trump is invading Syria. None of his stated reasons make any sense. We aren't pulling troops out of Syria. At least point out that Trump obviously isn't being straight with the American people.
posted by xammerboy at 6:13 AM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
I still think Pelosi should be calling for Trump to be removed for it. Trump calls for people to be impeached all the time, whether they technically can be in the way he's talking about or not, and it plays politically. If you need to stretch your case, argue that Trump literally sold out Syria for personal interests.
Do something! I'm also confused as to why, instead of reporting that Trump is going on his gut, the NyTimes isn't reporting instead that we don't know why Trump is invading Syria. None of his stated reasons make any sense. We aren't pulling troops out of Syria. At least point out that Trump obviously isn't being straight with the American people.
posted by xammerboy at 6:13 AM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
I still think Pelosi should be calling for Trump to be removed for it.
I understand that Oversight Committee is busy, but yeah Democrats should definitely be on TV talking about "Scheduling hearings into why Donald Trump betrayed our allies?"
posted by mikelieman at 6:33 AM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
I understand that Oversight Committee is busy, but yeah Democrats should definitely be on TV talking about "Scheduling hearings into why Donald Trump betrayed our allies?"
posted by mikelieman at 6:33 AM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
I'm ok with letting the Democrats stay focused on this. It's sad that the NYT is so compromised they can't ever stop insisting that, however bad Trump is, the Democrats are out of touch/in disarray/just as corrupt. But that's their schtick, except for a few worthwhile writers, so whatever.
I understand that Oversight Committee is busy, but yeah Democrats should definitely be on TV talking about "Scheduling hearings into why Donald Trump betrayed our allies?"
Trump's weird inverted superpower has always been, he's committing crimes and offenses so rapidly that his opponents get paralyzed by it; how can you tell what to focus on when new things happen literally every day? If you try to attack them all, you'll run out of hours in the day. He's counting on that, because it's been very effective.
The only way to fight him is to do what the Democrats are doing now, pick a vulnerable spot and keep poking at it. As it turns out, that is also shaking loose a whole lot of other stuff, but still: keep poking.
Doesn't mean you can't attack him later on the rest, and catalogue all his crimes, and I'm sure a lot of folks are like me, worried that if we take him down for one thing, he'll never face justice for the rest. But honestly: he's done too many crimes to ever face justice for all of them. He won't live long enough. Our focus needs to be on neutralizing him; getting him out of office, sending him to prison, getting his crooked family out of power and neutralized also, going after his network.
posted by emjaybee at 6:51 AM on October 15, 2019 [63 favorites]
I understand that Oversight Committee is busy, but yeah Democrats should definitely be on TV talking about "Scheduling hearings into why Donald Trump betrayed our allies?"
Trump's weird inverted superpower has always been, he's committing crimes and offenses so rapidly that his opponents get paralyzed by it; how can you tell what to focus on when new things happen literally every day? If you try to attack them all, you'll run out of hours in the day. He's counting on that, because it's been very effective.
The only way to fight him is to do what the Democrats are doing now, pick a vulnerable spot and keep poking at it. As it turns out, that is also shaking loose a whole lot of other stuff, but still: keep poking.
Doesn't mean you can't attack him later on the rest, and catalogue all his crimes, and I'm sure a lot of folks are like me, worried that if we take him down for one thing, he'll never face justice for the rest. But honestly: he's done too many crimes to ever face justice for all of them. He won't live long enough. Our focus needs to be on neutralizing him; getting him out of office, sending him to prison, getting his crooked family out of power and neutralized also, going after his network.
posted by emjaybee at 6:51 AM on October 15, 2019 [63 favorites]
I'm ok with letting the Democrats stay focused on this. It's sad that the NYT is so compromised they can't ever stop insisting that, however bad Trump is, the Democrats are out of touch/in disarray/just as corrupt. But that's their schtick, except for a few worthwhile writers, so whatever.
There's a difference between functionally objective and visibly objective. If the NYT was functionally objective it would look like a liberal rag because a Republican administrations on the whole are more ridiculously corrupt, caring about the ends more than the means. To appear visibly objective, it must always have scandal in equal and opposite proportion which means they have to go looking for shit to complain about on the left side.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:04 AM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
There's a difference between functionally objective and visibly objective. If the NYT was functionally objective it would look like a liberal rag because a Republican administrations on the whole are more ridiculously corrupt, caring about the ends more than the means. To appear visibly objective, it must always have scandal in equal and opposite proportion which means they have to go looking for shit to complain about on the left side.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:04 AM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
The fancy word for both-sides-ism is "fallacy of the golden mean".
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:18 AM on October 15, 2019 [18 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:18 AM on October 15, 2019 [18 favorites]
The fancy word for both-sides-ism is "fallacy of the golden mean".
And the way the so-called "liberal media" expresses this fallacy is to exchange objective reporting with balanced reporting.
Thus the media can continue to air the utterly discredited views of climate deniers and supply-side economists, and convey the Trump Administration's claim that their tax cut would lead to more revenue and lower deficits without noting the objective fact that it's never worked that way before.
Besides being cowardly, it's an intellectually lazy approach. They can air any nonsensical claim, follow up with a "critics say" [citation of objective reality] and then dust their hands off and call it a day, without caring that they put the false claim in a position of privilege by citing it first and weakened its refutation by reducing it to a he-said, she-said.
posted by Gelatin at 7:27 AM on October 15, 2019 [33 favorites]
And the way the so-called "liberal media" expresses this fallacy is to exchange objective reporting with balanced reporting.
Thus the media can continue to air the utterly discredited views of climate deniers and supply-side economists, and convey the Trump Administration's claim that their tax cut would lead to more revenue and lower deficits without noting the objective fact that it's never worked that way before.
Besides being cowardly, it's an intellectually lazy approach. They can air any nonsensical claim, follow up with a "critics say" [citation of objective reality] and then dust their hands off and call it a day, without caring that they put the false claim in a position of privilege by citing it first and weakened its refutation by reducing it to a he-said, she-said.
posted by Gelatin at 7:27 AM on October 15, 2019 [33 favorites]
Trump Suspects a Spiteful John Bolton Is Behind Some of the Ukraine Leaks (Daily Beast)
Trump fears the leaks are now coming from the people he chose to serve—and that only increases the paranoia currently infecting the West Wing.
Trump fears the leaks are now coming from the people he chose to serve—and that only increases the paranoia currently infecting the West Wing.
“[Trump] was clearly implying [it, saying] something to the effect of, ‘Oh, gee, I wonder who the source on that could be,’” this source said, referring to the president’s speculation. Bolton, for his part, told The Daily Beast last month that allegations that he was a leaker in Trump’s midst are “flatly incorrect.” The former national security adviser—who departed the administration last month on awful, mutually bitter terms—is working on a book about his time serving Trump, and has “a lot to dish,” one knowledgeable source noted.‘Everything becomes a conspiracy theory’: Trump leans into spurious claims for impeachment defense (Politico)
As president, Trump has promoted conspiracy theories since his inauguration centered on the idea of the deep state, the Clinton emails or the alleged wiretapping of his New York City campaign quarters by Obama’s federal government. He’s also promoted the idea Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election to help the Democrats: a charge Trump’s former top homeland security adviser recently publicly debunked, citing no evidence for the allegation.posted by katra at 8:15 AM on October 15, 2019 [7 favorites]
Former administration officials say it’s now futile to try to talk Trump out of these theories — with logic, data, common sense or even government intelligence — once he latches onto an idea. [...] The differences between Trump and other presidents is that he shares his conspiratorially minded, us-versus-them worldview far more publicly and prolifically, said Timothy Naftali, the founding director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum.
Americans did not know Nixon’s worldview until tapes of his Oval Office conversations surfaced. “Trump and Nixon share this belief that the structure of government is working against them,” Naftali said. “Nixon’s conspiracy theories sent him down a rabbit hole that destroyed his presidency. We’ll see what happens to President Trump.”
Trump's former Russia aide met with White House lawyer over Giuliani (Politico)
posted by katra at 8:28 AM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
President Donald Trump’s former top Russia aide Fiona Hill told House impeachment investigators on Monday that she had at least two meetings with a National Security Council lawyer about Rudy Giuliani’s efforts to convince Ukrainian officials to investigate the president’s political rivals, according to a person who was in the room for the testimony. [...] Hill testified that she met with Eisenberg briefly on July 10, the same day she attended a meeting with Ukrainian officials at the White House. Hill said she had a longer meeting with Eisenberg on July 11, the person added.And as a follow up to the discussion about why these preliminary hearings are being conducted in private, protecting classified information also seems like an important consideration, due to the subject matter.
[...] The person, who was not authorized to speak publicly about Hill’s testimony, said Hill became passionate more than once about Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. She expressed concern that the United States was not doing enough to combat Russia’s aggression, and that it was opening the door for other countries to do the same, the person said.
Hill’s lawyer, Lee Wolosky, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The New York Times first reported Bolton’s comments, as relayed by Hill, but the details of her two meetings with Eisenberg were not previously known.
posted by katra at 8:28 AM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
And as a follow up to the discussion about why these preliminary hearings are being conducted in private, protecting classified information also seems like an important consideration, due to the subject matter.
All the more reason not to allow a random, Trump-aligned congressman with a cell phone not on any of the relevant committees in the room. I'm assuming there are members of both parties involved. That should be the "representation" Trump should need.
posted by MrGuilt at 8:33 AM on October 15, 2019 [5 favorites]
All the more reason not to allow a random, Trump-aligned congressman with a cell phone not on any of the relevant committees in the room. I'm assuming there are members of both parties involved. That should be the "representation" Trump should need.
posted by MrGuilt at 8:33 AM on October 15, 2019 [5 favorites]
State Department official to face questions about Ukraine and Giuliani (WaPo)
George Kent, the deputy assistant secretary of state responsible for Ukraine, faced questions Tuesday in the House impeachment inquiry of President Trump, a key witness on whether Rudolph W. Giuliani tried to push out the former ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch. [...] internal documents turned over to Congress by the State Department inspector general in early October preview what Kent might tell lawmakers: The messages, which were obtained by The Washington Post, show that Kent thought Yovanovitch had become the target of a “classic disinformation operation” — and that he raised concerns about a smear to his superiors in hopes that they’d defend their own.posted by katra at 8:40 AM on October 15, 2019 [4 favorites]
[...] Kent, according to the documents, tried to get his bosses to counter the smear. He suggested that the department could push back by “circling in red all the misspellings and grammar mistakes and reposting it,” as the U.S. Embassy in Moscow had done in similar counter-propaganda campaigns.
[...] Lawmakers are bound to ask Kent about whom he contacted about his concerns. According to the inspector general’s documents, he took them to Philip Reeker, a U.S. diplomat in Europe, and later forwarded them to the No. 3 official at the department, David Hale, and State Department counselor T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, a close confidant of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
That should be the "representation" Trump should need.
IIRC, Donald J. Trump is registered to vote in NY-12, so his Representative -- the only one he should have in a Nation of Laws -- is Carolyn Maloney.
posted by mikelieman at 8:45 AM on October 15, 2019 [6 favorites]
IIRC, Donald J. Trump is registered to vote in NY-12, so his Representative -- the only one he should have in a Nation of Laws -- is Carolyn Maloney.
posted by mikelieman at 8:45 AM on October 15, 2019 [6 favorites]
If, like me, you're having trouble keeping all the parties to this clusterfrell straight, Buzzfeed News has you covered: Who's Who in the Trump Impeachment Saga.
posted by suelac at 10:17 AM on October 15, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by suelac at 10:17 AM on October 15, 2019 [8 favorites]
“Any person who persuades another to,” Barr told Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., during his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday. She had asked him whether “a president persuading a person to commit perjury would be obstruction.” 01/18/19
Thanks Amy! Her and Kamala, we need them for this.
posted by adept256 at 10:21 AM on October 15, 2019 [16 favorites]
Thanks Amy! Her and Kamala, we need them for this.
posted by adept256 at 10:21 AM on October 15, 2019 [16 favorites]
Jonathan Chait, New York Magazine: The (Full) Case for Impeachment A menu of high crimes and misdemeanors.
The crimes for which impeachment is the prescribed punishment are notoriously undefined. And that’s for a reason: Presidential powers are vast, and it’s impossible to design laws to cover every possible abuse of the office’s authority. House Democrats have calculated that an impeachment focused narrowly on the Ukraine scandal will make the strongest legal case against President Trump. But that’s not Trump’s only impeachable offense. A full accounting would include a wide array of dangerous and authoritarian acts — 82, to be precise. His violations fall into seven broad categories of potentially impeachable misconduct that should be weighed, if not by the House, then at least by history.posted by tonycpsu at 10:30 AM on October 15, 2019 [19 favorites]
I. Abusing Power for Political Gain
II. Mishandling Classified Information
III. Undermining Duly Enacted Federal Law
IV. Obstruction of Congress
V. Obstruction of Justice
VI. Profiting From Office
VII. Fomenting Violence
Who's Who in the Trump Impeachment Saga.
I think it might be smart investing to go long on vellum.
posted by srboisvert at 10:37 AM on October 15, 2019 [7 favorites]
I think it might be smart investing to go long on vellum.
posted by srboisvert at 10:37 AM on October 15, 2019 [7 favorites]
And as a follow up to the discussion about why these preliminary hearings are being conducted in private, protecting classified information also seems like an important consideration, due to the subject matter.
All the more reason not to allow a random, Trump-aligned congressman with a cell phone not on any of the relevant committees in the room. I'm assuming there are members of both parties involved. That should be the "representation" Trump should need.
If such access had been allowed, it would have created an opportunity for Trump and his team to comment publicly on specific topics ahead of the committees, letting them take greater control of the story.
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:35 AM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
All the more reason not to allow a random, Trump-aligned congressman with a cell phone not on any of the relevant committees in the room. I'm assuming there are members of both parties involved. That should be the "representation" Trump should need.
If such access had been allowed, it would have created an opportunity for Trump and his team to comment publicly on specific topics ahead of the committees, letting them take greater control of the story.
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:35 AM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
In general, do these Congressional committees follow any legal guidelines or procedures for their investigations, collection/preservation of evidence/testimony, etc.? Who administers this information?
posted by cenoxo at 11:48 AM on October 15, 2019
posted by cenoxo at 11:48 AM on October 15, 2019
Who's Who in the Trump Impeachment Saga.
🎵 How much is that bunny in the headlights ? 🎵posted by y2karl at 11:53 AM on October 15, 2019 [6 favorites]
soundguy99: White House accidentally sends Ukraine talking points to Democrats again
This is the Trump Administration making an effort to be bipartisan! (I'm sure this joke was made when they did this the first time, too.)
katra: One individual with firsthand knowledge of how the Trump calls with foreign leaders are handled said the president “hates” such “pre-briefs” and frequently has refused to do them. Trump doesn’t like written background materials either, preferring to handle the calls himself, often in the morning from the residence. Occasionally, while on the phone with foreign heads of state, Trump has handed the receiver to his daughter, Ivanka Trump, so she can talk with the leader, according to this individual.
In case anyone is looking to add this to the pile of "proof that Trump's mental capacity is declining," remember that In intelligence briefings, Trump prefers ‘as little as possible’ (MSNBC, January 18, 2017)
ryanrs: in russian white house, torn up evidence burns you
Also, something he's done for quite a while. Meet the guys who tape Trump's papers back together -- The president's unofficial 'filing system' involves tearing up documents into pieces, even when they're supposed to be preserved. (Politico, June 10, 2018)
I'm guessing that at least half of his presidential record will be taped up pieces of paper.
But that's all old news: Donald Trump tweeted that the Fox impeachment poll was 'incorrect.' It's not. (CNN, Oct. 15, 2019)
Trump's claim: more Dems were polled than should have been. In fact, the increased number and percentage of self-identifying Democrats is a function of when and how they were polled:
posted by filthy light thief at 11:59 AM on October 15, 2019 [7 favorites]
This is the Trump Administration making an effort to be bipartisan! (I'm sure this joke was made when they did this the first time, too.)
katra: One individual with firsthand knowledge of how the Trump calls with foreign leaders are handled said the president “hates” such “pre-briefs” and frequently has refused to do them. Trump doesn’t like written background materials either, preferring to handle the calls himself, often in the morning from the residence. Occasionally, while on the phone with foreign heads of state, Trump has handed the receiver to his daughter, Ivanka Trump, so she can talk with the leader, according to this individual.
In case anyone is looking to add this to the pile of "proof that Trump's mental capacity is declining," remember that In intelligence briefings, Trump prefers ‘as little as possible’ (MSNBC, January 18, 2017)
One of the unexpected developments of the transition period has been Donald Trump’s disinterest in daily intelligence briefings. President Obama, immediately after the election, ordered the relevant agencies to make available to the president-elect the same information that’s delivered to the Oval Office, but in a bit of a surprise, Trump largely blew off the information.And less than a month later, it's clear he wants even less to read: Turmoil at the National Security Council, From the Top Down (New York Times, Feb. 12, 2017)
Last month, Fox News’ Chris Wallace noted reports that the Republican was only receiving one briefing a week, instead of seven. Trump didn’t deny the accounts, but said it didn’t matter because he’s “like, a smart person.” He added, “I get it when I need it.”
And while Mr. Obama liked policy option papers that were three to six single-spaced pages, council staff members are now being told to keep papers to a single page, with lots of graphics and maps.
“The president likes maps,” one official said.
ryanrs: in russian white house, torn up evidence burns you
Also, something he's done for quite a while. Meet the guys who tape Trump's papers back together -- The president's unofficial 'filing system' involves tearing up documents into pieces, even when they're supposed to be preserved. (Politico, June 10, 2018)
I'm guessing that at least half of his presidential record will be taped up pieces of paper.
But that's all old news: Donald Trump tweeted that the Fox impeachment poll was 'incorrect.' It's not. (CNN, Oct. 15, 2019)
Trump's claim: more Dems were polled than should have been. In fact, the increased number and percentage of self-identifying Democrats is a function of when and how they were polled:
Because so many "independents" are actually very likely to consistently support one party when gently nudged, pollsters do just that. They first ask which party you identify with and then follow up with a "if you had to choose a party" question. Some people -- a small number -- say they are true independents. Most side with one party.And the closer we get to an election, the more people will identify with one party or another.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:59 AM on October 15, 2019 [7 favorites]
In general, do these Congressional committees follow any legal guidelines or procedures for their investigations, collection/preservation of evidence/testimony, etc.? Who administers this information?
Well, there's the Rules of the House, Rule XI covers "PROCEDURES OF COMMITTEES AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS", and begins on p. 557, ( p 572 of the PDF )
Hearing Procedures begin on PDF p 598
posted by mikelieman at 12:01 PM on October 15, 2019 [2 favorites]
Well, there's the Rules of the House, Rule XI covers "PROCEDURES OF COMMITTEES AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS", and begins on p. 557, ( p 572 of the PDF )
Hearing Procedures begin on PDF p 598
posted by mikelieman at 12:01 PM on October 15, 2019 [2 favorites]
This just in, "Giuliani says he won't comply with a congressional subpoena ":
President Donald's Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani told ABC News on Tuesday he is not complying with a congressional subpoena.posted by mhum at 12:11 PM on October 15, 2019 [5 favorites]
Giuliani told ABC News “if they enforce it then we will see what happens.”
Giuliani went on to tell ABC News he is no longer retaining the services of Jon Sale, who was acting as his attorney for this matter. Giuliani said that if Congress seeks to enforce a subpoena, then he will retain counsel.
[...]
Tuesday was the deadline for Giuliani to comply with a wide-ranging subpoena from three of the House committees working on the growing impeachment inquiry into President Trump.
Giuliani told ABC News “if they enforce it then we will see what happens.”
He's saying he's counting on Attorney General Barr to decline to enforce it.
The House Sergeant at Arms option (backed by the DC metro police) looks better and better. I doubt Giuliani has secret service protection.
posted by Gelatin at 12:16 PM on October 15, 2019 [24 favorites]
He's saying he's counting on Attorney General Barr to decline to enforce it.
The House Sergeant at Arms option (backed by the DC metro police) looks better and better. I doubt Giuliani has secret service protection.
posted by Gelatin at 12:16 PM on October 15, 2019 [24 favorites]
Giuliani told ABC News “if they enforce it then we will see what happens.”
My friends, I honestly think we might see a frogmarch.
posted by Faint of Butt at 12:16 PM on October 15, 2019 [34 favorites]
My friends, I honestly think we might see a frogmarch.
posted by Faint of Butt at 12:16 PM on October 15, 2019 [34 favorites]
“if they enforce it then we will see what happens.”
An adaptation of Trump's "wait until the end of the show, anything can happen" rhetoric, turned sour. Now it sounds lore like not-showing-my-hand gangster talk. How safe it feels to walk on thin ice. We'll see...
posted by Namlit at 12:17 PM on October 15, 2019
An adaptation of Trump's "wait until the end of the show, anything can happen" rhetoric, turned sour. Now it sounds lore like not-showing-my-hand gangster talk. How safe it feels to walk on thin ice. We'll see...
posted by Namlit at 12:17 PM on October 15, 2019
Guardian: Warnings began about Giuliani and Ukraine many months ago - report
Kent said he warned colleagues as far back as March, the New York Times reports, about Donald Trump’s personal lawyer/human “hand grenade” Rudy Giuliani’s role in what Kent described as a “disinformation” campaign - using a Ukrainian prosecutor to smear Trump’s Democratic rival in the 2020 presidential race, Joe Biden, and the ousted ambassador to the Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch. [...]posted by katra at 12:31 PM on October 15, 2019 [14 favorites]Kenneth P. Vogel (@kenvogel) NEW: GEORGE KENT, a career @StateDept official who is now testifying on the Hill, warned colleagues as far back as March about RUDY GIULIANI's role in what he called a “disinformation” campaign using a Ukrainian prosecutor to smear BIDEN, YOVANOVITCH, etc. https://t.co/KvMLoN2AoY
October 15, 2019
Warnings began about Giuliani and Ukraine many months ago - report
Anybody else worried that Rudy is being set up as the fall guy? That Trump is gonna turn on him and say "It was all Rudy! Rudy did all the bad stuff, I'm innocent!" and the GOP will fall in line with this?
posted by dnash at 12:41 PM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
Anybody else worried that Rudy is being set up as the fall guy? That Trump is gonna turn on him and say "It was all Rudy! Rudy did all the bad stuff, I'm innocent!" and the GOP will fall in line with this?
posted by dnash at 12:41 PM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
And Chait nicely summarizes how what Trump is doing in foreign policy somehow mysteriously seems to benefit Russia.
posted by PhineasGage at 12:41 PM on October 15, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 12:41 PM on October 15, 2019 [8 favorites]
Giuliani went on to tell ABC News he is no longer retaining the services of Jon Sale, who was acting as his attorney for this matter. Giuliani said that if Congress seeks to enforce a subpoena, then he will retain counsel.
I think this was too easily overlooked. Rudy was too batshit insane that his lawyer pulled the ripcord.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 12:49 PM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
I think this was too easily overlooked. Rudy was too batshit insane that his lawyer pulled the ripcord.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 12:49 PM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
Anybody else worried that Rudy is being set up as the fall guy? That Trump is gonna turn on him and say "It was all Rudy! Rudy did all the bad stuff, I'm innocent!" and the GOP will fall in line with this?
posted by dnash at 3:41 PM on October 15
It's funny, I was about to type this exact question, but got distracted by work and came back to see you'd raised it. It certainly seems incorrect to say that Giuliani is a *witting* fall guy, but fall guy he may be. At the same time, we have the call summary implicating Trump directly. Hard to see how he pins everything on Giuliani at this stage.
posted by scarylarry at 12:58 PM on October 15, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by dnash at 3:41 PM on October 15
It's funny, I was about to type this exact question, but got distracted by work and came back to see you'd raised it. It certainly seems incorrect to say that Giuliani is a *witting* fall guy, but fall guy he may be. At the same time, we have the call summary implicating Trump directly. Hard to see how he pins everything on Giuliani at this stage.
posted by scarylarry at 12:58 PM on October 15, 2019 [1 favorite]
Anybody else worried that Rudy is being set up as the fall guy?
Considering that Rudy was at least partially responsible for directly enabling and encouraging a lot of this stuff, not really. But this is a situation where, if any justice is served, there will be numerous fall guys.
posted by wondermouse at 12:59 PM on October 15, 2019 [5 favorites]
Considering that Rudy was at least partially responsible for directly enabling and encouraging a lot of this stuff, not really. But this is a situation where, if any justice is served, there will be numerous fall guys.
posted by wondermouse at 12:59 PM on October 15, 2019 [5 favorites]
I mean I'd be shocked if Trump didn't try to throw half of his posse under the bus by the time his term is over, but only one person needs to worry about getting impeached or losing re-election and that's Trump.
posted by BeginAgain at 1:02 PM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by BeginAgain at 1:02 PM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
Technically, Trump and Pence.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 1:09 PM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 1:09 PM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
I'm going to a town hall with my House rep on Saturday and if this is still dangling in four days I'm going to be the one yelling "Inherent contempt!" in a crowded middle school.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:10 PM on October 15, 2019 [32 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:10 PM on October 15, 2019 [32 favorites]
If Giuliani takes the blame he can be pardoned by Trump. It would probably play well among Trump supporters, too: brave patriot Giuliani "did what he had to do" in investigating Biden's corruption, so the President magnanimously pardons him for doing things that were morally right if legally wrong. And if the pardon includes other matters … or even if it only arguably includes them, due to some sloppy drafting … well, that would be a substantial bar to prosecution by anti-President forces and no more than this great patriot deserves.
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:12 PM on October 15, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:12 PM on October 15, 2019 [5 favorites]
Anybody else worried that Rudy is being set up as the fall guy?
Only in that it may result in Trump getting off the hook, and potentially reelected.
posted by MrGuilt at 1:23 PM on October 15, 2019
Only in that it may result in Trump getting off the hook, and potentially reelected.
posted by MrGuilt at 1:23 PM on October 15, 2019
Trump’s impeachment barricade crumbles (Politico)
Key witnesses are ignoring Trump and delivering bombshell testimony in Democrats’ Ukraine investigation.
Key witnesses are ignoring Trump and delivering bombshell testimony in Democrats’ Ukraine investigation.
As lawmakers return to Capitol Hill on Tuesday, a growing number of witnesses this week are set to describe their own role in the controversy, even as the White House has vowed not to engage with House Democrats’ “illegitimate” impeachment effort. The Democratic Caucus is set to meet Tuesday night after a two-week recess to discuss the impeachment inquiry. [...]posted by katra at 1:35 PM on October 15, 2019 [19 favorites]
“The walls are closing in. The details we are learning about the shadow foreign policy operation Trump has been running to benefit himself personally are stunning,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). “Why have a democracy, if we allow this to happen without consequence?”
Fall guy or not, Rudy doing a perp walk would make for a very satisfying story arc given his use of public shaming during his federal-prosecutor days.
posted by Lyme Drop at 1:36 PM on October 15, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by Lyme Drop at 1:36 PM on October 15, 2019 [17 favorites]
Hey, does anyone have a link to an updated/updating list of the Trump Administration's arrests/indictments/convictions? It's getting hard to keep track of who's done what.
posted by Myca at 1:38 PM on October 15, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Myca at 1:38 PM on October 15, 2019 [1 favorite]
@joe_inAustralia - you're suggesting that Giuliani is being set up to be Trump's Oliver North? Interesting idea. I hope some people remember Iran Contra days and have a good contingency plan for that.
posted by another_20_year_lurker at 2:01 PM on October 15, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by another_20_year_lurker at 2:01 PM on October 15, 2019 [7 favorites]
First off, don’t give him immunity...
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:36 PM on October 15, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:36 PM on October 15, 2019 [10 favorites]
Hey, does anyone have a link to an updated/updating list of the Trump Administration's arrests/indictments/convictions? It's getting hard to keep track of who's done what.
A Running Tab Of Mueller Investigation Convictions & Indictments (Medium), with context on each.
And a few more names from Time: Here Are All of the Indictments, Guilty Pleas and Convictions From Robert Mueller's Investigation
Both have been updated in 2019, but neither of these include anything from the current Ukraine scandal and impeachment efforts.
[And then there's the list of Trump administration dismissals and resignations on Wikipedia, but that's another thing all-together]
posted by filthy light thief at 2:44 PM on October 15, 2019 [4 favorites]
A Running Tab Of Mueller Investigation Convictions & Indictments (Medium), with context on each.
And a few more names from Time: Here Are All of the Indictments, Guilty Pleas and Convictions From Robert Mueller's Investigation
Both have been updated in 2019, but neither of these include anything from the current Ukraine scandal and impeachment efforts.
[And then there's the list of Trump administration dismissals and resignations on Wikipedia, but that's another thing all-together]
posted by filthy light thief at 2:44 PM on October 15, 2019 [4 favorites]
Related FPP: Onward in Ohio: A Wish for Words that Work
On October 15, the Democrats meet for the fourth time, starting at 8 p.m. ET in Westerville, Ohio, for a debate hosted by CNN and The New York Times, on the most crowded debate stage of this election cycle so far.posted by katra at 3:21 PM on October 15, 2019 [2 favorites]
I don't think pardoning Guliani for helping Trump commit crimes plays out well for Trump. Reminder that a pardon carries with it implicit guilt, so Trump pardoning him would effectively be admitting to his own crimes.
posted by Twain Device at 4:22 PM on October 15, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Twain Device at 4:22 PM on October 15, 2019 [1 favorite]
Live updates: Pence, Giuliani will not cooperate with impeachment inquiry (WaPo)
7:00 p.m.: ‘Three amigos’ were appointed to run Ukraine policyposted by katra at 4:29 PM on October 15, 2019 [13 favorites]
Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney organized a meeting this spring in which officials determined to take Ukraine policy out of the traditional channels, putting Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, and special U.S. envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker in charge of it instead, Kent told lawmakers Tuesday.
Kent, the deputy assistant secretary of state responsible for Ukraine, told House investigators that he was told to “lay low” and defer to the trio, who called themselves the “three amigos,” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) told reporters Tuesday.
6:30 p.m.: Sessions subpoenaed in New York over contacts with Giuliani, associates
A federal grand jury in New York has issued a subpoena to Sessions seeking records and other information on his interactions with Giuliani and two Giuliani associates charged last week with a scheme to funnel foreign money to U.S. politicians, according to two people familiar with the investigation.
those dumb motherfuckers probably had a secret "three amigos" handshake and a pseudo-military challenge coin
posted by ryanrs at 5:52 PM on October 15, 2019 [20 favorites]
posted by ryanrs at 5:52 PM on October 15, 2019 [20 favorites]
Rudolph W. Giuliani privately urged President Trump in 2017 to extradite a Turkish cleric living in exile in the United States, a top priority of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, according to multiple former administration officials familiar with the discussions.This seems particularly relevant.
posted by Brainy at 6:12 PM on October 15, 2019 [17 favorites]
Rudolph W. Giuliani privately urged President Trump in 2017 to extradite a Turkish cleric living in exile in the United States
Isn't this part of the reason Michael Flynn and his partner Bijan Rafiekian are going to jail - unregistered lobbyists for Turkey?
posted by JackFlash at 6:32 PM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
Isn't this part of the reason Michael Flynn and his partner Bijan Rafiekian are going to jail - unregistered lobbyists for Turkey?
posted by JackFlash at 6:32 PM on October 15, 2019 [11 favorites]
Politico: "As part of a plea deal cut in 2017 with special counsel Robert Mueller’s office, the government agreed not to prosecute Flynn for anything related to the Turkey-focused lobbying."
Politico: "U.S. District Court Judge Anthony Trenga, who presided over the weeklong trial of Bijan Rafiekian in July in Alexandria, Virginia, ruled that prosecutors put forward insufficient proof to sustain the jury’s finding that Rafiekian knowingly operated as a Turkish government agent and intentionally failed to notify U.S. officials about his work. [...] If Trenga’s ruling stands, Rafiekian could not be retried. However, the judge said that if an appeals court overturns his rulings about the evidence, he would still grant the defendant a new trial."
posted by katra at 6:43 PM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
Politico: "U.S. District Court Judge Anthony Trenga, who presided over the weeklong trial of Bijan Rafiekian in July in Alexandria, Virginia, ruled that prosecutors put forward insufficient proof to sustain the jury’s finding that Rafiekian knowingly operated as a Turkish government agent and intentionally failed to notify U.S. officials about his work. [...] If Trenga’s ruling stands, Rafiekian could not be retried. However, the judge said that if an appeals court overturns his rulings about the evidence, he would still grant the defendant a new trial."
posted by katra at 6:43 PM on October 15, 2019 [3 favorites]
Prosecutors flag that DOJ is not in sync with Trump on tax returns claim (Politico)
New York prosecutors pressing for access to President Donald Trump’s tax returns are drawing attention to the Justice Department’s refusal to back up a claim by Trump’s personal attorneys that he is entirely immune from the state-run criminal justice process. [...]posted by katra at 7:01 PM on October 15, 2019 [29 favorites]
“Given the DOJ’s own recent investigations, prosecutions, and convictions involving Appellant and his affiliates, including the prosecution of Michael Cohen, in which Appellant was referenced as an unindicted co-conspirator, the DOJ cannot (and does not) join in Appellant’s claim to an absolute immunity,” Vance and his colleagues wrote in a submission to the 2nd Circuit. “Appellant’s aggressive immunity claim here is particularly hollow in view of his failure to raise it in these recent investigations and prosecutions.” [...]
Vance’s team also scoffed at arguments from Trump and the Justice Department that impeachment is the mechanism the Constitution prescribes for misconduct by a president. The local prosecutors noted that Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone sent a letter to Congress last week defying its demands for information in an impeachment inquiry.
“The reality is that Appellant has refused to participate in the very impeachment process that he presents here as the bulwark against placing a president above the law… His core position on every one of these matters is that the United States Presidency places him beyond the reach of the law,” Vance’s office wrote.
ProPublica: Never-Before-Seen Trump Tax Documents Show Major Inconsistencies
"The president’s businesses made themselves appear more profitable to lenders and less profitable to tax officials. One expert calls the differing numbers 'versions of fraud.'"
<8O
posted by CheesesOfBrazil at 4:58 AM on October 16, 2019 [61 favorites]
"The president’s businesses made themselves appear more profitable to lenders and less profitable to tax officials. One expert calls the differing numbers 'versions of fraud.'"
<8O
posted by CheesesOfBrazil at 4:58 AM on October 16, 2019 [61 favorites]
ProPublica obtained the property tax documents using New York’s Freedom of Information Law. The documents were public because Trump appealed his property tax bill for the buildings every year for nine years in a row, the extent of the available records. We compared the tax records with loan records that became public when Trump’s lender, Ladder Capital, sold the debt on his properties as part of mortgage-backed securities.
posted by box at 5:21 AM on October 16, 2019 [28 favorites]
posted by box at 5:21 AM on October 16, 2019 [28 favorites]
katra: “The reality is that Appellant has refused to participate in the very impeachment process that he presents here as the bulwark against placing a president above the law… His core position on every one of these matters is that the United States Presidency places him beyond the reach of the law,” Vance’s office wrote.
QFT. Bolded for emphasis.
And it's not stopping: White House scrambles to slow impeachment push as explosive secrets spill behind closed doors (Stephen Collinson for CNN, October 16, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 7:08 AM on October 16, 2019 [42 favorites]
QFT. Bolded for emphasis.
And it's not stopping: White House scrambles to slow impeachment push as explosive secrets spill behind closed doors (Stephen Collinson for CNN, October 16, 2019)
The White House is launching a new effort to slow the speeding Democratic impeachment push, but its noncooperation strategy is being constantly thwarted by a daily stream of explosive secrets being spilled behind closed doors on Capitol Hill.Pro tip: to avoid bombshells, stop making bombs.
Current and former officials are painting an ever more damning picture of a wider than originally perceived scheme by President Donald Trump and his crew to pressure Ukraine that they warned could amount to a trampling of US law.
Vice President Mike Pence launched a new effort Tuesday to bolster White House hopes of stalling the House inquiry long enough for Trump to turn public opinion against it. He refused to turn over documents related to Trump's now notorious call with the President of Ukraine on July 25.
But White House officials are becoming increasingly frustrated at revelations from the closed-door hearings. Given that there is no presidential counsel in the room, they struggle to frame a defense, learning about almost daily bombshells only from news reports, CNN reported on Tuesday.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:08 AM on October 16, 2019 [42 favorites]
Back to Watergate: from my memory at the time, Nixon tax returns leaking hurt him as much as the Watergate revelations. Nixon paid less taxes than my single mother who was just squeaking supporting three kids at that time.
One of the more egregious offenses: Nixon deducted (I believe it was) $5000 for gas for his electric golf carts.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:26 AM on October 16, 2019 [22 favorites]
One of the more egregious offenses: Nixon deducted (I believe it was) $5000 for gas for his electric golf carts.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:26 AM on October 16, 2019 [22 favorites]
While there's little doubt that if the Trump Administration actually admitted what it's been doing, the jig would be up, I don't think his stonewalling is intended to delay impeachment. Indeed, given that the House has basically declared it would impeach Trump if he stonewalled, it seems a guarantee. It seems more a strategy to deprive public opinion about impeachment of as much oxygen as possible for as long as possible.
But the whistleblower complaint seems to have sparked the same cascade of events as Butterfield's revelations of the White House tapes during Watergate -- events are no spiraling beyond the ability of the White House to control (never great to begin with, the administration is reacting, mostly by flailing and increasingly heated appeals to Trump's base).
posted by Gelatin at 7:28 AM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
But the whistleblower complaint seems to have sparked the same cascade of events as Butterfield's revelations of the White House tapes during Watergate -- events are no spiraling beyond the ability of the White House to control (never great to begin with, the administration is reacting, mostly by flailing and increasingly heated appeals to Trump's base).
posted by Gelatin at 7:28 AM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
It seems more a strategy to deprive public opinion about impeachment of as much oxygen as possible for as long as possible.
Hopefully, this will lead to a flashover.
posted by hat_eater at 7:42 AM on October 16, 2019 [4 favorites]
Hopefully, this will lead to a flashover.
posted by hat_eater at 7:42 AM on October 16, 2019 [4 favorites]
Pompeo adviser [Michael McKinley, who resigned last week from a 37-year career,] to decry politicization of State Dept. in impeachment probe testimony (WaPo)
“The unwillingness of State Department leadership to defend Yovanovitch or interfere with an obviously partisan effort to intervene in our relationship with Ukraine for the political benefit of the president was too much for him,” said the person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid.posted by box at 7:54 AM on October 16, 2019 [22 favorites]
McKinley’s last day was Friday, though he had informed Pompeo more than a week earlier that he was resigning. The split has been bitter, as shown by the absence of a statement from Pompeo expressing gratitude for McKinley’s 37 years of service.
....
“They fired [Yovanovitch] in the most dishonorable way imaginable,” said one former State Department official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal processes.
....
“It is so indicative of how fragile [Mike Pompeo]’s relationship with the president is, even though he is the favored one in the national security environment,” said the person familiar with McKinley’s testimony, stressing that this was a personal observation, not McKinley’s. “The secretary felt he could not praise Mike or thank him publicly. Just as he could not stand up for Yovanovitch who was obviously the subject of a diplomatic mugging.”
Guardian: Third Rudy Giuliani associate arrested at JFK airport
posted by katra at 9:09 AM on October 16, 2019 [15 favorites]
A Florida man wanted in a campaign finance case involving associates of Rudy Giuliani is in federal custody. Federal authorities say they took David Correia into custody Wednesday at Kennedy Airport in New York City.Another man is arrested in probe of Giuliani associates (AP)
Correia is named in an indictment with two Giuliani associates arrested last week on charges they made illegal contributions to a congressman and a political action committee supporting President Donald Trump.
posted by katra at 9:09 AM on October 16, 2019 [15 favorites]
A Florida man wanted in a campaign finance case involving associates of Rudy Giuliani is in federal custody. Federal authorities say they took David Correia into custody Wednesday at Kennedy Airport in New York City.
Hah. "man wanted". Why do we always go easy on the terms when we talk about white men even in progressive rags like The Guardian. He's an indicted co-conspirator who went to ground six days ago when the other three were arrested. He was a fugitive and he was arrested trying to flee the country.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:17 AM on October 16, 2019 [6 favorites]
Hah. "man wanted". Why do we always go easy on the terms when we talk about white men even in progressive rags like The Guardian. He's an indicted co-conspirator who went to ground six days ago when the other three were arrested. He was a fugitive and he was arrested trying to flee the country.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:17 AM on October 16, 2019 [6 favorites]
From the AP:
A Florida man wanted in a campaign finance case involving associates of Rudy Giuliani is in federal custody after flying Wednesday to Kennedy Airport in New York City to turn himself in, federal authorities said.posted by katra at 9:21 AM on October 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
Why do we always go easy on the terms when we talk about white men even in progressive rags
Maybe because progressive rags believe in due process and "wanted" is actually the accurate term for someone who hasn't yet been charged or convicted?
posted by neroli at 9:25 AM on October 16, 2019 [16 favorites]
Maybe because progressive rags believe in due process and "wanted" is actually the accurate term for someone who hasn't yet been charged or convicted?
posted by neroli at 9:25 AM on October 16, 2019 [16 favorites]
Mulvaney emerges as a key facilitator of the campaign to pressure Ukraine (WaPo)
[...] current and former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters, said Mulvaney contributed substantially to the unfolding political crisis, both through his connection to key events related to the attempt to pressure Kiev and through his general approach to the chief of staff job, which was driven by a perceived reluctance to displease the president.posted by katra at 9:28 AM on October 16, 2019 [12 favorites]
U.S. officials said Mulvaney met frequently with Sondland and that details of their discussions were kept from then-National Security Adviser John Bolton and other officials who were raising internal concerns about the hidden Ukraine agenda. Mulvaney also tolerated meetings between Trump and Giuliani at a time when Giuliani was brazenly declaring in interviews his intent to enlist Kiev in efforts to substantiate conspiracy theories about the 2016 election and revive seemingly dormant probes that could prove damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.
Perhaps most significantly, Mulvaney — at the direction of the president — placed a hold on nearly $400 million in aid to Ukraine in the weeks before Trump used a July 25 phone call to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to pursue Giuliani’s agenda.
From ProPublica's bombshell analysis of apparent tax fraud in Trump's New York returns: ProPublica obtained the property tax documents using New York’s Freedom of Information Law. The documents were public because Trump appealed his property tax bill for the buildings every year for nine years in a row, the extent of the available records.
I'd laugh so hard if Trump's impulse to be a cheapskate was what wound up torpedoing his impulse to cover up his wrongdoing.
Speaking of benefit of the doubt, by the way, we now have what appears to be clear-cut evidence of tax fraud (and/or lending fraud) by Trump in the public domain. It's high time Democrats and other loyal American point out in the media that Trump's obvious desperation to hide his returns is a good indication that they'd reveal evidence of wrongdoing.
More evidence, that is.
posted by Gelatin at 9:28 AM on October 16, 2019 [24 favorites]
I'd laugh so hard if Trump's impulse to be a cheapskate was what wound up torpedoing his impulse to cover up his wrongdoing.
Speaking of benefit of the doubt, by the way, we now have what appears to be clear-cut evidence of tax fraud (and/or lending fraud) by Trump in the public domain. It's high time Democrats and other loyal American point out in the media that Trump's obvious desperation to hide his returns is a good indication that they'd reveal evidence of wrongdoing.
More evidence, that is.
posted by Gelatin at 9:28 AM on October 16, 2019 [24 favorites]
I propose that "Guiliani" refer to the act mixing your own sliced off fingers with finely cut vegetables and hoping either nobody notices or says anything.
posted by srboisvert at 9:32 AM on October 16, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 9:32 AM on October 16, 2019 [15 favorites]
He was a fugitive and he was arrested trying to flee the country.
Not according to the AP:
"A Florida man wanted in a campaign finance case involving associates of Rudy Giuliani is in federal custody after flying Wednesday to Kennedy Airport in New York City to turn himself in, federal authorities said."
I think "Florida man wanted" will do just fine for now. He's in custody, which is the main thing.
posted by mcstayinskool at 10:09 AM on October 16, 2019
Not according to the AP:
"A Florida man wanted in a campaign finance case involving associates of Rudy Giuliani is in federal custody after flying Wednesday to Kennedy Airport in New York City to turn himself in, federal authorities said."
I think "Florida man wanted" will do just fine for now. He's in custody, which is the main thing.
posted by mcstayinskool at 10:09 AM on October 16, 2019
Mike Pompeo’s Subordinates Are Calling His Bluff in the Impeachment Inquiry (Jeremy Stahl, Slate)
They’re defying his orders and testifying against Trump.posted by ZeusHumms at 10:13 AM on October 16, 2019 [27 favorites]
Pompeo’s empty threats, along with the administration’s bluster demanding total obstruction of Congress’ impeachment inquiry, are based on radical legal theories that would place the president above the law.
One of my favorite lines from the Slate piece ZeusHumms links to:
(I almost typed that Pompeo might also be allowing it simply to take down Trump. On one hand, he's in as much hot water as Trump. On the other hand, that's just a convenient handle for when he's thrown under the bus.)
posted by MrGuilt at 10:21 AM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
It’s unclear if Pompeo is ignoring his own order for these officials not to testify without administration counsel, or if he has recognized that enforcing his order by punishing employees who had complied with a lawful subpoena might prove difficult.The other possibility is he's creating a narrative of rogue, out-of-control Deep State factions within the State Department are behind all of this, can't be trusted, and should be purged. It is part of my overarching theory that Trump is simply looking for enough of a fig leaf to let enough of his base to rationalize not favoring impeachment in spite of a massive amount of solid evidence of massive wrongdoing. He's pulled it off in the past; somehow, it's like he's falling down a cliff, and every branch he tries to grab on the way snaps.
(I almost typed that Pompeo might also be allowing it simply to take down Trump. On one hand, he's in as much hot water as Trump. On the other hand, that's just a convenient handle for when he's thrown under the bus.)
posted by MrGuilt at 10:21 AM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
You know what makes me really uneasy here? Just how many admin officials are implicated in violations of the law. What the fuck is going to happen to Pompeo, Pence, Giuliani, Mulvaney, Barr all these other people who are now clearly on record as breaking the law?
Can somebody refresh my memory: Nixon wasn't similarly surrounded by complicit enablers in such positions, was he?
I'm just wondering what the end game here is. They all go to jail? And foment violence from there? They get pardoned? We have to eat that shit in the name of going forward?
posted by angrycat at 10:43 AM on October 16, 2019 [10 favorites]
Can somebody refresh my memory: Nixon wasn't similarly surrounded by complicit enablers in such positions, was he?
I'm just wondering what the end game here is. They all go to jail? And foment violence from there? They get pardoned? We have to eat that shit in the name of going forward?
posted by angrycat at 10:43 AM on October 16, 2019 [10 favorites]
> He's pulled it off in the past; somehow, it's like he's falling down a cliff, and every branch he tries to grab on the way snaps.
Trump is following the mob tactic of getting everyone around you dirty, so everyone will help coverup since him going down takes them down with them. Folks who left were ones who either had too much of their own baggage that selling out Trump was a better deal, or wouldn't take on his dirt sufficiently enough to ensure fealty.
posted by mrzarquon at 10:44 AM on October 16, 2019 [12 favorites]
Trump is following the mob tactic of getting everyone around you dirty, so everyone will help coverup since him going down takes them down with them. Folks who left were ones who either had too much of their own baggage that selling out Trump was a better deal, or wouldn't take on his dirt sufficiently enough to ensure fealty.
posted by mrzarquon at 10:44 AM on October 16, 2019 [12 favorites]
> What the fuck is going to happen to Pompeo, Pence, Giuliani, Mulvaney, Barr all these other people who are now clearly on record as breaking the law?
It also makes me curious how much stuff around things like Brett Kavanaugh's appointment is touched by this - along with other federal judges - Trump managed to fuck up the judiciary branch so much with his graft and deal making.
posted by mrzarquon at 10:47 AM on October 16, 2019 [10 favorites]
It also makes me curious how much stuff around things like Brett Kavanaugh's appointment is touched by this - along with other federal judges - Trump managed to fuck up the judiciary branch so much with his graft and deal making.
posted by mrzarquon at 10:47 AM on October 16, 2019 [10 favorites]
Nixon wasn't similarly surrounded by complicit enablers in such positions, was he?
'In the aftermath of Richard Nixon’s resignation, Watergate continued to claim victims.
The final toll included:
one presidential resignation
one vice-presidential resignation – although Agnew’s crimes were unrelated to Watergate
40 government officials indicted or jailed
H.R. Haldeman and John Erlichman (White House staff), resigned 30 April 1973, subsequently jailed
John Dean (White House legal counsel), sacked 30 April 1973, subsequently jailed
John Mitchell, Attorney-General and Chairman of the Committee to Re-elect the President (CREEP), jailed
Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy (ex-White House staff), planned the Watergate break-in, both jailed
Charles Colson, special counsel to the President, jailed
James McCord (Security Director of CREEP), jailed'
posted by Harry Caul at 10:49 AM on October 16, 2019 [43 favorites]
'In the aftermath of Richard Nixon’s resignation, Watergate continued to claim victims.
The final toll included:
one presidential resignation
one vice-presidential resignation – although Agnew’s crimes were unrelated to Watergate
40 government officials indicted or jailed
H.R. Haldeman and John Erlichman (White House staff), resigned 30 April 1973, subsequently jailed
John Dean (White House legal counsel), sacked 30 April 1973, subsequently jailed
John Mitchell, Attorney-General and Chairman of the Committee to Re-elect the President (CREEP), jailed
Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy (ex-White House staff), planned the Watergate break-in, both jailed
Charles Colson, special counsel to the President, jailed
James McCord (Security Director of CREEP), jailed'
posted by Harry Caul at 10:49 AM on October 16, 2019 [43 favorites]
I'm waiting for the link between Ukraine (or Deutsche Bank, or Russia, or all three) and Kavanaugh's mysteriously vanished debts.
posted by Lyme Drop at 10:52 AM on October 16, 2019 [38 favorites]
posted by Lyme Drop at 10:52 AM on October 16, 2019 [38 favorites]
ProPublica obtained the property tax documents using New York’s Freedom of Information Law. The documents were public
This is why, when I am tempted to give money to some bullshit podcast that "discusses events", I give it to ProPublica instead. They do actual reporting, like looking at publicly available documents, rather than laundering grievances in the name of "access".
posted by benzenedream at 11:12 AM on October 16, 2019 [45 favorites]
This is why, when I am tempted to give money to some bullshit podcast that "discusses events", I give it to ProPublica instead. They do actual reporting, like looking at publicly available documents, rather than laundering grievances in the name of "access".
posted by benzenedream at 11:12 AM on October 16, 2019 [45 favorites]
mrzarquon Even in the aftermath of Nixon's resignation none of his judicial appointments came under even significant scrutiny much less pressure to resign. I'm extremely doubtful that even a Justice as blatantly corrupt and on the take as Kavanaugh will be ousted or even have his corruption discussed anywhere outside places like Metafilter.
And frankly I'm doubtful that we'll see a Nixon style housecleaning following Trump, the Democrats most likely won't take the Senate even if they do win the Presidency, and in recent history the Democrats have had a tendency to essentially ignore crimes committed by prior administrations. Unlike after Nixon there's FOX today which will be doing its utmost to cause civil war if the Democrats try to imprison many Trump officials, plus all the hate radio and web, and the Democrats will be preoccupied trying to fix all the stuff Trump broke and need political favors with Mitch to get anything through the Senate.
I'm betting it gets pushed under the rug and we "look forward, not back" like Obama told us to. I'd like to hope the Democrats at least extort some bills getting through McConnell's Senate as a condition for giving up the prosecution, but I'm not hopeful.
posted by sotonohito at 11:40 AM on October 16, 2019 [9 favorites]
And frankly I'm doubtful that we'll see a Nixon style housecleaning following Trump, the Democrats most likely won't take the Senate even if they do win the Presidency, and in recent history the Democrats have had a tendency to essentially ignore crimes committed by prior administrations. Unlike after Nixon there's FOX today which will be doing its utmost to cause civil war if the Democrats try to imprison many Trump officials, plus all the hate radio and web, and the Democrats will be preoccupied trying to fix all the stuff Trump broke and need political favors with Mitch to get anything through the Senate.
I'm betting it gets pushed under the rug and we "look forward, not back" like Obama told us to. I'd like to hope the Democrats at least extort some bills getting through McConnell's Senate as a condition for giving up the prosecution, but I'm not hopeful.
posted by sotonohito at 11:40 AM on October 16, 2019 [9 favorites]
Can't most officials in the executive branch be impeached? Not sure about private citizen Giuliani.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:34 PM on October 16, 2019
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:34 PM on October 16, 2019
I'd like to hope the Democrats at least extort some bills getting through McConnell's Senate as a condition for giving up the prosecution, but I'm not hopeful.
That's horse trading political favours for corruption. That sounds even worse to me.
posted by Bovine Love at 12:37 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
That's horse trading political favours for corruption. That sounds even worse to me.
posted by Bovine Love at 12:37 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
ZeusHumms: Can't most officials in the executive branch be impeached?
Who Can be Impeached? (Litigation.Findlaw.com)
posted by filthy light thief at 12:39 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
Who Can be Impeached? (Litigation.Findlaw.com)
Only two U.S. presidents (Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton) have been impeached, neither of whom were removed from office. However, 17 other U.S. officials, most of them judges, also have been impeached through the same legal authority and process. While the term "impeachment" typically is associated with the Commander in Chief, the Constitution clearly states who can be impeached: "The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States."The article goes on to provide more information on who can be impeached, plus impeachable offenses and historical examples.
Federal officers who are impeached face "removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States." They also may be tried for the same offenses in criminal court.
posted by filthy light thief at 12:39 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
I'm waiting for the link between Ukraine (or Deutsche Bank, or Russia, or all three) and Kavanaugh's mysteriously vanished debts.
The conspiracy unfortunately doesn't go that far - it was probably just the Judicial Crisis Network who pooled some funds together and bought themselves a Supreme Court seat.
posted by PenDevil at 12:43 PM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
The conspiracy unfortunately doesn't go that far - it was probably just the Judicial Crisis Network who pooled some funds together and bought themselves a Supreme Court seat.
posted by PenDevil at 12:43 PM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
The conspiracy unfortunately doesn't go that far - it was probably just the Judicial Crisis Network who pooled some funds together and bought themselves a Supreme Court seat.Are we assuming that a conservative lobbying organization created in the past 20 years by a Republican lawyer and a real estate tycoon is not a Russian cutout?
posted by Horkus at 1:14 PM on October 16, 2019 [20 favorites]
Federal investigation of Rudy Giuliani includes counterintelligence probe (CNN)
For months, investigators looking into Rudy Giuliani's business dealings in Ukraine have dug into everything from possible financial entanglements with alleged corrupt Ukrainian figures to counterintelligence concerns raised by some of those business ties, according to people briefed on the matter.posted by katra at 1:27 PM on October 16, 2019 [11 favorites]
The counterintelligence part of the investigation indicates that FBI and criminal prosecutors in Manhattan are looking at a broader set of issues related to Giuliani, President Donald Trump's personal attorney, than has been previously reported.
Kenneth McCallion, a New York attorney, says that investigators first approached him earlier this year to ask about Giuliani's ties to Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two Giuliani associates indicted last week on campaign-finance related charges. McCallion says FBI counterintelligence agents in February or March asked questions about some of Giuliani's Ukrainian business dealings.
The counterintelligence probe hinges in part on whether a foreign influence operation was trying to take advantage of Giuliani's business ties in Ukraine and with wealthy foreigners to make inroads with the White House, according to one person briefed on the matter.
How Many Times Could Donald Trump Be Impeached? (Dahlia Lithwick, Slate)
Laurence Tribe explains why Congress should aim to work at three speeds.posted by ZeusHumms at 1:28 PM on October 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
“There’s no reason why these impeachments can’t proceed while Congress still digs around and tries to get to the bottom of certain details.” […]
"So the evidence is going to pile up from voluntary sources, including people like the whistleblower, and that pile of evidence can be accumulated while we try to get accelerated judgments from the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, in cases where witnesses are under the president’s thumb and are not willing to come forward and comply with subpoenas. And in the meantime, we can impeach the president. So we can do three things at once. And it seems to me that’s exactly what we need to do in this existential crisis that the president has created."
Well this is probably concerning for Guiliani...
From the WSJ: Cuomo Signs ‘Double Jeopardy’ Bill Aimed at Presidential Pardons
Law closes what its proponents say is a loophole and aims to curb Trump’s pardon power. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Wednesday signed a bill into law that would allow New York prosecutors to bring state criminal charges against close associates of the president who are pardoned for a similar federal offense.
posted by TWinbrook8 at 2:01 PM on October 16, 2019 [30 favorites]
From the WSJ: Cuomo Signs ‘Double Jeopardy’ Bill Aimed at Presidential Pardons
Law closes what its proponents say is a loophole and aims to curb Trump’s pardon power. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Wednesday signed a bill into law that would allow New York prosecutors to bring state criminal charges against close associates of the president who are pardoned for a similar federal offense.
posted by TWinbrook8 at 2:01 PM on October 16, 2019 [30 favorites]
Mod note: A couple comments deleted; please put Turkey/Syria news in the Turkey thread; thanks.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 2:11 PM on October 16, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 2:11 PM on October 16, 2019 [2 favorites]
Can someone explain, kind-of simply and briefly, what the significance of the counterintelligence involvement in investigating Giuliani is/what it means? I'm not super-sure how this makes it different from yesterday!
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:12 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:12 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
IMHO counterintelligence means they're investigating a crime related to national security rather than just some financial hanky-panky.
posted by PenDevil at 2:16 PM on October 16, 2019 [14 favorites]
posted by PenDevil at 2:16 PM on October 16, 2019 [14 favorites]
Are we assuming that a conservative lobbying organization created in the past 20 years by a Republican lawyer and a real estate tycoon is not a Russian cutout?
Also the Judicial Crisis Network is essentially funded by an unknown single donor.
"JCN's tax return for the period July 2015 to June 2016 shows that one $17.9 million donation, whose source was not reported, accounted for 96.6 percent of the organization's revenue."
posted by srboisvert at 2:19 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
Also the Judicial Crisis Network is essentially funded by an unknown single donor.
"JCN's tax return for the period July 2015 to June 2016 shows that one $17.9 million donation, whose source was not reported, accounted for 96.6 percent of the organization's revenue."
posted by srboisvert at 2:19 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
Also the Judicial Crisis Network is essentially funded by an unknown single donor.
Flip a coin, it's either one of the Kochs or the Mercers.
posted by PenDevil at 2:25 PM on October 16, 2019 [4 favorites]
Flip a coin, it's either one of the Kochs or the Mercers.
posted by PenDevil at 2:25 PM on October 16, 2019 [4 favorites]
Can someone explain, kind-of simply and briefly, what the significance of the counterintelligence involvement in investigating Giuliani is/what it means?
Asha Rangappa addresses this question in these tweets.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 2:26 PM on October 16, 2019 [9 favorites]
Asha Rangappa addresses this question in these tweets.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 2:26 PM on October 16, 2019 [9 favorites]
Law closes what its proponents say is a loophole and aims to curb Trump’s pardon power. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Wednesday signed a bill into law that would allow New York prosecutors to bring state criminal charges against close associates of the president who are pardoned for a similar federal offense.
Elections, consequences, etc. When that little cabal of collaborationist Democrats were mostly turfed out (and the remaining ones stripped of their power), it was time for Cuomo to put up or shut up on his progressivism. It doesn't really matter if it's sincere or a cynical ploy on Cuomo's part, the end result is the same - Letitia James (and others) will be thrilled to do what she can to bring Trump (and hopefully the Traitor Tots) to justice.
posted by Rosie M. Banks at 2:44 PM on October 16, 2019 [11 favorites]
Elections, consequences, etc. When that little cabal of collaborationist Democrats were mostly turfed out (and the remaining ones stripped of their power), it was time for Cuomo to put up or shut up on his progressivism. It doesn't really matter if it's sincere or a cynical ploy on Cuomo's part, the end result is the same - Letitia James (and others) will be thrilled to do what she can to bring Trump (and hopefully the Traitor Tots) to justice.
posted by Rosie M. Banks at 2:44 PM on October 16, 2019 [11 favorites]
Federal officers who are impeached face "removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States."
Point of clarification: "Both the Constitution and the Senate’s procedures treat removal and disqualification from holding future office as separate punishments upon a conviction of impeachment."
posted by kirkaracha at 2:51 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
Point of clarification: "Both the Constitution and the Senate’s procedures treat removal and disqualification from holding future office as separate punishments upon a conviction of impeachment."
posted by kirkaracha at 2:51 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
How Many Times Could Donald Trump Be Impeached?
I believe one comprehensive, clearly-explained impeachment would be easier politically than multiple ones.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:52 PM on October 16, 2019
I believe one comprehensive, clearly-explained impeachment would be easier politically than multiple ones.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:52 PM on October 16, 2019
I'm not super-sure how this makes it different from yesterday!
Because now I can fantasize about Giuliani and Trump being frogmarched in orange jumpsuits for all of their actual treason, and not some bullshit complicated financial crime that no one understands and that idiots will dismiss forever as not a "real" crime
I want the GOP to live with the shame of being the party of actual, for real treason for fucking ever
It doesn't really matter if it's sincere or a cynical ploy on Cuomo's part
lol that's good because it is DEFINITELY a cynical ploy and he will find a way to weasel around it if it ever benefits him
posted by schadenfrau at 3:00 PM on October 16, 2019 [6 favorites]
Because now I can fantasize about Giuliani and Trump being frogmarched in orange jumpsuits for all of their actual treason, and not some bullshit complicated financial crime that no one understands and that idiots will dismiss forever as not a "real" crime
I want the GOP to live with the shame of being the party of actual, for real treason for fucking ever
It doesn't really matter if it's sincere or a cynical ploy on Cuomo's part
lol that's good because it is DEFINITELY a cynical ploy and he will find a way to weasel around it if it ever benefits him
posted by schadenfrau at 3:00 PM on October 16, 2019 [6 favorites]
The lawyer at the center of the Ukraine vortex (Politico)
Meet John Eisenberg, the White House attorney whose actions are coming under scrutiny in Democrats’ impeachment probe.
Meet John Eisenberg, the White House attorney whose actions are coming under scrutiny in Democrats’ impeachment probe.
As lawyers often do, Eisenberg took notes in meetings with Trump, a standard practice that “drove the president absolutely bonkers,” according to one former White House official. “His sense was people were taking notes because they were going to write a book or testify against him,” the former official said.posted by katra at 4:12 PM on October 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
It was Eisenberg to whom several alarmed White House officials turned when Trump urged Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter. It was Eisenberg who then helped order the record of that call into a system used for ultra-secret classified information. And it was Eisenberg who, several reports say, consulted with political appointees at the Justice Department on how to handle a whistleblower’s complaint about the Ukraine call. [...]
The White House is now reviewing how it handled Trump’s phone call with Zelensky, according to an administration official. Eisenberg is at the center of that review, according to the New York Times, which reported that some aides are worried that the mission of the review is to find a scapegoat.
Some of Eisenberg’s former colleagues are concerned that he will be blamed for the Ukraine scandal, with one of them saying: “The White House is full of political actors with agendas and there can be a lot of knife fights over there. That’s not something that John really engages in.”
If so, it would be a remarkably familiar Washington plotline in a town in the throes of unprecedented political upheaval. “If I remember D.C.,” observed [Michael Mukasey, a former attorney general in the Bush administration who worked with Eisenberg], “it’s a place where a lot of people don’t always carry their weapons in view.” [...]
[...] Making Eisenberg a scapegoat for the Ukraine scandal could prove risky for a president who has alienated many of his former top aides. [...] “If there are any buried bodies, Eisenberg knows where they are,” said a former administration official.
McConnell eyes quick impeachment trial in Senate
Ceterum autem censeo Trump delenda est
posted by kirkaracha at 4:26 PM on October 16, 2019 [4 favorites]
Senate Republicans are preparing for a speedy impeachment trial that concludes before the end of the year.Sure, whenever's convenient for you, Moscow Mitch.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told Senate Republicans on Wednesday that he expects Speaker Nancy Pelosi to approve articles of impeachment as early as Thanksgiving, according to five people familiar with Wednesday’s party lunch. McConnell then surmised that the Senate could deal with the trial by Christmas, concluding the impeachment proceedings before the Democratic presidential primaries begin.
Ceterum autem censeo Trump delenda est
posted by kirkaracha at 4:26 PM on October 16, 2019 [4 favorites]
For a supposedly anti-abortion politician, McConnell sure seems anxious to kill this baby before the investigation has fully gestated.
Which is precisely why the Democrats shouldn’t issue articles of impeachment now. This needs to proceed on a timeline of Speaker Pelosi’s choosing.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 4:38 PM on October 16, 2019 [2 favorites]
Which is precisely why the Democrats shouldn’t issue articles of impeachment now. This needs to proceed on a timeline of Speaker Pelosi’s choosing.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 4:38 PM on October 16, 2019 [2 favorites]
McConnell told senators they would be unable to speak during the trial and that only the chief justice of the Supreme Court, the president’s defenders and the House managers could talk, said one person familiar with the meeting.
Sounds perfectly reasonable, perfectly normal.
posted by benzenedream at 4:39 PM on October 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
Sounds perfectly reasonable, perfectly normal.
posted by benzenedream at 4:39 PM on October 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
Just wow. Nothing like a trial with a predetermined outcome. Banana. Republic.
posted by j_curiouser at 4:47 PM on October 16, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by j_curiouser at 4:47 PM on October 16, 2019 [2 favorites]
Sounds perfectly reasonable, perfectly normal.
That's exactly how the Clinton impeachment was run. You don't want the members of the jury, senators, jumping up and down and giving speeches during the trial.
The House managers give the prosecution's argument. The president's lawyers give the defense rebuttal. Then the senators can submit written questions for the prosecution and defense which the presiding judge reads out loud.
posted by JackFlash at 4:50 PM on October 16, 2019 [17 favorites]
That's exactly how the Clinton impeachment was run. You don't want the members of the jury, senators, jumping up and down and giving speeches during the trial.
The House managers give the prosecution's argument. The president's lawyers give the defense rebuttal. Then the senators can submit written questions for the prosecution and defense which the presiding judge reads out loud.
posted by JackFlash at 4:50 PM on October 16, 2019 [17 favorites]
And after three days of closed-door deliberations, the senate voted on the verdict.
All pretty much as any jury trial precedes.
posted by JackFlash at 4:54 PM on October 16, 2019
All pretty much as any jury trial precedes.
posted by JackFlash at 4:54 PM on October 16, 2019
I'll double down on my prediction that the Senate quickly convicts. Tr*mp no longer has value to McConnell and is becoming a major liability (well beyond the substantive foreign policy disagreements), and there are enough Republican Senators who do NOT have a primary electorate to face in 2020.
posted by PhineasGage at 4:58 PM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 4:58 PM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
The senators act as a jury during an impeachment.
Senate Rules for Impeachment
“We’re gonna give you a fair trial, followed by a first class hanging.” -- Silverado
posted by kirkaracha at 4:59 PM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
Senate Rules for Impeachment
Following is the text of the "Rules of Procedure and Practice in the Senate When Sitting on Impeachment Trials," drafted for the impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson in 1868 and updated after the Watergate scandal in 1974. The 26 rules cover everything from the oath that senators would take (to administer "impartial justice") to a requirement that senators stand by their chairs when they vote.Senate Rules; If Impeachment Seems Strange, Just Wait for the Trial
“We’re gonna give you a fair trial, followed by a first class hanging.” -- Silverado
posted by kirkaracha at 4:59 PM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
That's great, but with McConnell at the helm, any rule that isn't explicitly written into the Constitution (and probably some that are) may as well not exist at all. He's not bound by norms, he's not bound by precedent, and he has no fucks at all to give about how the proceedings will make him and his party look. If he wants Trump to stay, he will likely find a way to make sure Trump stays. If he wants him gone, he's probably gone. Might makes right in McConnellville.
posted by tonycpsu at 5:25 PM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by tonycpsu at 5:25 PM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
I don't think McConnell is worried for even a minute that the senate will convict. He will just expedite proceedings so that Republicans can get this unpleasantness behind them and on to the their real business, the 2020 election. It should be all over in a week.
In the Clinton trial, even though Republicans held a majority, they only got 45 votes for perjury and 50 votes for obstruction. Not even a majority let alone close to the required 67 votes.
I don't expect this trial to be much different.
posted by JackFlash at 5:35 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
In the Clinton trial, even though Republicans held a majority, they only got 45 votes for perjury and 50 votes for obstruction. Not even a majority let alone close to the required 67 votes.
I don't expect this trial to be much different.
posted by JackFlash at 5:35 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
On the Potential Viability of Foreign Agent Charges for Guiliani (Marcy Wheeler, emptywheel)
If the easiest way to end the Ukraine inquiry is to blame Rudy for it all (and if that’s still possible after several weeks of damning testimony), that may well come to pass.posted by katra at 5:38 PM on October 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
And if Bill Barr needs to greenlight a FARA prosecution of Rudy as a way to minimize the damage to the Administration, and to himself, he may well do that (yet another reason why he should have recused long ago).
That’s all the more true given that most of Trump’s aides seem to recognize how damaging Rudy is for Trump’s exposure. If Trump won’t separate himself from Rudy, his lackeys might one day decide, then separate Rudy from Trump by prosecuting him, the same way they separated Michael Cohen from Trump.
That said, with Trump, loyalty is always transactional. And if he believes Rudy has dirt that can bring him down — and given the likelihood some of what Rudy is doing is the continuation of what Paul Manafort had been doing since August 2, 2016, that may be true — then Trump will defend Rudy’s work even if it means claiming everything he did operated under Article II authority. [...]
Yes, Rudy Giuliani is, by all appearances, in blatant violation of FARA. Yes, he may get away with that, in part because DOJ hasn’t yet figured out hard to charge it consistently (though knows what not to do given recent history), and in part because he has made sure to implicate Trump and his cabinet officials.
But there’s a larger question about whether those same financial ties expose Rudy for much uglier conspiracy charges.
Mod note: Couple comments removed. Gentle reminder that "hey I bet we'll all get nuked" isn't a great direction to take comment speculation in, however cynical or doomy you may personally be feeling.
posted by cortex (staff) at 5:40 PM on October 16, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 5:40 PM on October 16, 2019 [12 favorites]
Ex-Aide Saw Gordon Sondland as a Potential National Security Risk (NYT)
The adviser, Fiona Hill, did not accuse Mr. Sondland of acting maliciously or intentionally putting the country at risk. But she described Mr. Sondland, a hotelier and Trump donor-turned-ambassador, as metaphorically driving in an unfamiliar place with no guardrails and no GPS, according to the people, who were not authorized to publicly discuss a deposition that took place behind closed doors.posted by katra at 5:46 PM on October 16, 2019 [15 favorites]
Ms. Hill, the former senior director for European and Russian affairs at the White House, also said that she raised her concerns with intelligence officials inside the White House, one of the people said. [...] In her testimony, Ms. Hill described her fears that Mr. Sondland represented a counterintelligence risk because his actions made him vulnerable to foreign governments who could exploit his inexperience. She said Mr. Sondland extensively used a personal cellphone for official diplomatic business and repeatedly told foreign officials they were welcome to come to the White House whenever they liked.
Ms. Hill said that his invitations, which were highly unusual and not communicated to others at the White House, prompted one instance in which Romanian officials arrived at the White House without appointments, citing Mr. Sondland. Ms. Hill also testified that Mr. Sondland held himself out to foreign officials as someone who could deliver meetings at the White House while also providing the cellphone numbers of American officials to foreigners, the people said. Those actions created additional counterintelligence risks, she said.
McConnell tells Senate Republicans to be ready for impeachment trial of Trump (WaPo)
McConnell said the Senate would likely meet six days a week during the trial, lawmakers said. [...]posted by katra at 5:58 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
Republicans have been trying to coalesce around an impeachment strategy for weeks, lawmakers and aides say. In the House, they have decried the process as unfair and secretive — even as GOP members of the investigative committees have fully participated in deposing the witnesses.
On Wednesday, Trump allies showed up to McKinley’s deposition and tried to enter the private meeting room. They were denied entry, as they are not members of the House panels — and then they raced to the TV cameras to accuse Democrats of hiding investigative work from the public. [...]
Timing was a looming question in the Senate GOP meeting. McConnell said that he expected Pelosi to hold an impeachment vote by Thanksgiving and that the Senate should try to dispose of the issue by Christmas. But he also noted that motions of dismissal of the charges in an impeachment trial are handled at the discretion of the chief justice, who presides over the trial.
In this case, John G. Roberts Jr. would have the final word on how quickly the Senate could move, potentially complicating the GOP’s effort to short-circuit what could become a lengthy trial.
WaPo: 6:45 p.m.: Schiff sends House members update on impeachment, says he intends to make transcripts public
“As the investigation proceeds, and at a time that it will not jeopardize investigative equities, we will make the interview transcripts public, subject to any necessary redactions for classified or sensitive information,” Schiff wrote. “We also anticipate that at an appropriate point in the investigation, we will be taking witness testimony in public, so that the full Congress and the American people can hear their testimony firsthand.”posted by katra at 6:08 PM on October 16, 2019 [22 favorites]
Schiff also pushed back at the claim by Republicans and the White House that the Democrats have blocked GOP members from participating in the interviews with key witnesses, saying both “the majority and minority have been provided equal staff representation and time to question witnesses.”
He also said the decisions by Trump administration agencies and officials, including Vice President Pence, to defy congressional subpoenas would be viewed “as evidence of the President’s effort to obstruct the impeachment inquiry, and we may also use that obstruction as additional evidence of the wrongfulness of the President’s underlying conduct.”
McConnell said that he expected Pelosi to hold an impeachment vote by Thanksgiving and that the Senate should try to dispose of the issue by Christmas.
If a Senate trial were finished today, I have no doubt they would vote to acquit. But this allows another 6-10 weeks for public opinion to further turn against Trump, which gives me a little hope. A little, not a lot, but I'll take it.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 6:25 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
If a Senate trial were finished today, I have no doubt they would vote to acquit. But this allows another 6-10 weeks for public opinion to further turn against Trump, which gives me a little hope. A little, not a lot, but I'll take it.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 6:25 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
Okay help me out here, because I'm not seeing how we get to conviction in the Senate.
Prevailing wisdom seems to be that Republicans in the Senate vote for impeachment if support for impeachment / disapproval of Trump / support for Republican primary challengers rises to some threshold, the value of which varies from opinion to opinion.
The thing I don't get is that those metrics for flipping Republicans has voter pressure as an assumption, and therefore has the integrity of elections as an assumption.
I don't think that's a legit assumption though, right? We know that there was foreign interference in the 2016 election, we know that those efforts have increased for the 2020 election, and we know that beyond foreign interference there is a system of gerrymandering / voter suppression / etc etc etc that is artificially preserving the Republican majority in the Senate and Republican presidencies while the will of the popular vote is ignored. (edit: not to mention they more or less own the judiciary system now)
What evidence is there to suggest that the Republicans would vote to impeach given the massive structural advantages in their favor? What am I missing there?
On the other hand, there is absolutely something all of us do not know about yet with regards to the extent of corruption in the Republican party. The metaphor that Josh Marshall uses is helpful: there is some black hole of awfulness that is exerting a huge pull on the entire party, more or less. That thing, which we can only see the effects of right now and not the actual thing, is strong enough to make dignity wraiths out of old-guard Republicans and straight up-felons and war criminals out of the new(er) crowd. I just don't understand how we ever get a conviction of the President under these circumstances, ever.
I still think that the House should vote to impeach, mind you. I think not doing so would be a total failure of professional and ethical responsibility, not to mention bad politics.
posted by lazaruslong at 6:38 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
Prevailing wisdom seems to be that Republicans in the Senate vote for impeachment if support for impeachment / disapproval of Trump / support for Republican primary challengers rises to some threshold, the value of which varies from opinion to opinion.
The thing I don't get is that those metrics for flipping Republicans has voter pressure as an assumption, and therefore has the integrity of elections as an assumption.
I don't think that's a legit assumption though, right? We know that there was foreign interference in the 2016 election, we know that those efforts have increased for the 2020 election, and we know that beyond foreign interference there is a system of gerrymandering / voter suppression / etc etc etc that is artificially preserving the Republican majority in the Senate and Republican presidencies while the will of the popular vote is ignored. (edit: not to mention they more or less own the judiciary system now)
What evidence is there to suggest that the Republicans would vote to impeach given the massive structural advantages in their favor? What am I missing there?
On the other hand, there is absolutely something all of us do not know about yet with regards to the extent of corruption in the Republican party. The metaphor that Josh Marshall uses is helpful: there is some black hole of awfulness that is exerting a huge pull on the entire party, more or less. That thing, which we can only see the effects of right now and not the actual thing, is strong enough to make dignity wraiths out of old-guard Republicans and straight up-felons and war criminals out of the new(er) crowd. I just don't understand how we ever get a conviction of the President under these circumstances, ever.
I still think that the House should vote to impeach, mind you. I think not doing so would be a total failure of professional and ethical responsibility, not to mention bad politics.
posted by lazaruslong at 6:38 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
I don't think they will either, given the current state of "Republicans". I think we can still beat them at the ballot box. Will take a long time to ever get the Senate, but, these guys don't care about the rule of law.
#RESIST
posted by Windopaene at 6:42 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
#RESIST
posted by Windopaene at 6:42 PM on October 16, 2019 [1 favorite]
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told Senate Republicans on Wednesday that he expects Speaker Nancy Pelosi to approve articles of impeachment as early as Thanksgiving,
Is there any evidence this expectation of Moscow Mitch's originates from anywhere besides his own butthole?
posted by soundguy99 at 6:45 PM on October 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
Is there any evidence this expectation of Moscow Mitch's originates from anywhere besides his own butthole?
posted by soundguy99 at 6:45 PM on October 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
presumably mitch is laying out a short timeline so that he can claim pelosi is “delaying” (because her case is so weak) and “playing politics” when Thanksgiving comes and goes without articles of impeachment.
posted by murphy slaw at 7:01 PM on October 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by murphy slaw at 7:01 PM on October 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
The metaphor that Josh Marshall uses is helpful: there is some black hole of awfulness that is exerting a huge pull on the entire party, more or less.
Yes. It's called Republican primary voters. Who comes out to primaries? They have turnout rates of like 12% on a good day. Fox has pissed off nut jobs in order to get them to vote Republican and because they're so batshit insane and pissed off they come out for the primaries now too.
Republicans who are left are, bar 5 or so senators (Gardener, Collins, Ernst, McSally, Tillis) are going to have non-competitive elections assuming the Blue Wave of 2018 is a high water mark or close to it. Who do they fear? The primary voters. Not the electorate at large.
Even if they do lose a bunch of house seats, so what? They've got a virtual lock on 50 senators and they have 40 senators permanently. Republicans can just monkey wrench anything they want when they're not in power and they can wreck up the place when they're given the levers by a stupid electorate with the long term memory of a goldfish.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:04 PM on October 16, 2019 [24 favorites]
Yes. It's called Republican primary voters. Who comes out to primaries? They have turnout rates of like 12% on a good day. Fox has pissed off nut jobs in order to get them to vote Republican and because they're so batshit insane and pissed off they come out for the primaries now too.
Republicans who are left are, bar 5 or so senators (Gardener, Collins, Ernst, McSally, Tillis) are going to have non-competitive elections assuming the Blue Wave of 2018 is a high water mark or close to it. Who do they fear? The primary voters. Not the electorate at large.
Even if they do lose a bunch of house seats, so what? They've got a virtual lock on 50 senators and they have 40 senators permanently. Republicans can just monkey wrench anything they want when they're not in power and they can wreck up the place when they're given the levers by a stupid electorate with the long term memory of a goldfish.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:04 PM on October 16, 2019 [24 favorites]
Articles of impeachment by Thanksgiving? Pelosi wants to move 'expeditiously' (ABC News, Sep 28, 2019)
Asked about the timeline, senior Democratic aides told ABC News the situation remained fluid, and was contingent on the committees' ongoing investigative work and efforts to follow up on the complaint, but pointed to Pelosi's repeated comments on working "expeditiously."Trump’s Impeachment Blockade Crumbles as Witnesses Agree to Talk (NYT)
One by one, a parade of Trump administration career diplomats and senior officials has offered a cascade of revelations. Those accounts have corroborated and expanded upon key aspects of the whistle-blower complaint that spawned the impeachment inquiry into whether the president abused his power to enlist Ukraine to help him in the 2020 presidential election. [...]posted by katra at 8:04 PM on October 16, 2019 [10 favorites]
“It’s partly because this shadow foreign policy that the president was running was so deeply offensive to people in his own administration who took pride in overseeing a professionally run and arguably exemplary policy in support of Ukraine,” said Representative Tom Malinowski, Democrat of New Jersey and a former State Department official involved in the inquiry.
Referring to Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, he added, “And then to see the official policy undermined by this clownishly corrupt effort led by Rudy Giuliani on behalf of the president was just more than many people apparently could bear.”
Only once has Gallup seen more support for removing a president. Nixon was gone four days later. (WaPo)
New data from Gallup released on Wednesday shows Trump’s approval rating — 39 percent — is about where Nixon’s was in the middle of 1973. The level of support for impeaching him and removing him from office, though — 52 percent — is essentially where Nixon’s would have been right before he resigned in August of the following year. [...]posted by katra at 8:53 PM on October 16, 2019 [19 favorites]
What it does highlight is how uncharted the current territory is. Gallup’s report on support for impeaching Trump notes only 32 percent of the country wanted to see President Bill Clinton removed from office in late 1998. Meaning the only time Americans have ever told Gallup they more strongly support impeaching and removing a president from office — on Aug. 5, 1974 — that president was gone four days later.
Which is, again, why it’s so odd for Trump to be openly fighting with Republicans on Capitol Hill. [...] It’s still unlikely that support for impeachment grows substantially from here (thanks to support from Republican voters), and it’s still unlikely that 20 Republican senators turn on Trump (thanks to their fear of Republican voters).
But Trump fumbling an important alliance while being convinced he’s making all the right decisions is certainly not without recent precedent.
Democrats’ New Impeachment Plan Might Let Rudy Giuliani Skate on Contempt (Jeremy Stahl, Slate)
Subpoenas mean nothing unless they’re enforced. [...]posted by ZeusHumms at 9:09 PM on October 16, 2019 [7 favorites]
The problem for Congress is that there are only two mechanisms available to enforce its subpoenas. Neither option seems to have the backing of House leadership, but a failure to act could help hand Trump a quicker and easier acquittal in the Senate.
The first enforcement option would be to ask the courts to do the work of enforcing Congress’ subpoenas, a process that could take months depending on how urgently the courts deign to act. The second option would be to revive Congress’ long-dormant “inherent contempt” power to arrest—and potentially fine—obstructive witnesses. [...]
The level of support for impeaching him and removing him from office, though — 52 percent — is essentially where Nixon’s would have been right before he resigned in August of the following year.
But if you look at the same poll, 94% of Republicans do not support impeachment. As a Republican, you have to get through the Republican primary, where 94% oppose impeachment, before you can even think about the general election. I can't see any Republicans flipping on their 94%. And as far as the trend since June, that number has gone up from 93%. There is no evidence that the recent revelations have moved the needle one iota.
posted by JackFlash at 9:29 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
But if you look at the same poll, 94% of Republicans do not support impeachment. As a Republican, you have to get through the Republican primary, where 94% oppose impeachment, before you can even think about the general election. I can't see any Republicans flipping on their 94%. And as far as the trend since June, that number has gone up from 93%. There is no evidence that the recent revelations have moved the needle one iota.
posted by JackFlash at 9:29 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
This is so stressful, watching this slow motion death of our country, our democracy. I so want to see the end of this toxic administration. This might sound dumb, but I have been watching The West Wing while reading about all this horror. I just needed to feel what decent people can be like even in the halls of power. Yes it's fiction, but it makes me remember the Obama administration, and what a decent human he is. Yes, he made so many mistakes, but he didn't seem like a horrible scheming opportunist with no empathy what-so-ever. His mistakes weren't because he was trying to enrich himself and his friends, he wasn't a power hungry monster. He was a flawed but decent human. How is it that republicans do not see the same thing that I see? I have been crying a lot.
posted by Belle O'Cosity at 10:52 PM on October 16, 2019 [44 favorites]
posted by Belle O'Cosity at 10:52 PM on October 16, 2019 [44 favorites]
I watched nothing on TV but West Wing reruns for pretty much all of 2017. It helps.
posted by Weeping_angel at 11:14 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Weeping_angel at 11:14 PM on October 16, 2019 [8 favorites]
I can't see any Republicans flipping on their 94%. And as far as the trend since June, that number has gone up from 93%. There is no evidence that the recent revelations have moved the needle one iota.
Well, there's the whole 'party identification' axis as well; the climb from 93->94 could easily be a reduction in the number of never-trumpers identifying as republican. Or just noise, since the error bars on the polls tend to be a few points...
posted by kaibutsu at 11:42 PM on October 16, 2019 [4 favorites]
Well, there's the whole 'party identification' axis as well; the climb from 93->94 could easily be a reduction in the number of never-trumpers identifying as republican. Or just noise, since the error bars on the polls tend to be a few points...
posted by kaibutsu at 11:42 PM on October 16, 2019 [4 favorites]
“Party Identification” is really Fox News identification. Which is a problem for everybody. (Secretly I hope the Republicans will now recognize this and be open to efforts to rectify things. Something something ‘fairness doctrine’)
posted by From Bklyn at 12:49 AM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by From Bklyn at 12:49 AM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
As a Republican, you have to get through the Republican primary, where 94% oppose impeachment, before you can even think about the general election.
If Pelosi could just manage to wait until after primary season...
But I understand that then the impeachment fight will get caught up in the presidential election and Trump will be able to to "defend" himself by talking about that time Elizabeth Warren checked the wrong box on a form or whatever.
Still there are a number of Republicans who are retiring. There are the five who are in swing states who might benefit from rejecting Trump. A third of Senators won't face re-election until 2024. WaPo has 0 Republican senators expressing support for the impeachment inquiry but 15 bold enough to express "concerns" about Trump's behavior. If it's true that Lindsey Graham sold his dignity so he could be in the the room where it happens on national security decision making, he's gotta be pretty pissed at Trump for excluding him after taking delivery on that dignity. And Romney has some room to play because of the large NeverTrump minority in Utah.
I dunno, 15 is not 20, and expressing concerns is not voting to impeach. So probably Trump still skates in the Senate no matter what. But would it be possible to liberate a few more Senators by holding off on impeachment until spring, when the ones who have already got through their primary could join the ones who are retiring in having a little more freedom? Especially if Trump does worse than expected in the Republican presidential primaries (such as they are.)
Or will people be pissed if politicians take the decision on Trump out of the voters' hands that close to an election?
posted by OnceUponATime at 4:33 AM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
If Pelosi could just manage to wait until after primary season...
But I understand that then the impeachment fight will get caught up in the presidential election and Trump will be able to to "defend" himself by talking about that time Elizabeth Warren checked the wrong box on a form or whatever.
Still there are a number of Republicans who are retiring. There are the five who are in swing states who might benefit from rejecting Trump. A third of Senators won't face re-election until 2024. WaPo has 0 Republican senators expressing support for the impeachment inquiry but 15 bold enough to express "concerns" about Trump's behavior. If it's true that Lindsey Graham sold his dignity so he could be in the the room where it happens on national security decision making, he's gotta be pretty pissed at Trump for excluding him after taking delivery on that dignity. And Romney has some room to play because of the large NeverTrump minority in Utah.
I dunno, 15 is not 20, and expressing concerns is not voting to impeach. So probably Trump still skates in the Senate no matter what. But would it be possible to liberate a few more Senators by holding off on impeachment until spring, when the ones who have already got through their primary could join the ones who are retiring in having a little more freedom? Especially if Trump does worse than expected in the Republican presidential primaries (such as they are.)
Or will people be pissed if politicians take the decision on Trump out of the voters' hands that close to an election?
posted by OnceUponATime at 4:33 AM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
Or will people be pissed if politicians take the decision on Trump out of the voters' hands that close to an election?
Well, how many more people would be pissed about that rather than pissed that someone who commits impeachable and criminal offenses again and again and again is allowed to skate through because some politicians are afraid they’ll lose their own election? If getting voted out of office is their primary concern in all this, that’s what they deserve.
The whole point of a process like impeachment is that sometimes even a legitimately elected official will act in a way that is criminal and damaging to our democracy and needs to be removed immediately.
posted by wondermouse at 5:24 AM on October 17, 2019 [9 favorites]
Well, how many more people would be pissed about that rather than pissed that someone who commits impeachable and criminal offenses again and again and again is allowed to skate through because some politicians are afraid they’ll lose their own election? If getting voted out of office is their primary concern in all this, that’s what they deserve.
The whole point of a process like impeachment is that sometimes even a legitimately elected official will act in a way that is criminal and damaging to our democracy and needs to be removed immediately.
posted by wondermouse at 5:24 AM on October 17, 2019 [9 favorites]
Mod note: Not a megathread
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 6:12 AM on October 17, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 6:12 AM on October 17, 2019 [13 favorites]
Ambassador to E.U. to Testify That Trump Delegated Ukraine Policy to Giuliani (NYT)
According to a copy of his opening statement obtained by the New York Times, Mr. Sondland will say that Mr. Trump refused to take the counsel of his top diplomats, who recommended to him that he meet with the new Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, without any preconditions. The president said that the diplomats needed to satisfy concerns both he and Mr. Giuliani had related corruption in Ukraine, Mr. Sondland will say. [...]posted by katra at 7:06 AM on October 17, 2019 [12 favorites]
“Please know that I would not have recommended that Mr. Giuliani or any private citizen be involved in these foreign policy matters,” he planned to say. “However, given the president’s explicit direction, as well as the importance we attached to arranging a White House meeting between Presidents Trump and Zelensky, we agreed to do as President Trump directed.”
Mr. Sondland will say that he; Kurt D. Volker, the special envoy to Ukraine, and Rick Perry, the energy secretary, began coordinating with Mr. Giuliani, who insisted the Ukrainians put out a statement committing to a series of investigations. The ambassador will say that he failed to appreciate how Burisma, a company that Mr. Giuliani wanted the Ukranians to look into, was directly tied to Hunter Biden, the former vice president’s son.
Or will people be pissed if politicians take the decision on Trump out of the voters' hands that close to an election?
Sure, Republicans will be pissed but they’ll be pissed regardless. Don’t fall into the trap of conflating Trump’s win in 2016 as a mandate from the voters. It wasn’t. He legally and constitutionally won the election but it was not a small-D democratic win.
Trump and his apologists do this all the time — they make claims that he’s “the People’s president“ or that Democrats are trying to undo the election and it’s utter poppycock. They won on a technicality but govern like it was a landslide. And they try to gaslight us into accepting their desired reality.
Properly executed, impeachment will not only lay out Trump’s specific crimes but also lay bare the GOP’s anti-constitutional theory of rule. Don’t - under any circumstances - let them dictate the terms of the debate.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:08 AM on October 17, 2019 [52 favorites]
Sure, Republicans will be pissed but they’ll be pissed regardless. Don’t fall into the trap of conflating Trump’s win in 2016 as a mandate from the voters. It wasn’t. He legally and constitutionally won the election but it was not a small-D democratic win.
Trump and his apologists do this all the time — they make claims that he’s “the People’s president“ or that Democrats are trying to undo the election and it’s utter poppycock. They won on a technicality but govern like it was a landslide. And they try to gaslight us into accepting their desired reality.
Properly executed, impeachment will not only lay out Trump’s specific crimes but also lay bare the GOP’s anti-constitutional theory of rule. Don’t - under any circumstances - let them dictate the terms of the debate.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:08 AM on October 17, 2019 [52 favorites]
Is disbarment of Giuliani a plausible punishment for not answering a subpoena?
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:31 AM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:31 AM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
Or will people be pissed if politicians take the decision on Trump out of the voters' hands that close to an election?
Putting decisions in voters hands generally seems to fail on both sides of the Atlantic.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:55 AM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
Putting decisions in voters hands generally seems to fail on both sides of the Atlantic.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:55 AM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
Marcy Wheeler is tweeting her way through Sondland's dissembling opening statement, if anyone is looking for a deep dive into this hot mess..
posted by cudzoo at 7:59 AM on October 17, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by cudzoo at 7:59 AM on October 17, 2019 [12 favorites]
Putting decisions in voters hands generally seems to fail on both sides of the Atlantic.
Most voters definitely didn't want this. We just have stupid rules on this side of the Atlantic that mean the candidate with the lower number of votes somehow gets to win sometimes.
posted by delicious-luncheon at 8:17 AM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
Most voters definitely didn't want this. We just have stupid rules on this side of the Atlantic that mean the candidate with the lower number of votes somehow gets to win sometimes.
posted by delicious-luncheon at 8:17 AM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
We just have stupid rules on this side of the Atlantic
Oh they're not stupid. They're clever. And racist.
posted by Harry Caul at 8:26 AM on October 17, 2019 [23 favorites]
Oh they're not stupid. They're clever. And racist.
posted by Harry Caul at 8:26 AM on October 17, 2019 [23 favorites]
Impeachment handled correctly will spell out that Republicans have sold out democracy and rule of law at home and abroad for political gain. There's no guarantee that Trump will be impeached. The United States may continue its march toward autocracy, but it will do so with open eyes.
posted by xammerboy at 9:13 AM on October 17, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 9:13 AM on October 17, 2019 [7 favorites]
IIRC, Donald J. Trump is registered to vote in NY-12, so his Representative -- the only one he should have in a Nation of Laws -- is Carolyn Maloney.
WaPo: 10 a.m.: Maloney becomes acting Oversight Committee chair due to seniority
posted by katra at 9:16 AM on October 17, 2019 [13 favorites]
WaPo: 10 a.m.: Maloney becomes acting Oversight Committee chair due to seniority
Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.), the second-highest ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, will become the panel’s acting chair following the passing of Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), according to a senior Democratic leadership aide.Obituary thread for Rep. Cummings is here.
posted by katra at 9:16 AM on October 17, 2019 [13 favorites]
Marcy Wheeler is tweeting her way through Sondland's dissembling opening statement
Sondland several times uses the evasive phrase "electronic communications" between him, Guiliani and Volker. I hope someone asks him if he is referring to WhatsApp and whether he made copies of those communications for the State Department within 20 days as required by federal law. I'm guessing most are deleted.
Or perhaps they should just ask Sondland if they should lock 'em up.
posted by JackFlash at 9:19 AM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
Sondland several times uses the evasive phrase "electronic communications" between him, Guiliani and Volker. I hope someone asks him if he is referring to WhatsApp and whether he made copies of those communications for the State Department within 20 days as required by federal law. I'm guessing most are deleted.
Or perhaps they should just ask Sondland if they should lock 'em up.
posted by JackFlash at 9:19 AM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
Marcy Wheeler is tweeting her way through Sondland's dissembling opening statement
"My goodness this statement is a swiss cheese shitshow."
posted by kirkaracha at 9:24 AM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
"My goodness this statement is a swiss cheese shitshow."
posted by kirkaracha at 9:24 AM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
House Oversight asks court to expedite subpoena order for Trump's finances (The Hill)
The House Oversight and Reform Committee asked a federal appeals court to expedite the enforcement of a subpoena for President Trump's financial records, citing Democrats' ongoing impeachment inquiry. [...] The motion comes just days after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the Oversight Committee's subpoena of the financial firm Mazars, in a sweeping victory for the House Democrats. The subpoena was issued earlier this year prior to the launch of the impeachment inquiry.posted by katra at 9:30 AM on October 17, 2019 [9 favorites]
At this point The People have gotten almost 3 out of the 4 years of the term they voted for, so it’s not like they should expect a refund.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 9:34 AM on October 17, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Huffy Puffy at 9:34 AM on October 17, 2019 [5 favorites]
Yeah and also the product was flawed.
posted by Namlit at 9:36 AM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Namlit at 9:36 AM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
The people have called the customer service and demanded a replacement.
posted by hat_eater at 9:43 AM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by hat_eater at 9:43 AM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
Would Trump quit? One Wall Street firm looks at the potential and its market ramifications (CNBC)
“While we acknowledge this is a low probability event, the question we are hearing more often in DC is: What if President Trump decides to walk away from the presidency and voluntarily resigns prior to being impeached and/or having to release his tax returns?” wrote Chris Meekins and Ed Mills, policy research analysts at Raymond James.posted by katra at 9:48 AM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
Market impact likely would be minimal, according to the analysis, which sees the emergence of Vice President Mike Pence as the GOP standard-bearer providing stability for Wall Street and the economy. [...] Nevertheless, should his approach change and he decides to step down, “Trump would not go down in history as one of the only impeached presidents,” the Raymond James analysts added. “His tax returns, which he does not want to give to become public while President ... kind of become a non-issue. Trump can go make even more money and maybe start his own media network, which reportedly was the initial plan.”
Let's not forget that "the people" voted for Hillary Clinton by a margin that would have been considered an overwhelming victory in any other circumstance.
The majority of voters did not ask for this.
posted by schmod at 9:55 AM on October 17, 2019 [35 favorites]
The majority of voters did not ask for this.
posted by schmod at 9:55 AM on October 17, 2019 [35 favorites]
“Trump would not go down in history as one of the only impeached presidents,” the Raymond James analysts added.
Nonsense on stilts. The first word that comes to anyone's mind when Nixon is mentioned is "impeachment" even though he wasn't impeached. It's much too late for this asshole too.
posted by Quindar Beep at 9:58 AM on October 17, 2019 [18 favorites]
Nonsense on stilts. The first word that comes to anyone's mind when Nixon is mentioned is "impeachment" even though he wasn't impeached. It's much too late for this asshole too.
posted by Quindar Beep at 9:58 AM on October 17, 2019 [18 favorites]
Giuliani's work for Iranian group with bloody past could lead to more legal woes (NBC News)
Giuliani ally Michael Mukasey’s move to register as a lobbyist for an Iranian dissident group may spur the DOJ to investigate, experts say.
Giuliani ally Michael Mukasey’s move to register as a lobbyist for an Iranian dissident group may spur the DOJ to investigate, experts say.
In the spring of 2017, former U.S. attorney general Michael Mukasey met with representatives of the Iranian dissident group Mujahedeen e-Khalq (MEK), a State Department-designated foreign terrorist organization until 2012. Mukasey wasn't alone. Joining him at the meeting was another high-profile American political figure: Rudy Giuliani.posted by katra at 10:04 AM on October 17, 2019 [7 favorites]
For nearly a decade, the former law partners have pushed the agenda of the MEK, giving paid speeches and writing newspaper op-eds expressing support for a group linked to the deaths of six Americans in the 1970s. But it wasn’t until late last month that Mukasey registered as a foreign agent lobbying pro bono for MEK’s political arm. Giuliani still hasn’t, raising the possibility that the Justice Department could target him in an illegal lobbying probe, experts say. [...]
“This certainly walks like a FARA issue and talks like a FARA issue,” said Matthew Sanderson, a defense lawyer who specializes in foreign lobbying cases. He said the Justice Department will likely try to “develop facts to determine whether these efforts to influence public opinion in the U.S. were at the request or direction of MEK, a foreign interest.”
“This is a particularly unusual situation because Mr. Giuliani was acting as the president’s counsel, all while acting in ways that suggest he was simultaneously representing certain foreign interests,” Sanderson said. [...]
Daniel Benjamin, a State Department counterterrorism coordinator from 2009 to 2012, has focused extensively on the network of American politicians who have been paid by MEK, including Giuliani and Mukasey. [...] “The big question,” Benjamin added, "is where does all this money come from?”
What if President Trump decides to walk away from the presidency and voluntarily resigns prior to being impeached and/or having to release his tax returns?
As I pointed out before, Trump can't resign. Being President is all that shields him from criminal investigation and prosecution -- even if Pence pardoned him, New York State would come at him hard -- and the only bulwark he has against having his tax returns released.
Remember the speculation that he ran for president in the first place in part as a shield against the criminal activities that were probably catching up to him even then -- the "event horizon" of wrongdoing that Josh Marshall described? And evidence of criminal activity in office has been piling up. Trump isn't going anywhere until we vote him out.
posted by Gelatin at 10:09 AM on October 17, 2019 [10 favorites]
As I pointed out before, Trump can't resign. Being President is all that shields him from criminal investigation and prosecution -- even if Pence pardoned him, New York State would come at him hard -- and the only bulwark he has against having his tax returns released.
Remember the speculation that he ran for president in the first place in part as a shield against the criminal activities that were probably catching up to him even then -- the "event horizon" of wrongdoing that Josh Marshall described? And evidence of criminal activity in office has been piling up. Trump isn't going anywhere until we vote him out.
posted by Gelatin at 10:09 AM on October 17, 2019 [10 favorites]
Mick Mulvaney just said in a live press conference that the White House held up Ukraine's military aid to get the government there to agree to look into the origins of the Russia probe, and anybody who doesn't like it should "get over it."
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 10:14 AM on October 17, 2019 [58 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 10:14 AM on October 17, 2019 [58 favorites]
Aaaaand we've fully reached the "Yeah, we did it, it wasn't wrong" stage.
Hands up everyone who called this two months ago
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:22 AM on October 17, 2019 [61 favorites]
Hands up everyone who called this two months ago
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:22 AM on October 17, 2019 [61 favorites]
Aaaaand we've fully reached the "Yeah, we did it, it wasn't wrong" stage.
Of course. Why not? By holding the G7 at Doral, they're even more openly flouting the emoluments clause.
posted by Gelatin at 10:25 AM on October 17, 2019 [14 favorites]
Of course. Why not? By holding the G7 at Doral, they're even more openly flouting the emoluments clause.
posted by Gelatin at 10:25 AM on October 17, 2019 [14 favorites]
[A message to] House Democrats: It's time to include Trump's shady Syria/Turkey deal in impeachment inquiry (Amanda Marcotte, Salon)
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:32 AM on October 17, 2019 [15 favorites]
Trump's desperation to keep anyone from looking too closely here is all the more reason to do so. In fact, Democrats need to seriously consider expanding the impeachment inquiry to look at why, exactly, Trump is so eager to please Erdoğan, even above his own party. […] So the question is, what is Trump getting out of this, and have any laws been broken in selling out American interests to Turkey?Syria/Turkey thread.
Democrats don't even really need to expand the scope of the basic impeachment focus to include this Turkey/Syria situation. After all, the existing impeachment inquiry is about Trump illegally using foreign policy for personal gain at the expense of American interests in Ukraine. The only question now is how many other foreign policy mishaps are guided by the same Trumpian self-interest, what crimes he's committing to achieve self-interest, and how many lives are being lost because of it.
Trump's wild, defensive behavior around this situation is remarkably reminiscent of every other time he has lashed out hysterically because he has a guilty conscience and is afraid of being caught doing something corrupt or illegal. […]
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:32 AM on October 17, 2019 [15 favorites]
Let's not forget that "the people" voted for Hillary Clinton by a margin that would have been considered an overwhelming victory in any other circumstance.
She definitely got the most votes, but "overwhelming" is a stretch. According the list of United States presidential elections by popular vote margin, Clinton won the popular vote by a margin of 2.09%, putting her near the bottom end of the list, between Jimmy Carter in 1976 and George W. Bush in 2004. By contrast, five presidents have won by popular vote margins of over 20%.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:32 AM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
She definitely got the most votes, but "overwhelming" is a stretch. According the list of United States presidential elections by popular vote margin, Clinton won the popular vote by a margin of 2.09%, putting her near the bottom end of the list, between Jimmy Carter in 1976 and George W. Bush in 2004. By contrast, five presidents have won by popular vote margins of over 20%.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:32 AM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
Guardian: Well, that was a whirlwind of a press briefing from Mick Mulvaney. Here are some of the key points that Trump’s acting chief of staff covered: [...]
posted by katra at 10:36 AM on October 17, 2019 [15 favorites]
Here’s the real kicker: after weeks of Trump claiming there was no quid pro quo involved in the delaying of military aid to Ukraine, Mulvaney confirmed that there was indeed a quid pro quo. However, he said the quid pro quo in question involved an investigation of a debunked conspiracy theory from the 2016 election and not a probe of Joe Biden. Mulvaney said this distinction made the request acceptable, but it is safe to assume that any ethics expert would take issue with that argument.Guardian: However, the White House’s own memo on the president’s call with the Ukrainian president shows that Trump brought up a potential investigation of Biden and his son, despite lacking any evidence to back up his corruption claims against the pair.
Mulvaney said it should be taken as a given that political calculations would factor into foreign policy decisions, and he offered this advice to reporters: “Get over it.”
posted by katra at 10:36 AM on October 17, 2019 [15 favorites]
Mulvaney said it should be taken as a given that political calculations would factor into foreign policy decisions, and he offered this advice to reporters: “Get over it.”
Yeah, right. That's why the White House staff panicked and hid the readout of the Zelensky call in a secure server meant for classified information.
I hope the press isn't fooled by this false bravado, but instead sees it for the weak and panicky flailing it is.
[Ron Howard narrator voice:] The press is fooled by false bravado.
posted by Gelatin at 10:39 AM on October 17, 2019 [29 favorites]
Yeah, right. That's why the White House staff panicked and hid the readout of the Zelensky call in a secure server meant for classified information.
I hope the press isn't fooled by this false bravado, but instead sees it for the weak and panicky flailing it is.
[Ron Howard narrator voice:] The press is fooled by false bravado.
posted by Gelatin at 10:39 AM on October 17, 2019 [29 favorites]
Sondland is pretty determined not to be the fall guy for this.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 10:54 AM on October 17, 2019 [18 favorites]
“Please know that I would not have recommended that Mr. Giuliani or any private citizen be involved in these foreign policy matters. However, given the President’s explicit direction, as well as the importance we attached to arranging a White House meeting between Presidents Trump and Zelensky, we agreed to do as President Trump directed,” Sondland wrote.Far from throwing Trump and Rudy under a bus, Sondland saw the bus coming, stopped it, strapped Trump and Rudy down in its path, attached a rocket to the back of the bus, and set it moving again using said rocket.
“Based on the President’s direction, we were faced with a choice: We could abandon the goal of a White House meeting for President Zelensky, which we all believed was crucial to strengthening U.S.-Ukrainian ties and furthering long-held U.S. foreign policy goals in the region; or we could do as President Trump directed and talk to Mr. Giuliani to address the President’s concerns.”
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 10:54 AM on October 17, 2019 [18 favorites]
President Trump still has friends on Capitol Hill. (NYT)
At noon on Thursday, supporters of Mr. Trump will gather outside the Capitol to rally against Mr. Trump’s impeachment.posted by katra at 10:59 AM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
Some of headliners are to be expected: Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 2 Republican in the House, Representative John Rutherford, Republican of Florida, and Matt Schlapp, head of the American Conservative Union and one of the president’s most dogged defenders,
Others? Well, they certainly have been in Mr. Trump’s orbit. Highlighted for the rally is Jack Posobiec, one of the most prominent promulgators of “Pizzagate,” which held that Hillary Clinton ran a child trafficking operation out of the back of a Washington pizzeria.
It's time to include Trump's shady Syria/Turkey deal in impeachment inquiry
Just like the Ukraine scandal is linked to the Russia scandal (thanks Mick Mulvaney for clarifying that relationship), so too is the Syria scandal...
Jonathan Spyer for the usually very Trumpist WSJ opinion page (long quote because of the WSJ's hard paywall):
Putin Is the New King of Syria
Just like the Ukraine scandal is linked to the Russia scandal (thanks Mick Mulvaney for clarifying that relationship), so too is the Syria scandal...
Jonathan Spyer for the usually very Trumpist WSJ opinion page (long quote because of the WSJ's hard paywall):
Putin Is the New King of Syria
"Vladimir Putin is now the indispensable strategic arbiter in Syria. None of the remaining pieces on the broken chessboard can move without Mr. Putin’s hand. The Assad regime owes its survival to Moscow’s air intervention in September 2015. This reporter and others who have spent time in Damascus note the impunity with which Russian security and other personnel conduct themselves. They are effectively beyond the reach of the local authorities.posted by OnceUponATime at 11:07 AM on October 17, 2019 [19 favorites]
[..] The SDF [the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces] consists of some 100,000 seasoned fighters. Until this week it was the sole armed force able to operate east of the Euphrates. Since late 2015, when U.S. Special Forces helped to midwife the alliance, the SDF’s constituent parts—the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) as well as Assyrian Christian forces and Arab tribal militias—have fought under a single banner. In the victorious campaign to retake territory from Islamic State, the SDF has been the decisive actor and the U.S. ground partner of choice. Suddenly this powerful army appears to be coming under Russian control.
The Kurds still operate their civilian administration east of the Euphrates. Their forlorn hope is to salvage and maintain as much as they can of the autonomy they have painstakingly built since 2012. Baathist regimes—Mr. Assad’s as well as Saddam Hussein’s —are noted for unforgiving attitudes toward ethnic separatist projects, and especially those of the Kurds. But the ruling Kurdish party in eastern Syria maintains an office in Moscow. Such hopes as remain will depend on Russia. No one else is available.
Turkey will also depend on Russia to maintain its project in northern Syria. It isn’t clear if there was prior Russian knowledge of the Turkish operation. But by triggering America’s departure and then the rush of the Kurds to embrace Mr. Assad, Turkey’s action delivered two long-sought gifts to Moscow.
[...]
If Israel wishes to continue its clandestine war against Iranian weapons transfers and infrastructure-building in Syria, it will be able to do so only with Russian permission, in an arena in which Moscow’s hand is now profoundly stronger. Expect a busy shuttle route to Moscow for whoever emerges as Israel’s prime minister.
Mr. Assad, the Kurds, Turkey and Israel all now depend on Moscow’s approval to advance their interests in Syria. This outcome has been sealed by this week’s sudden windfall, all without the firing of a single Russian bullet. All roads to Syria now run through Moscow. Mr. Putin could hardly ask for more."
What if President Trump decides to walk away from the presidency and voluntarily resigns prior to being impeached and/or having to release his tax returns?”
I call this the "let's hope this guy's demonstrated laziness kicks in and he decides to just quit" theory. Which would be consistent with his past decisions. But then...
Trump can't resign. Being President is all that shields him from criminal investigation and prosecution -- even if Pence pardoned him, New York State would come at him hard -- and the only bulwark he has against having his tax returns released.
A strong counterargument! However, there's always the possibility that this notoriously bad-at-thinking-ahead president decides to roll the dice and hope that, once again, his lawyers can drag things out indefinitely and keep him out of jail. Which, again, is not impossible and certainly lines up with his past record.
The one other complicating factor might be not his fear of prosecution but his fear of Putin, who could not only stop funding his business but might actually decide to take him out. I don't know if that's actually likely; would a post-presidential Trump be any real threat to Putin? But I guess it's possible.
posted by emjaybee at 11:11 AM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
I call this the "let's hope this guy's demonstrated laziness kicks in and he decides to just quit" theory. Which would be consistent with his past decisions. But then...
Trump can't resign. Being President is all that shields him from criminal investigation and prosecution -- even if Pence pardoned him, New York State would come at him hard -- and the only bulwark he has against having his tax returns released.
A strong counterargument! However, there's always the possibility that this notoriously bad-at-thinking-ahead president decides to roll the dice and hope that, once again, his lawyers can drag things out indefinitely and keep him out of jail. Which, again, is not impossible and certainly lines up with his past record.
The one other complicating factor might be not his fear of prosecution but his fear of Putin, who could not only stop funding his business but might actually decide to take him out. I don't know if that's actually likely; would a post-presidential Trump be any real threat to Putin? But I guess it's possible.
posted by emjaybee at 11:11 AM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
Trump directed his energy secretary to work with Giuliani on Ukraine: Mulvaney (Reuters)
President Donald Trump asked U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry to work with personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani on matters involving Ukraine, acting White House chief of staff Mike Mulvaney said on Thursday, adding that he himself was not asked to do so.posted by katra at 11:29 AM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
Sondland’s testimony raises new questions about Giuliani’s role in scandal (Paul Waldman, WaPo Opinion)
I spoke about this bizarre situation with Heather Hurlburt, a foreign policy expert at New America who served in the White House and the State Department under Bill Clinton. She noted that friends and relatives of presidents will occasionally show up at an embassy and offer their extremely unwanted assistance with one matter or another. “But to have that presented as, ‘No, this person is actually in charge of policy and you, the Senate-confirmed person in the role, will stand aside in favor of the president’s friend/lawyer’ is totally unheard of," Hurlburt told me.posted by katra at 11:38 AM on October 17, 2019 [11 favorites]
Even having Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union, managing Ukraine policy is unprecedented. “It is not normal for any ambassador to get that far out of their lane,” Hurlburt said. “The E.U. portfolio does not include managing relations with Ukraine. And no normal secretary of state would allow or encourage that because it would just make your building unmanageable.”
It isn’t that there aren’t sometimes cases where authority is moved around or temporarily given to one figure over another. But when it happens, Hurlburt told me, “it’s all done through a process that’s public, it’s announced, everybody knows who you’re supposed to be dealing with, and the power relations of it are deliberately made explicit throughout the bureaucracy."
This is kind of the opposite of that, where we set up a different group of people who get to decide what happens in Ukraine and we don’t want that to be apparent to anyone," Hurlburt continued.
I cannot wait for the impeachment interview transcripts to come out. From Axios' Alayna Treene:
A GOP committee source following Mulvaney’s press briefing: “His diatribe has blown up the Sondland interview—Democrats are referring to the transcript mid-interview. WTF”posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:43 AM on October 17, 2019 [31 favorites]
would a post-presidential Trump be any real threat to Putin?
More the opposite; Putin would retain whatever kompromat he had on Trump before his election, and all the incriminating evidence -- recordings of phone calls, notes taken by the Russians when no Americans were present, etc. -- he's accumulated since.
(By the way, one of the reasons Trump was stupid to allow meetings with only Russian note takers present is that he couldn't refute whatever transcripts or notes Putin saw fit to release.)
posted by Gelatin at 11:47 AM on October 17, 2019 [12 favorites]
More the opposite; Putin would retain whatever kompromat he had on Trump before his election, and all the incriminating evidence -- recordings of phone calls, notes taken by the Russians when no Americans were present, etc. -- he's accumulated since.
(By the way, one of the reasons Trump was stupid to allow meetings with only Russian note takers present is that he couldn't refute whatever transcripts or notes Putin saw fit to release.)
posted by Gelatin at 11:47 AM on October 17, 2019 [12 favorites]
katra: Market impact likely would be minimal, according to the analysis, which sees the emergence of Vice President Mike Pence as the GOP standard-bearer providing stability for Wall Street and the economy.
Pence would likely be more stable than Trump, and might be a boon to the economy, if he backed down on the tariff battles that Trump likes to jump into. If Trump's ousted (I agree with Gelatin's thoughts that stepping down voluntarily is highly unlikely, given his well-documented crimes)
Gelatin: By holding the G7 at Doral, they're even more openly flouting the emoluments clause.
Trump Says He'll Host G7 Summit at His Own Miami Resort (Jerry Iannelli for Miami New Times, Oct. 17, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 11:49 AM on October 17, 2019 [10 favorites]
Pence would likely be more stable than Trump, and might be a boon to the economy, if he backed down on the tariff battles that Trump likes to jump into. If Trump's ousted (I agree with Gelatin's thoughts that stepping down voluntarily is highly unlikely, given his well-documented crimes)
Gelatin: By holding the G7 at Doral, they're even more openly flouting the emoluments clause.
Trump Says He'll Host G7 Summit at His Own Miami Resort (Jerry Iannelli for Miami New Times, Oct. 17, 2019)
In a news conference this afternoon, Donald Trump's chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, announced to the media that the president will host the 2020 G7 Summit — a meeting in which leaders of the seven largest economies on the planet meet to discuss world issues — at Trump National Doral Miami, which the president owns (and profits from).That is, if Trump's still in office. TTTCS.
Rumors had swirled for months that he was planning to host the G7 at one of his properties. In August, Trump himself said he was considering hosting the summit at his Doral golf resort — a prospect critics promptly deemed one of the most transparently corrupt and self-interested stunts the president could pull while in office.
"We are announcing today that we are going to do the 46th G7 Summit on June 10 through June 12 at the Trump National Doral facility in Miami, Florida," the chief of staff declared from the lectern. "The focus of the event will be global growth and challenges to the global economy."
posted by filthy light thief at 11:49 AM on October 17, 2019 [10 favorites]
I can't wait to be told the White House Chief of Staff doesn't speak for the President*.
It was an informal remark, at an off the record press conference, about matters the chief of staff isn't involved with, also he's only a coffee boy really.
I joke, but they won't be joking when they try this. And they will.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 11:55 AM on October 17, 2019 [20 favorites]
It was an informal remark, at an off the record press conference, about matters the chief of staff isn't involved with, also he's only a coffee boy really.
I joke, but they won't be joking when they try this. And they will.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 11:55 AM on October 17, 2019 [20 favorites]
I don't care if Congress never thought they'd have to write an actual law saying "it's illegal for the president to use the power of his office to induce foreign governments to influence the presidential election by finding or manufacturing incriminating evidence on his or her opponent." Doing so -- as Trump did -- is an abuse of office regardless of whether it's a crime, and it's impeachable for that reason alone.
Mulvaney's gambit is in part to define "politically motivated" broadly so that said abuse of power is in the same set as "a brilliant foreign policy coup that will make the president more politically popular." It's inherently dishonest, but then so is Mulvaney.
posted by Gelatin at 11:58 AM on October 17, 2019 [7 favorites]
Mulvaney's gambit is in part to define "politically motivated" broadly so that said abuse of power is in the same set as "a brilliant foreign policy coup that will make the president more politically popular." It's inherently dishonest, but then so is Mulvaney.
posted by Gelatin at 11:58 AM on October 17, 2019 [7 favorites]
kirkaracha - by including Hillary Clinton who did not become president in spite of her margin in the popular vote, you would have to include the others who did not become president in spite of an up to 2.09% margin. That includes Andrew Jackson (as a loser), Grover Cleveland (as a loser), Samuel Tilden, Al Gore, Winfield Hancock, James Blaine, Richard Nixon (as a loser), Henry Clay (one of his losses), Hubert Humphrey, and Gerald Ford. So, she didn't do so badly.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 11:58 AM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 11:58 AM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
Just learned of Dan Sinker's daily recap of all the impeachment news, impeachment.fyi, via Mike Monteiro's newsletter.
posted by PhineasGage at 12:07 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 12:07 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
Mulvaney's gambit is in part to define "politically motivated" broadly so that said abuse of power is in the same set as "a brilliant foreign policy coup that will make the president more politically popular." It's inherently dishonest, but then so is Mulvaney.
Reuters redirected the original link I posted to a different article, but I found it again, and as you were saying, Gelatin:
posted by katra at 12:14 PM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
Reuters redirected the original link I posted to a different article, but I found it again, and as you were saying, Gelatin:
Mulvaney denied it was improper to conduct diplomacy with Ukraine through a private citizen who is the president’s personal lawyer. “There’s not a shadow policy here. The president is entitled to have whoever he wants to work,” Mulvaney told a White House news conference.'Inherently dishonest,' indeed.
posted by katra at 12:14 PM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
So what if
What if Mulvaney is showing us here the first signs of an imminent palace revolution...
I mean, assumed that he wanted to tip the balance in exactly the way it seems to be tipping now, while trying to avoid the risk of getting in the way of Trump base wrath.
With an unrepentant and not very tactically-thinking boss, an unworkable and volatile situation at the workplace, and doom on the horizon, what would one do if not exactly this: say just a little too much, throw a few denial soundbites into the mix to make it seem like you're defending the other side, end with "get over it" and hope for the best.
posted by Namlit at 12:28 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
What if Mulvaney is showing us here the first signs of an imminent palace revolution...
I mean, assumed that he wanted to tip the balance in exactly the way it seems to be tipping now, while trying to avoid the risk of getting in the way of Trump base wrath.
With an unrepentant and not very tactically-thinking boss, an unworkable and volatile situation at the workplace, and doom on the horizon, what would one do if not exactly this: say just a little too much, throw a few denial soundbites into the mix to make it seem like you're defending the other side, end with "get over it" and hope for the best.
posted by Namlit at 12:28 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
Jim @Acosta, CNN: Trump outside attorney Jay Sekulow to CNN: "The legal team was not involved in the Acting Chief of Staff's press briefing."
What did I just say?
posted by scaryblackdeath at 12:33 PM on October 17, 2019 [34 favorites]
What did I just say?
posted by scaryblackdeath at 12:33 PM on October 17, 2019 [34 favorites]
Guardian: Schiff: Mulvaney's quid pro quo admission makes impeachment situation 'much worse'
Geoff Bennett (@GeoffRBennett)posted by katra at 12:34 PM on October 17, 2019 [16 favorites]
Schiff when asked about Mulvaney admission of quid pro quo: The situation has “gone from very, very bad to much, much worse.” I asked if he hopes to bring Mulvaney in for a deposition. Schiff said he had “nothing further to add at this time.”
October 17, 2019
WaPo on the Doral G7:
President Trump has awarded the 2020 Group of Seven summit of world leaders to his private company, scheduling the summit for June at his Trump Doral golf resort outside Miami, the White House announced Thursday.Or, as Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington puts it:
That decision is without precedent in modern American history: The president used his public office to direct a massive contract to himself.
“The president is now officially using the power of his office to help prop up his struggling golf business.There appears to be no bottom to President Trump’s corruption. What matters most to him is his personal profit and personal advancement, not the best interests of the American people. There is now no question that the American government is being used as a public relations and marketing subsidiary of the Trump Organization.”posted by box at 12:40 PM on October 17, 2019 [35 favorites]
My sense of Mulvaney's press conference is somewhat darker: this is the rhetoric of impending rebellion. To wit, the subtext I hear is, 'We did it, it's not wrong because everyone does it, so get over it. If you don't get over it--if you try to hold us accountable over some arcane, irrelevant concept like "legality"--you are attempting a coup, to overthrow the democratically-elected president without cause, and we will respond to an attempted coup however necessary.'
Obviously I hope I'm wrong, but either Mulvaney is dumber than even my very low opinion allows for, or this is a deliberate tactic. It's definitely confusing, because it belies a strategy that no sane, sensible, peace-loving person would pursue; but it sure did sound like a deliberate set of answers to me. (Or, he really is that dumb and actually thinks that his argument is persuasive and somehow not likely to land him in prison. But wow, that degree of stupid just makes me wonder how a person, like, remembers to eat and dress themselves.)
posted by LooseFilter at 12:48 PM on October 17, 2019 [5 favorites]
Obviously I hope I'm wrong, but either Mulvaney is dumber than even my very low opinion allows for, or this is a deliberate tactic. It's definitely confusing, because it belies a strategy that no sane, sensible, peace-loving person would pursue; but it sure did sound like a deliberate set of answers to me. (Or, he really is that dumb and actually thinks that his argument is persuasive and somehow not likely to land him in prison. But wow, that degree of stupid just makes me wonder how a person, like, remembers to eat and dress themselves.)
posted by LooseFilter at 12:48 PM on October 17, 2019 [5 favorites]
At this point I think the other 6 of the G7 should decline the invitation. Particularly as each country likely has legislation similar to the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act that will place those leaders in legal jeopardy for participating in American corruption.
posted by srboisvert at 12:55 PM on October 17, 2019 [68 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 12:55 PM on October 17, 2019 [68 favorites]
My sense of Mulvaney's press conference is somewhat darker: this is the rhetoric of impending rebellion.
This is exactly how many people said it was going to go:
"We didn't do it."
"You can't prove we did it."
"It's not that bad that we did it."
"We had very good reasons for doing it."
"It doesn't matter whether we did it, whether you can prove it, whether it's bad, or whether we had good reasons. Fuck you."
posted by Etrigan at 1:01 PM on October 17, 2019 [25 favorites]
This is exactly how many people said it was going to go:
"We didn't do it."
"You can't prove we did it."
"It's not that bad that we did it."
"We had very good reasons for doing it."
"It doesn't matter whether we did it, whether you can prove it, whether it's bad, or whether we had good reasons. Fuck you."
posted by Etrigan at 1:01 PM on October 17, 2019 [25 favorites]
At this point I think the other 6 of the G7 should decline the invitation.
You know, I think we need to start working on that. If you have friends in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, or United Kingdom, please ask them to contact their government and urge them to boycott such obvious corruption.
Unless Trump is donating the use of Doral free of charge (HA!) in which case they should go and drink that fucker dry and generally just trash the joint.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 1:06 PM on October 17, 2019 [32 favorites]
You know, I think we need to start working on that. If you have friends in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, or United Kingdom, please ask them to contact their government and urge them to boycott such obvious corruption.
Unless Trump is donating the use of Doral free of charge (HA!) in which case they should go and drink that fucker dry and generally just trash the joint.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 1:06 PM on October 17, 2019 [32 favorites]
I'm missing why this would be good for Mulvaney, who is very much implicated in the scandal, and potentially in a criminal way.
Well, assuming some strategic thinking ability, there must be a (subjectively perceived) sweet spot where the risk tips. Like "if I pull the plug too early, and things end up not going as badly as I now think, that would be really bad for me // if I pull the plug too late, I would be very much implicated in the scandal, and potentially in a criminal way, and that would be very bad for me // if I pull the plug at the right time and in the right manner, I will save face in both directions, at least as much as that is possible at that point."
But ok, you needa think doing this.
posted by Namlit at 1:09 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
Well, assuming some strategic thinking ability, there must be a (subjectively perceived) sweet spot where the risk tips. Like "if I pull the plug too early, and things end up not going as badly as I now think, that would be really bad for me // if I pull the plug too late, I would be very much implicated in the scandal, and potentially in a criminal way, and that would be very bad for me // if I pull the plug at the right time and in the right manner, I will save face in both directions, at least as much as that is possible at that point."
But ok, you needa think doing this.
posted by Namlit at 1:09 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
All this is how people in power behave if they expect to never be punished for their crimes in any meaningful way.
posted by wondermouse at 1:11 PM on October 17, 2019 [34 favorites]
posted by wondermouse at 1:11 PM on October 17, 2019 [34 favorites]
Guardian: Perry reportedly informs Trump he intends to resign
Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs)posted by katra at 1:17 PM on October 17, 2019 [22 favorites]
Scoop: Energy sec Rick Perry notified the president in writing on Air Force One on the way to Texas that he will be leaving his post soon, sources tell me, @jendeben and @AriNatter.
October 17, 2019
Scoop: Energy sec Rick Perry notified the president in writing on Air Force One on the way to Texas that he will be leaving his post soon, sources tell me, @jendeben and @AriNatter.
Getting clear of the bus?
posted by mike_honcho at 1:22 PM on October 17, 2019 [5 favorites]
Getting clear of the bus?
posted by mike_honcho at 1:22 PM on October 17, 2019 [5 favorites]
This is exactly how many people said it was going to go
Unfortunately so. Whatever the specifics of how this impeachment finally goes down, it will be Trump's disordered mind that shapes events as much as anything. Personally, I don't see his presidency ending until some law enforcement unit raids the White House and physically removes him from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. (even if following impeachment, conviction and removal from office), but hope I'm totally wrong about that. We really don't need to know what happens if the U.S. Secret Service has to decide between loyalty to country & constitution, or to president. But we'll continue learning answers to many questions we would prefer never to have to answer in the real world--not everyone can resign their way out of this train wreck, and sides will have to be chosen.
posted by LooseFilter at 1:24 PM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
Unfortunately so. Whatever the specifics of how this impeachment finally goes down, it will be Trump's disordered mind that shapes events as much as anything. Personally, I don't see his presidency ending until some law enforcement unit raids the White House and physically removes him from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. (even if following impeachment, conviction and removal from office), but hope I'm totally wrong about that. We really don't need to know what happens if the U.S. Secret Service has to decide between loyalty to country & constitution, or to president. But we'll continue learning answers to many questions we would prefer never to have to answer in the real world--not everyone can resign their way out of this train wreck, and sides will have to be chosen.
posted by LooseFilter at 1:24 PM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
WaPo: 3:20 p.m.: White House and Justice officials furious over Mulvaney’s remarks
One Trump adviser said Mulvaney did “far more damage” than Sondland’s testimony, calling it “totally inexplicable.”Guardian: A Republican senator, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, told reporters that she did not think it was appropriate for Trump to host the June G7 summit at one of his Florida resorts. [...] Ethics experts lambasted the decision as a classic example of self-dealing and called on lawmakers to denounce it. From the former director of the office of government ethics:
“He literally said the thing the president and everyone else said did not happen,” the adviser said. [...]
Mulvaney also caught the Justice Department by surprise when he asserted that Ukraine’s “cooperating in an ongoing investigation with our Department of Justice” was connected to aid money being withheld. A department official said, “If the White House was withholding aid in regards to the cooperation of any investigation at the Department of Justice, that is news to us.” [...]
A third outside official said it was incredible that in the middle of an impeachment inquiry and the chaos in Syria that the White House would also invite another emoluments issue. “Clearly, they just don’t care anymore,” this person said.
Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) If you work in a domed building in the nation's capital, you will either call this G-7 deal corrupt or your silence will scream out your own corruption. pic.twitter.com/kJp08HPLEeposted by katra at 1:31 PM on October 17, 2019 [29 favorites]
October 17, 2019
Just a reminder, Trump still has his private security because he doesn't trust the secret service to be crooked enough for him.
posted by benzenedream at 1:36 PM on October 17, 2019 [28 favorites]
posted by benzenedream at 1:36 PM on October 17, 2019 [28 favorites]
All this is how people in power behave if they expect to never be punished for their crimes in any meaningful way.
And you can expect not to be punished if the relevant judges and justices are owned and corrupt.
posted by rhizome at 1:41 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
And you can expect not to be punished if the relevant judges and justices are owned and corrupt.
posted by rhizome at 1:41 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
Let me guess, Erik Prince is offering that security for free in exchange for the duchy of Michigan.
posted by cmfletcher at 1:41 PM on October 17, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by cmfletcher at 1:41 PM on October 17, 2019 [6 favorites]
Let me guess, Erik Prince is offering that security for free in exchange for the duchy of Michigan.
First of his name, Baron of Ypsilanti and Hero of Battle Creek, Scourge of Milwaukee
posted by mike_honcho at 1:44 PM on October 17, 2019 [15 favorites]
First of his name, Baron of Ypsilanti and Hero of Battle Creek, Scourge of Milwaukee
posted by mike_honcho at 1:44 PM on October 17, 2019 [15 favorites]
Mod note: Folks, general reminder to try and keep this focused on fairly directly impeachment-related stuff. That includes thinking about whether some bit of news or admin nonsense is genuinely about the impeachment situation in a meaningful way or is just more The Sort Of Thing Someone Maybe Ought To Be Impeached For, because given that the latter is kind of every damn thing that happens with the Trump administration at this point that's casting a too-wide net and is gonna blow us back up into megathread territory.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:49 PM on October 17, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:49 PM on October 17, 2019 [13 favorites]
box: There is now no question that the American government is being used as a public relations and marketing subsidiary of the Trump Organization
Want to have influence in Trump's AmericaTM? Listen to U.S. State Department and stay at Trump properties!
benzenedream: Just a reminder, Trump still has his private security because he doesn't trust the secret service to be crooked enough for him.
Trump’s Private Security Force: an Operational and Legal Swamp -- Trump's precendent-breaking decision to retain a private security force raises troubling questions about transparency and accountability. (Manuel Madrid, January 20, 2017)
posted by filthy light thief at 1:50 PM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
Want to have influence in Trump's AmericaTM? Listen to U.S. State Department and stay at Trump properties!
Former Mexican ambassador says State Department is telling world leaders to stay at Trump hotels
What's the point of public service if you can't profit off of it?
Ian Millhiser for Think Progress, Nov 1, 2017.
A former top Mexican diplomat accused the Trump administration this week of using official diplomatic channels to funnel business to Donald Trump’s hotels.
Arturo Sarukhan, who served as Mexico’s ambassador to the United States from 2007 to 2013, tweeted on Tuesday that a former U.S. diplomat told him the U.S. State Department’s protocol emphasizes to world leaders that they should use Trump’s D.C. hotel for official visits.
benzenedream: Just a reminder, Trump still has his private security because he doesn't trust the secret service to be crooked enough for him.
Trump’s Private Security Force: an Operational and Legal Swamp -- Trump's precendent-breaking decision to retain a private security force raises troubling questions about transparency and accountability. (Manuel Madrid, January 20, 2017)
President-elect Donald Trump doesn't seem to tire of setting new precedents. Despite being provided with a newly bolstered Secret Service detail after the election, the president-elect has retained his own private security and intelligence force, breaking with tradition and creating operational and potentially legal problems.See also: 11 Private Security Firms Guarding Donald Trump -- Donald Trump’s longtime fascination with having his own private security force is now a hefty campaign expense that might be illegal. (Olivia Nuzzi for The Daily Beast, April 13, 2017)
Last month, Trump spokesman Jason Miller responded to a Politico article citing supposed fault lines between Secret Service agents and members of Trump's private security team, calling it "wildly out of proportion." Yet Miller confirmed that Trump will continue to be surrounded by "longtime allies and advisers." Among those is Keith Schiller, a former New York police detective who has worked as Trump's bodyguard for 17 years and recently as his head of security during the campaign.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:50 PM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
White House and Justice officials furious over Mulvaney’s remarks
This is one of the other major sea-changes with the Trump admin vs well pretty much every political movement in history.
Everyone making statements seems to be just doing so as an individual: there appears to be no actual organisation or discussion ever happens in the background. They just get up in front of the mike and let whatever passes for consciousness in their minds stream.
Like they're all working towards for Fuhrer, but as game show contestants, some sort of "Apprentice to the Fuhrer" type deathmatch.
That they are so very shit at it is a major indictment of all those keeping the show running.
posted by Buntix at 1:50 PM on October 17, 2019 [24 favorites]
This is one of the other major sea-changes with the Trump admin vs well pretty much every political movement in history.
Everyone making statements seems to be just doing so as an individual: there appears to be no actual organisation or discussion ever happens in the background. They just get up in front of the mike and let whatever passes for consciousness in their minds stream.
Like they're all working towards for Fuhrer, but as game show contestants, some sort of "Apprentice to the Fuhrer" type deathmatch.
That they are so very shit at it is a major indictment of all those keeping the show running.
posted by Buntix at 1:50 PM on October 17, 2019 [24 favorites]
Everyone making statements seems to be just doing so as an individual: there appears to be no actual organisation or discussion ever happens in the background. They just get up in front of the mike and let whatever passes for consciousness in their minds stream.
I quoted something about this upthread from (checks date-stamp) yesterday: But White House officials are becoming increasingly frustrated at revelations from the closed-door hearings. Given that there is no presidential counsel in the room, they struggle to frame a defense, learning about almost daily bombshells only from news reports, CNN reported on Tuesday.
Emphasis mine. Without leadership of any form, people are spinning their own realities. And some folks are making and lobbing their own bombs. Who cares? Get over it.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:59 PM on October 17, 2019 [6 favorites]
I quoted something about this upthread from (checks date-stamp) yesterday: But White House officials are becoming increasingly frustrated at revelations from the closed-door hearings. Given that there is no presidential counsel in the room, they struggle to frame a defense, learning about almost daily bombshells only from news reports, CNN reported on Tuesday.
Emphasis mine. Without leadership of any form, people are spinning their own realities. And some folks are making and lobbing their own bombs. Who cares? Get over it.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:59 PM on October 17, 2019 [6 favorites]
The G7 meeting: Miami in June. What a thoroughly comfortable notion. (To be fair: Miami in August is worse)
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 2:02 PM on October 17, 2019
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 2:02 PM on October 17, 2019
Elaine Chao, Mitch McConnell and Questions of Conflict From the NYTimes Editorial Board
posted by mumimor at 2:02 PM on October 17, 2019 [21 favorites]
According to an analysis by Politico, in her first 14 months as transportation secretary, one in four of the scheduled meetings with local officials on Ms. Chao’s calendar were with Kentuckians. (The two states next on the list, Indiana and Georgia, accounted for only 6 percent each.) Some of the meetings were set up at the request of McConnell staff members, who let his wife’s office know which officials were “friends” or “loyal supporters.”Why can't the Democratic Party find a serious challenger to Mitch McConnell? It seems absurd, and also extremely urgent.
A spokesman for the department allowed that it may appear as though Ms. Chao meets with Kentucky folks a lot, but disputed that there was anything odd about this — or that the state has received more than its share of federal dollars.
Far from fretting about the appearance of preferential treatment, Mr. McConnell has embraced it. His re-election campaign tweeted out the Politico article about Ms. Chao’s meetings as proof that “Mitch McConnell is a Kentucky Asset.”
This is classic McConnell. The majority leader is not beloved by Kentucky voters. His dismal approval numbers back home frequently earn him the distinction as the Senate’s most unpopular member. He often responds to critics by touting his ability to bring home federal bacon.
posted by mumimor at 2:02 PM on October 17, 2019 [21 favorites]
White House acknowledges strings attached in Trump withholding Ukraine aid (Reuters)
Democratic members of the three House committees leading the impeachment inquiry pounced on Mulvaney’s remarks.posted by katra at 2:04 PM on October 17, 2019 [25 favorites]
Representative Gerald Connolly said: “I guess having failed at discrediting the facts of this case, they’ve decided on a new tactic, which is to admit them and basically say: ‘So what’?
“The answer to that is, well the ‘so what’ is you’re going to be impeached because that’s abuse of office. And extortion, the last time I checked, is still a crime,” he said.
Everyone making statements seems to be just doing so as an individual: there appears to be no actual organisation or discussion ever happens in the background. They just get up in front of the mike and let whatever passes for consciousness in their minds stream.
This is a regular theme in Jay Rosen's criticism of press coverage of "the White House":
This is a regular theme in Jay Rosen's criticism of press coverage of "the White House":
There is no White House. Not in the sense that journalists have always assumed. It's just Trump— and people who work in the building. No continuity between the two can be posited. That term, "the White House" is still in use. But it has lost its referent.posted by a snickering nuthatch at 2:06 PM on October 17, 2019 [20 favorites]
Why can't the Democratic Party find a serious challenger to Mitch McConnell?
Question coming from genuine ignorance: is Amy McGrath not considered a serious challenger?
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 2:09 PM on October 17, 2019 [9 favorites]
Question coming from genuine ignorance: is Amy McGrath not considered a serious challenger?
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 2:09 PM on October 17, 2019 [9 favorites]
And NPR's headline for Mulvany's quote is deftly spun as a defense of Trump (in my read): 'Get Over It': Politics Is Part Of Foreign Policy, Mulvaney Says
“I am not part of whatever drug deal Rudy and Mulvaney are cooking up,” Mr. Bolton, a Yale-trained lawyer, told Ms. Hill to tell White House lawyers, according to the testimony.
Emphasis mine -- and a reminder that 'Drug deal' is a colloquialism in govt and military. (link to prior comment on this).
Grifters and liars, all of 'em.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:09 PM on October 17, 2019 [20 favorites]
White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney acknowledged Thursday that President Trump expected concessions from Ukraine's president in exchange for engagement — but said that's just how business is done in diplomacy.Quid pro quo ISN'T POLITICS. And this isn't a little "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours," it was "dig up dirt on my political opponent, Joe Biden, and his son, and I'll give you the military aid that my country has already promised you." Or un-spun: "if you don't dig up dirt on Biden, I won't give you military funding we previously offered." That's coercion, using the power of his position to again work with a foreign government to gain leverage over his political opponent.
Mulvaney said that he wasn't involved with the other request that Trump made of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy — to investigate the family of former Vice President Joe Biden.But remember what Your Childhood Pet Rock quoted upthread: Bolton Objected to Ukraine Pressure Campaign, Calling Giuliani ‘a Hand Grenade’
But he did admit that Trump held up aid to Ukraine as part of a quid pro quo — something Trump himself has denied.
“I am not part of whatever drug deal Rudy and Mulvaney are cooking up,” Mr. Bolton, a Yale-trained lawyer, told Ms. Hill to tell White House lawyers, according to the testimony.
Emphasis mine -- and a reminder that 'Drug deal' is a colloquialism in govt and military. (link to prior comment on this).
Grifters and liars, all of 'em.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:09 PM on October 17, 2019 [20 favorites]
Bolton may be a warmongering psychopath but, by god, he’s gonna do it by the book!
I gotta say, I kind of respect that. Although I will feel massively ambivalent if his testimony ends up being the lynchpin in Trump’s undoing.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:23 PM on October 17, 2019 [11 favorites]
I gotta say, I kind of respect that. Although I will feel massively ambivalent if his testimony ends up being the lynchpin in Trump’s undoing.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:23 PM on October 17, 2019 [11 favorites]
The G7 meeting: Miami in June. What a thoroughly comfortable notion.
June is the off-season when Doral is almost vacant and losing the most money. Rich people don't go to Doral in June. Hence the need to force world leaders to go there and grift taxpayer dollars to pay for their hospitality.
Seems like another article for impeachment.
posted by JackFlash at 2:27 PM on October 17, 2019 [42 favorites]
June is the off-season when Doral is almost vacant and losing the most money. Rich people don't go to Doral in June. Hence the need to force world leaders to go there and grift taxpayer dollars to pay for their hospitality.
Seems like another article for impeachment.
posted by JackFlash at 2:27 PM on October 17, 2019 [42 favorites]
Our Republic Is Under Attack From the President (William H. McRaven, NYT Opinion)
William H. McRaven, a retired Navy admiral, is a former commander of the United States Special Operations Command and former chancellor of the University of Texas system.
posted by katra at 2:36 PM on October 17, 2019 [24 favorites]
William H. McRaven, a retired Navy admiral, is a former commander of the United States Special Operations Command and former chancellor of the University of Texas system.
As I stood on the parade field at Fort Bragg, one retired four-star general, grabbed my arm, shook me and shouted, “I don’t like the Democrats, but Trump is destroying the Republic!”Guardian: "McRaven is known as the architect of the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden. He has publicly attacked the president before, in a 2018 open letter to the president that ran in the Washington Post, criticizing his decision to revoke the clearance of former CIA director John Brennan, who has criticized Trump’s behavior as “treasonous” and called him “wholly in the pocket of Putin.”"
Those words echoed with me throughout the week. It is easy to destroy an organization if you have no appreciation for what makes that organization great. We are not the most powerful nation in the world because of our aircraft carriers, our economy, or our seat at the United Nations Security Council. We are the most powerful nation in the world because we try to be the good guys. We are the most powerful nation in the world because our ideals of universal freedom and equality have been backed up by our belief that we were champions of justice, the protectors of the less fortunate.
[...] And if this president doesn’t understand their importance, if this president doesn’t demonstrate the leadership that America needs, both domestically and abroad, then it is time for a new person in the Oval Office — Republican, Democrat or independent — the sooner, the better. The fate of our Republic depends upon it.
posted by katra at 2:36 PM on October 17, 2019 [24 favorites]
A linchpin is the pin that kept a wagon wheel on the wagon's axle. The point being that it is the thing that maintains the coherence and stability of the whole wagon allowing it to continue moving forward. Without it the wheels fly off and the wagon crashes to a stop.
So there is zero chance Bolton is any sort of linchpin as there is clearly no structure holding together either the metaphorical wagon of the White House Administration or the impeachment process which will mirror it.
I don't think there is a metaphor that can handle this.
posted by srboisvert at 2:38 PM on October 17, 2019 [7 favorites]
So there is zero chance Bolton is any sort of linchpin as there is clearly no structure holding together either the metaphorical wagon of the White House Administration or the impeachment process which will mirror it.
I don't think there is a metaphor that can handle this.
posted by srboisvert at 2:38 PM on October 17, 2019 [7 favorites]
Dumpster fire? Shitstorm?
posted by Lyme Drop at 2:42 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Lyme Drop at 2:42 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
I gotta say, I kind of respect that. Although I will feel massively ambivalent if his testimony ends up being the lynchpin in Trump’s undoing.
Maybe a better metaphor is when Batman (thinking 60s-era TV Batman) is attacked by a swarm of henchmen, and grabs one of them and shoves him to take out three-four others. He's still a henchman, but he can be a temporary weapon. BOFF!
Anyway, if Bolton wants to throw himself at his fellow evildoers, I'm not gonna stop him, but I'm not gonna give him a medal either. At the end of the day, he was still doing crimes for the Orange Menace and deserves to be in jail.
posted by emjaybee at 2:44 PM on October 17, 2019 [11 favorites]
Maybe a better metaphor is when Batman (thinking 60s-era TV Batman) is attacked by a swarm of henchmen, and grabs one of them and shoves him to take out three-four others. He's still a henchman, but he can be a temporary weapon. BOFF!
Anyway, if Bolton wants to throw himself at his fellow evildoers, I'm not gonna stop him, but I'm not gonna give him a medal either. At the end of the day, he was still doing crimes for the Orange Menace and deserves to be in jail.
posted by emjaybee at 2:44 PM on October 17, 2019 [11 favorites]
Lyme Drop beat me. I was going to add clusterfuck.
posted by BuddhaInABucket at 2:44 PM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by BuddhaInABucket at 2:44 PM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
ABC News Jonathan Karl: Let's be clear. What you just described is a quid pro quo. Funding will not flow unless the investigation into the Democratic server happened as well.
MULVANEY: We do that all the time with foreign policy. ... I have news for everybody. Get over it. There is going to be political influence in foreign policy. Elections have consequences.
This is Mulvaney literally admitting that there was a quid pro quo. But the crazy thing is what Trump wanted ... the DNC server! From Ukraine! "I want to see the server!"
This is just wacko crazy and nobody in the White House was willing to say that to Trump.
What interest or even right does Trump have to see the private DNC mail server? Why didn't someone just get an old Commodore 64 and take into the Oval Officer so that the White House photographer could take a picture of Trump triumphantly pointing at it with his stubby finger saying "See!"
I beginning to wonder if Trump plans on using the insanity defense in his impeachment trial.
posted by JackFlash at 2:47 PM on October 17, 2019 [22 favorites]
MULVANEY: We do that all the time with foreign policy. ... I have news for everybody. Get over it. There is going to be political influence in foreign policy. Elections have consequences.
This is Mulvaney literally admitting that there was a quid pro quo. But the crazy thing is what Trump wanted ... the DNC server! From Ukraine! "I want to see the server!"
This is just wacko crazy and nobody in the White House was willing to say that to Trump.
What interest or even right does Trump have to see the private DNC mail server? Why didn't someone just get an old Commodore 64 and take into the Oval Officer so that the White House photographer could take a picture of Trump triumphantly pointing at it with his stubby finger saying "See!"
I beginning to wonder if Trump plans on using the insanity defense in his impeachment trial.
posted by JackFlash at 2:47 PM on October 17, 2019 [22 favorites]
June is the off-season when Doral is almost vacant and losing the most money. Rich people don't go to Doral in June. Hence the need to force world leaders to go there and grift taxpayer dollars to pay for their hospitality.
On the plus side, all attendees get a goody bag with genuine Trump brand bedbugs
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:49 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
On the plus side, all attendees get a goody bag with genuine Trump brand bedbugs
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:49 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
beginning to wonder if Trump plans on using the insanity defense in his impeachment trial.
If not then surely when he's released into the wild and has to face a million other lawsuits.
posted by Namlit at 2:55 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
If not then surely when he's released into the wild and has to face a million other lawsuits.
posted by Namlit at 2:55 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
Mod note: One deleted; if people want to talk about Dem challengers to McConnell or other stuff, please make a separate thread for that.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 3:19 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 3:19 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
Mulvaney just issued a statement flatly contradicting himself, claiming there was no quid pro quo.
I call this an omnishambles.
posted by suelac at 3:20 PM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
I call this an omnishambles.
posted by suelac at 3:20 PM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
I beginning to wonder if Trump plans on using the insanity defense in his impeachment trial.
No such thing, unless Congress decides there is and there's no reason why it should be.
By the text (and as Justice Kagan said "we are all textualists now") impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors has the flavor of strict liability, or in some aspects maybe the violation of a duty of care and loyalty. No specific intent, or really any criminal mens rea or other scienter is required, so state of mind doesn't matter unless that somehow bears on the gravity of the misconduct as framed by the Articles of Impeachment delivered by the House.
More likely would be a Reganesque dotard defense, which is a bit different than an insanity defense as it attempts to pass the buck because too senile to be personally responsbile. But in impeachment, the Senate doesn't have to care. It just votes, and SCOTUS will not interfere with removal because Congress didn't permit or accept an affirmative defense of insanity in trial in the Senate.
Plus, Reagan didn't have a sundowning twitter feed and habit of bragging about everything he'd now have to plead ignorance of.
posted by snuffleupagus at 3:21 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
No such thing, unless Congress decides there is and there's no reason why it should be.
By the text (and as Justice Kagan said "we are all textualists now") impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors has the flavor of strict liability, or in some aspects maybe the violation of a duty of care and loyalty. No specific intent, or really any criminal mens rea or other scienter is required, so state of mind doesn't matter unless that somehow bears on the gravity of the misconduct as framed by the Articles of Impeachment delivered by the House.
More likely would be a Reganesque dotard defense, which is a bit different than an insanity defense as it attempts to pass the buck because too senile to be personally responsbile. But in impeachment, the Senate doesn't have to care. It just votes, and SCOTUS will not interfere with removal because Congress didn't permit or accept an affirmative defense of insanity in trial in the Senate.
Plus, Reagan didn't have a sundowning twitter feed and habit of bragging about everything he'd now have to plead ignorance of.
posted by snuffleupagus at 3:21 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
In case you were still wondering if Mulvaney's admission of quid-pro-quo was some kind of strategic gambit or perhaps a blunder, well he's already trying to take it back. From The Hill, "Mulvaney walks back comments tying Ukraine aid to 2016 probe":
Mulvaney issued a statement Thursday afternoon accusing the media of “misconstruing” his earlier remarks to the press at the White House “to advance a biased and political witch hunt against President Trump.”posted by mhum at 3:21 PM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
“Let me be clear, there was absolutely no quid pro quo between Ukrainian military aid and any investigation into the 2016 election,” Mulvaney said. “The president never told me to withhold any money until the Ukrainians did anything related to the server.”
[...]
“Did [Trump] also mention to me in the past that the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely, no question about that. But that was it. That’s why we held up the money,” Mulvaney told reporters at the earlier afternoon briefing.
Guardian: According to Mulvaney’s new statement:
“The president never told me to withhold any money until the Ukrainians did anything related to the server. The only reasons we were holding the money was because of concern about lack of support from other nations and concerns over corruption.Emphasis added, because the 'concerns over corruption' led to "Mr. Trump’s request for a probe of the Bidens in a July 25 call with Ukraine’s president [that] has sparked the impeachment inquiry in the House," and it appears that Trump's preferred defense is currently:
“He honestly believes that he did nothing wrong. And he honestly believes that the Bidens have been involved in impropriety and it hasn’t been investigated and, as president of the United States, he has the duty to do it,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), who was with Trump for a rally in Louisiana last week.posted by katra at 3:38 PM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
I stand corrected. So it's the old "I never said this thing that I just said" ploy. He's trying to drive us nuts is what he is.
posted by Namlit at 3:40 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Namlit at 3:40 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
You can't jump up and shout "You're damn right I ordered the Code Red" and then come back later and say well maybe it was just a Code Pink.
posted by JackFlash at 3:41 PM on October 17, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 3:41 PM on October 17, 2019 [13 favorites]
I call this an omnishambles.
"Five monkeys trying to hump a football" was a term of art where I worked once upon a time.
posted by jquinby at 3:42 PM on October 17, 2019 [14 favorites]
"Five monkeys trying to hump a football" was a term of art where I worked once upon a time.
posted by jquinby at 3:42 PM on October 17, 2019 [14 favorites]
Even more than the corruption, the defining attribute of this administration is incompetence.
posted by PhineasGage at 3:43 PM on October 17, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 3:43 PM on October 17, 2019 [10 favorites]
“Let me be clear, there was absolutely no quid pro quo between Ukrainian military aid and any investigation into the 2016 election,” Mulvaney said. “The president never told me to withhold any money until the Ukrainians did anything related to the server.”
“Did [Trump] also mention to me in the past that the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely, no question about that. But that was it. That’s why we held up the money,” Mulvaney told reporters at the earlier afternoon briefing.
See, I never just did things just to do them. Come on, what am I gonna do, just all of a sudden jump up and grind my feet on somebody’s couch like it’s something to do? Come on, I got a little more sense then that.
…Yeah, I remember grinding my feet on Eddie’s couch.
posted by mike_honcho at 3:44 PM on October 17, 2019 [30 favorites]
“Did [Trump] also mention to me in the past that the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely, no question about that. But that was it. That’s why we held up the money,” Mulvaney told reporters at the earlier afternoon briefing.
See, I never just did things just to do them. Come on, what am I gonna do, just all of a sudden jump up and grind my feet on somebody’s couch like it’s something to do? Come on, I got a little more sense then that.
…Yeah, I remember grinding my feet on Eddie’s couch.
posted by mike_honcho at 3:44 PM on October 17, 2019 [30 favorites]
I think you might mean 'malcompetence' , Phineas
pines for the simpler days of W
posted by Johnny Waterbed at 3:45 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
pines for the simpler days of W
posted by Johnny Waterbed at 3:45 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
Cooooooool.... Let's see what he says under oath!
All of this is an excellent demonstration of why there's a separation between the political appointees and the civil servants. It's fine for the politicians to say 'go stop crimes of type XYZ!' And if that class of criminals happens to include some politicians, well, so be it. But that's very different from the president wielding the full weight of the government to go after specific political adversaries. I'm hoping (ha, not really) that the FEC finds that this was a $391-million-dollar favor, owed back to the government by drumpfco.
posted by kaibutsu at 3:48 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
All of this is an excellent demonstration of why there's a separation between the political appointees and the civil servants. It's fine for the politicians to say 'go stop crimes of type XYZ!' And if that class of criminals happens to include some politicians, well, so be it. But that's very different from the president wielding the full weight of the government to go after specific political adversaries. I'm hoping (ha, not really) that the FEC finds that this was a $391-million-dollar favor, owed back to the government by drumpfco.
posted by kaibutsu at 3:48 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
Everyone in Washington is under oaf
posted by Namlit at 3:49 PM on October 17, 2019 [46 favorites]
posted by Namlit at 3:49 PM on October 17, 2019 [46 favorites]
At this point I think the other 6 of the G7 should decline the invitation.
Much more likely is that Putin shows up unexpectedly surprising everyone and Trump says that it's his golf club and he can invite anyone he wants.
posted by JackFlash at 4:16 PM on October 17, 2019 [27 favorites]
Much more likely is that Putin shows up unexpectedly surprising everyone and Trump says that it's his golf club and he can invite anyone he wants.
posted by JackFlash at 4:16 PM on October 17, 2019 [27 favorites]
And he honestly believes that the Bidens have been involved in impropriety and it hasn’t been investigated and, as president of the United States, he has the duty to do it,”
Fire up The Mystery Machine kids! The leader of the free world’s most important job is to prosecute Democrats!
posted by valkane at 4:18 PM on October 17, 2019 [5 favorites]
Fire up The Mystery Machine kids! The leader of the free world’s most important job is to prosecute Democrats!
posted by valkane at 4:18 PM on October 17, 2019 [5 favorites]
In the parallel Watergate world, taking illegal action (break-ins, extortion, pay-offs, etc) was always presidential conspiracy theory connected as well. Also even to the uncomfortableness of his staff.
posted by Harry Caul at 4:24 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 4:24 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
I know I'll be writing my prime minister here in Canada about attendance at G7, just have to hope we'll have a reasonable one voted in next week.
posted by meowf at 4:43 PM on October 17, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by meowf at 4:43 PM on October 17, 2019 [9 favorites]
Mulvaney is also a victim of right wing punditry. He must have read somewhere that of course the president can ask for help in an ongoing investigation, and forgot those articles are meant for boneheads.
Even without quid quo pro, this is extortion. Trump put a gun to the head of Ukraine and secretly asked them to find something his own intelligence community says does not exist. Trump doesn't need to personally benefit for his actions to be criminal.
posted by xammerboy at 5:45 PM on October 17, 2019 [11 favorites]
Even without quid quo pro, this is extortion. Trump put a gun to the head of Ukraine and secretly asked them to find something his own intelligence community says does not exist. Trump doesn't need to personally benefit for his actions to be criminal.
posted by xammerboy at 5:45 PM on October 17, 2019 [11 favorites]
Mulvaney Says, Then Denies, That Trump Held Back Ukraine Aid as Quid Pro Quo (NYT)
Mr. Mulvaney said holding up Ukraine’s aid was a normal part of foreign policy, and he compared it to the foreign aid to Central America that the administration froze until Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras agreed to adopt the immigration policies pressed by Mr. Trump.posted by katra at 5:53 PM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
Asked whether he had admitted to a quid pro quo, Mr. Mulvaney said, “We do that all the time with foreign policy."
His answer ignored the distinction — raised by many of the president’s critics — between holding up foreign aid to further American interests and holding up foreign aid to further Mr. Trump’s personal interests.
Senior White House aides like Mr. Mulvaney are often largely immune from congressional subpoenas to discuss their private conversations with the president, but talking about them publicly in such an extended way could undermine that legal protection.
Quid pro d'oh!
posted by kirkaracha at 6:21 PM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 6:21 PM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
Mr. Mulvaney said the hotel would put on the summit “at cost.” “I think the president has pretty much made it very clear since he got here that he doesn’t profit from being here,” he said. “He has no interest in profit from being here.”
Are you kidding me!?
posted by xammerboy at 6:23 PM on October 17, 2019 [19 favorites]
Are you kidding me!?
posted by xammerboy at 6:23 PM on October 17, 2019 [19 favorites]
And the free publicity? And the additional revenue? And at cost. Does he decide the cost?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:52 PM on October 17, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:52 PM on October 17, 2019 [6 favorites]
Mr. Mulvaney said the hotel would put on the summit “at cost.”
During the June off-season Trump has a bunch of staff at his resort standing around doing little or nothing, coming out of his pocket. If he puts them to work "at cost" then the money comes out of the taxpayers pockets. It's all a grift.
posted by JackFlash at 7:18 PM on October 17, 2019 [39 favorites]
During the June off-season Trump has a bunch of staff at his resort standing around doing little or nothing, coming out of his pocket. If he puts them to work "at cost" then the money comes out of the taxpayers pockets. It's all a grift.
posted by JackFlash at 7:18 PM on October 17, 2019 [39 favorites]
Anyway, it doesn't matter. It's "appearance of impropriety". The Republicans made Carter sell his peanut farm. They don't get to suddenly decide that now it's OK for one of their guys to own an international hotel chain and force government employees to stay there and host government business there.
Just the G7 decision alone is worthy of impeachment because it is a clear and direct violation of the emoluments clause.
posted by sotonohito at 7:25 PM on October 17, 2019 [51 favorites]
Just the G7 decision alone is worthy of impeachment because it is a clear and direct violation of the emoluments clause.
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign StateThis isn't rocket surgery. Trump hosting the G7 at one of his hotels is clearly and plainly against the Constitution.
posted by sotonohito at 7:25 PM on October 17, 2019 [51 favorites]
That is the foreign emoluments clause. For this situation, you must reference the domestic emoluments clause:
The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:29 PM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:29 PM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
“There’s difficulties going various places,” Mulvaney insisted. “There’s one place, I won’t say where it was, we actually had to figure out if we were going to have oxygen tanks for the participants, because of the altitude.”
posted by xammerboy at 7:35 PM on October 17, 2019
posted by xammerboy at 7:35 PM on October 17, 2019
“The president has been very candid about whether he wants Russia to rejoin the G7, they used to be part of that organization,” Mulvaney said. “We go to the G7 and what dominates so much of the discussion? Russia. Wouldn’t it be better to have them inside as part of the conversation?”
Trump is going to invite Russia to the G7 whether or not anyone else wants them there...
posted by xammerboy at 7:37 PM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
Trump is going to invite Russia to the G7 whether or not anyone else wants them there...
posted by xammerboy at 7:37 PM on October 17, 2019 [8 favorites]
Mod note: One deleted; maybe let's spin off a G-7 thread if folks want to talk in more depth about that.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 7:49 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 7:49 PM on October 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
“He honestly believes that he did nothing wrong. And he honestly believes that the Bidens have been involved in impropriety and it hasn’t been investigated and, as president of the United States, he has the duty to do it,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
This is the horrible truth, right here, ironically said by someone (Kennedy) who probably didn't realize the gravity of what they were saying at the time.
They are high on their own supply. Tripping fucking balls. They have fed the exhaust line from the bus they're riding in back through the vents—and have no idea why that could be a bad idea. Anyone who questioned it has been thrown out.
The far right spent decades and created a media machine capable of delivering bald-faced lies to the public with absolute sincerity and not a trace of shame, but somewhere along the line a bunch of them started actually believing in what was on the screen. And those true believers are now in charge.
The part that ought to scare you is: if someone's the kind of person who believes that the Bidens are secretly corrupt petro-oligarchs, and that the DNC had its email server secreted away to Ukraine, what other stuff do they believe?
posted by Kadin2048 at 8:05 PM on October 17, 2019 [56 favorites]
This is the horrible truth, right here, ironically said by someone (Kennedy) who probably didn't realize the gravity of what they were saying at the time.
They are high on their own supply. Tripping fucking balls. They have fed the exhaust line from the bus they're riding in back through the vents—and have no idea why that could be a bad idea. Anyone who questioned it has been thrown out.
The far right spent decades and created a media machine capable of delivering bald-faced lies to the public with absolute sincerity and not a trace of shame, but somewhere along the line a bunch of them started actually believing in what was on the screen. And those true believers are now in charge.
The part that ought to scare you is: if someone's the kind of person who believes that the Bidens are secretly corrupt petro-oligarchs, and that the DNC had its email server secreted away to Ukraine, what other stuff do they believe?
posted by Kadin2048 at 8:05 PM on October 17, 2019 [56 favorites]
Good scam artists come to believe their own scams, but this is like the random guy at his computer believing he really is the Nigerian Prince.
posted by xammerboy at 8:17 PM on October 17, 2019 [20 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 8:17 PM on October 17, 2019 [20 favorites]
if someone's the kind of person who believes that the Bidens are secretly corrupt petro-oligarchs, and that the DNC had its email server secreted away to Ukraine, what other stuff do they believe?
That they don't need a coordinated strategy to defend against the impeachment:
That they don't need a coordinated strategy to defend against the impeachment:
In an email, the White House press secretary, Stephanie Grisham, rejected questions about the West Wing’s approach to the impeachment inquiry.posted by katra at 9:01 PM on October 17, 2019 [2 favorites]
“We have stated this several times,” she said. “There has not been any effort to put together a war room. The president did nothing wrong and we are still working over here.” [...]
In the West Wing, aides who have seen Mr. Trump survive potentially debilitating scandals like the release of the “Access Hollywood” tape a month before the 2016 election, and the appointment of a special counsel with wide-ranging powers to investigate him, are shrugging off impeachment as just another bump in the road. [...]
Kellyanne Conway, the White House counselor and one of Mr. Trump’s longest-serving aides, has told reporters that Trump supporters will not leave him because of impeachment. She joins a group that includes Jay Sekulow, one of the president’s personal lawyers, and other aides and allies, who believe that anything resembling a White House “war room” is needless and would make them look as if they were under siege.
House lawyers: Trump trying to ‘obstruct his own impeachment’ (Politico)
The allegation came in a stinging 66-page court filing as part of the House Judiciary Committee’s bid to secure testimony from former White House Counsel Don McGahn, whom Democrats consider to be the star witness in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.posted by katra at 9:21 PM on October 17, 2019 [9 favorites]
“A president with the power to obstruct his own impeachment through capacious grants of absolute immunity would be a president who is above the law,” House lawyers, led by House General Counsel Douglas Letter, wrote in the filing.
The House’s lawyers cited the recent missive from the current top White House lawyer declaring that the Trump administration would refuse all cooperation with the House’s impeachment inquiry, calling it “illegitimate” and “invalid.” The blanket stonewalling, House lawyers say, requires a court to intervene or else Trump could be effectively shielded from accountability.
“If the president could deprive the committee of information required for its impeachment inquiry into his own misconduct, the president could potentially thwart his accountability for that conduct,” the attorneys said, referring to Trump’s efforts to block witness testimony and document production. “No further discussion will resolve an impasse dictated by the president himself,” they added. [...]
The House lawyers emphasized why they consider McGahn — more than any other witness — the most important to determine whether Trump should be impeached on the basis of obstructing the Mueller investigation.
"Particularly as each country likely has legislation similar to the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act that will place those leaders in legal jeopardy for participating in American corruption."
Unfortunately, the FCPA is widely considered the strongest anti-corruption statute in the world (and US companies bitch about it endlessly); while some countries have followed the FCPA, I don't know of any that are as strong as the FCPA. Canada and the UK have pretty strong statutes modeled on the US statute, and I understand the EU has a reasonably strong statute (although I don't know as much about it), but if you're counting on the FCPA, you need to always keep in the mind the US FCPA is by far the strongest available.
"Why can't the Democratic Party find a serious challenger to Mitch McConnell? It seems absurd, and also extremely urgent."
So, I went to law school with one of the frequently-cited potential Democratic challengers to McConnell (it's not McGrath), and he fucking suuuuuuuuucks and is corrupt himself. I mean obviously I'd still vote for him if I lived in Kentucky, but with the knowledge that he is a corrupt misogynist asshole.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 10:15 PM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
Unfortunately, the FCPA is widely considered the strongest anti-corruption statute in the world (and US companies bitch about it endlessly); while some countries have followed the FCPA, I don't know of any that are as strong as the FCPA. Canada and the UK have pretty strong statutes modeled on the US statute, and I understand the EU has a reasonably strong statute (although I don't know as much about it), but if you're counting on the FCPA, you need to always keep in the mind the US FCPA is by far the strongest available.
"Why can't the Democratic Party find a serious challenger to Mitch McConnell? It seems absurd, and also extremely urgent."
So, I went to law school with one of the frequently-cited potential Democratic challengers to McConnell (it's not McGrath), and he fucking suuuuuuuuucks and is corrupt himself. I mean obviously I'd still vote for him if I lived in Kentucky, but with the knowledge that he is a corrupt misogynist asshole.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 10:15 PM on October 17, 2019 [17 favorites]
Even if that other dude weren’t corrupt, the question itself reeks of Green Lanternism. It’s like asking why the GOP can’t field a credible candidate against Dianne Feinstein. The weather is unfavorable and the incumbent and supporters control all the boats.
posted by notyou at 10:59 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by notyou at 10:59 PM on October 17, 2019 [3 favorites]
So... at a rally last night in Dallas Trump said (amongst other things) the following:
1. The forces in northern Syria should just "scrap a little" with each other;
2. The Academy Awards are failing because of stupid people who oppose him;
3. Dictators like him;
4. Unlike Hunter Biden, Trump's children do not benefit from nepotism;
5. Texas "made a fortune" due to federal money injected into the state after Hurricane Harvey (without acknowledging that the hurricane killed more than 100 people);
6. Past US administrations have wanted the ceasefire he arranged in Northern Syria for 15 or 20 years (notwithstanding that the civil war in Syria only began 9 years ago);
7. Wind power means that, if the wind's not blowing, you can't watch TV.
Source.
posted by essexjan at 12:11 AM on October 18, 2019 [16 favorites]
1. The forces in northern Syria should just "scrap a little" with each other;
2. The Academy Awards are failing because of stupid people who oppose him;
3. Dictators like him;
4. Unlike Hunter Biden, Trump's children do not benefit from nepotism;
5. Texas "made a fortune" due to federal money injected into the state after Hurricane Harvey (without acknowledging that the hurricane killed more than 100 people);
6. Past US administrations have wanted the ceasefire he arranged in Northern Syria for 15 or 20 years (notwithstanding that the civil war in Syria only began 9 years ago);
7. Wind power means that, if the wind's not blowing, you can't watch TV.
Source.
posted by essexjan at 12:11 AM on October 18, 2019 [16 favorites]
“I earned my spurs on the battlefield … and Donald Trump earned his spurs in a letter from a doctor,” Mattis said.
posted by michswiss at 1:10 AM on October 18, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by michswiss at 1:10 AM on October 18, 2019 [12 favorites]
“I think the president has pretty much made it very clear since he got here that he doesn’t profit from being here,” [Mulvaney] said. “He has no interest in profit from being here.”
By the way, note how Mulvaney addressed the obvious emoluments issue by moving the goalposts, claiming Trump doesn't profit, while the emoluments clause forbids payment (that's what an emolument is).
And as David Farenthold has been pointing out for years, Trump's finances are notoriously opaque, yet there's ample reason to believe the claim he doesn't profit is false anyway.
posted by Gelatin at 2:43 AM on October 18, 2019 [25 favorites]
By the way, note how Mulvaney addressed the obvious emoluments issue by moving the goalposts, claiming Trump doesn't profit, while the emoluments clause forbids payment (that's what an emolument is).
And as David Farenthold has been pointing out for years, Trump's finances are notoriously opaque, yet there's ample reason to believe the claim he doesn't profit is false anyway.
posted by Gelatin at 2:43 AM on October 18, 2019 [25 favorites]
If Giuliani can defy congressional subpoena without consequence, then we are functionally done as a country with rule of law. Call your representative.
posted by Gadarene at 5:11 AM on October 18, 2019 [40 favorites]
posted by Gadarene at 5:11 AM on October 18, 2019 [40 favorites]
Rich people don't go to Doral in June.
Unless the golf is incredible (no idea as I don't play), I doubt rich people ever go to the Doral, at least not more than once. I've stayed at this hotel a dozen times, because a client of mine with nearby offices had a deal there and insisted. It's not a great hotel, at all: it's completely generic. It's not even expensive: I went on Orbitz to look at photos to see if it had been upgraded recently (no) and late fall rooms started at a little over $200 (plus, I'm certain, a daily resort fee) and topped out around $500-600 for rooms that also aren't anything special. The separate buildings Trump touts as being so great for the delegations are a pain in the ass; to get to the restaurants, meeting rooms, pool, etc., you can hoof it and arrive sweaty or you can wait and wait and wait to go by cart. I did appreciate that chameleons often snuck into the ground floor rooms, but I'm weird like that.
The Doral isn't close to the best hotel in Miami, let alone the country, if one goal is giving the G7 a high end hospitality experience. The folks on Succession would never consider it; Roman's personal Vietnam was staying at a Marriott In short, it's a poor person's idea of what a swanky resort is like. /snobbery
posted by carmicha at 5:34 AM on October 18, 2019 [65 favorites]
Unless the golf is incredible (no idea as I don't play), I doubt rich people ever go to the Doral, at least not more than once. I've stayed at this hotel a dozen times, because a client of mine with nearby offices had a deal there and insisted. It's not a great hotel, at all: it's completely generic. It's not even expensive: I went on Orbitz to look at photos to see if it had been upgraded recently (no) and late fall rooms started at a little over $200 (plus, I'm certain, a daily resort fee) and topped out around $500-600 for rooms that also aren't anything special. The separate buildings Trump touts as being so great for the delegations are a pain in the ass; to get to the restaurants, meeting rooms, pool, etc., you can hoof it and arrive sweaty or you can wait and wait and wait to go by cart. I did appreciate that chameleons often snuck into the ground floor rooms, but I'm weird like that.
The Doral isn't close to the best hotel in Miami, let alone the country, if one goal is giving the G7 a high end hospitality experience. The folks on Succession would never consider it; Roman's personal Vietnam was staying at a Marriott In short, it's a poor person's idea of what a swanky resort is like. /snobbery
posted by carmicha at 5:34 AM on October 18, 2019 [65 favorites]
I think an emolument is anything of value. The inspiration for the emoluments clause was a fancy ashtray some king was handing out to diplomats. The founders were actually freaked out that a foreign king was handing out gifts.
posted by xammerboy at 5:36 AM on October 18, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 5:36 AM on October 18, 2019 [9 favorites]
The founders were actually freaked out that a foreign king was handing out gifts.
Foreign influence seems to have been a big concern to them; hence, the President must be a natural-born citizen, etc. One of the big things that Alexander Hamilton's political foes hammered away at was the idea that he was somehow beholden to England; perhaps because he had defended Loyalists in court.
posted by thelonius at 5:41 AM on October 18, 2019 [3 favorites]
Foreign influence seems to have been a big concern to them; hence, the President must be a natural-born citizen, etc. One of the big things that Alexander Hamilton's political foes hammered away at was the idea that he was somehow beholden to England; perhaps because he had defended Loyalists in court.
posted by thelonius at 5:41 AM on October 18, 2019 [3 favorites]
Apparently, one reason the hotel was perfect for the event is that is has "ample parking". Also, I learned that Trump not only names hotels after himself, but then also names all the meeting rooms after himself of family members as well, so you have the pleasure of staying at Trump hotel then meeting in the Donald Trump room and then socializing later in the Ivanka Trump ballroom. Your drunken night probably ends in rueful tears in the Eric Trump hotel bar.
The hotel thing, btw, is absolutely impeachable. It's not a question. This is an impeachable offense committed in the open, and this action had to be taken in relation to the other impeachment charges. Trump must have basically reached the conclusion that using his hotel for the G7 would be a smart move at this point. I'm not sure he's wrong, because the world is going to freak out, while the average voter will be confused and not see what the big deal is, eventually concluding that all this impeachment stuff must be overblown.
posted by xammerboy at 5:46 AM on October 18, 2019 [37 favorites]
The hotel thing, btw, is absolutely impeachable. It's not a question. This is an impeachable offense committed in the open, and this action had to be taken in relation to the other impeachment charges. Trump must have basically reached the conclusion that using his hotel for the G7 would be a smart move at this point. I'm not sure he's wrong, because the world is going to freak out, while the average voter will be confused and not see what the big deal is, eventually concluding that all this impeachment stuff must be overblown.
posted by xammerboy at 5:46 AM on October 18, 2019 [37 favorites]
One thing that’s been odd to me is how the press has talked almost from the beginning about foreign emoluments but never domestic emoluments — even though Trump has been paying himself for meals and rooms for security details and other aides every time he goes to Mar A Lago or any of his other properties. Doral definitely puts his abuses to another level but this really isn’t new.
Also, go back and reread the two emoluments clauses — notice how they are different. You can receive a foreign emolument with the approval of congress but there is no such exception for domestic emoluments. You get your salary and that’s it — no other payments or gifts are allowed.
When the House does write up articles of impeachment, this absolutely needs to be one of the charges and might be the easiest and most straightforward one to get a conviction. His actions are out in the open and the GOP’s willing abeyance of their constitutional role needs to be made clear to the voters.
And if we’re lucky enough to impeach him for this crime, Congress then needs to claw back every penny he charged the government.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 6:35 AM on October 18, 2019 [43 favorites]
Also, go back and reread the two emoluments clauses — notice how they are different. You can receive a foreign emolument with the approval of congress but there is no such exception for domestic emoluments. You get your salary and that’s it — no other payments or gifts are allowed.
When the House does write up articles of impeachment, this absolutely needs to be one of the charges and might be the easiest and most straightforward one to get a conviction. His actions are out in the open and the GOP’s willing abeyance of their constitutional role needs to be made clear to the voters.
And if we’re lucky enough to impeach him for this crime, Congress then needs to claw back every penny he charged the government.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 6:35 AM on October 18, 2019 [43 favorites]
Republicans seek to delay effort to censure Schiff after Cummings' death (Juliegrace Brufke, The Hill)
Otherwise we might have seen it introduced this week.
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:58 AM on October 18, 2019 [1 favorite]
Otherwise we might have seen it introduced this week.
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:58 AM on October 18, 2019 [1 favorite]
Impeachment inquiry shows Trump at the center of Ukraine efforts against rivals (WaPo)
Nick Akerman, a prosecutor who investigated President Richard Nixon, said that unlike Watergate, when prosecutors struggled to figure out Nixon’s role in the events they were investigating, a growing body of evidence points directly to Trump.Next question for Rick Perry: Will he testify? (Politico)
“Here, you’ll have that in spades,” Akerman said. “All these individuals, all testifying that this is what happened. . . . It’s just cascading at this point.”
Akerman said that unlike Nixon’s loyal cadre of aides, Trump’s outer circle of aides and advisers is increasingly unwilling to shield him from what some view as his own dubious behavior.
[...] And, he added, each new witness and detail seems to reveal a common thread: “You’ve got Trump clearly involved.”
“For the most part, he has a lot to lose by getting embroiled in this and he’s not going to want to hide things,” said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity to preserve relationships with administration officials. “He’s going to want to extract himself as cleanly as he can from this snare.”posted by katra at 7:00 AM on October 18, 2019 [5 favorites]
The hotel thing, btw, is absolutely impeachable. It's not a question.
If you'd asked me three years ago if members of congress would wave away something like this like it's nothing to get upset about, I'd have been incredulous, now I expect it.
posted by octothorpe at 7:21 AM on October 18, 2019 [23 favorites]
If you'd asked me three years ago if members of congress would wave away something like this like it's nothing to get upset about, I'd have been incredulous, now I expect it.
posted by octothorpe at 7:21 AM on October 18, 2019 [23 favorites]
Impeachment is too important to leave to Congress — it’s going to take mass mobilization (Matthew Yglesias, Vox)
A lawless president won’t be constrained by establishment politics alone.posted by ZeusHumms at 7:33 AM on October 18, 2019 [22 favorites]
Watergate is the ur-text for how Americans imagine the defeat of a sitting president, but it shouldn’t be how to think about the impeachment of Donald Trump. […]
Elected officials in the Democratic Party, like established politicians everywhere, aren’t instinctively comfortable with the idea of popular resistance, but it’s not an entirely alien concept to them, either. In the extreme political emergency of 2017, they embraced protest politics. That started with emergency mass demonstrations at airports to block Trump’s initial travel ban, continued through the Women’s March, and was seen repeatedly on Capitol Hill and in congressional town halls as people came out en masse to oppose repealing the Affordable Care Act.
A lawless government cannot be constrained by the institutions of the law alone. It is popular mass resistance that creates a crisis point and forces action. And if Democrats want to beat Trump’s stonewalling tactics in 2019, they should consider doing it again.
“I earned my spurs on the battlefield … and Donald Trump earned his spurs in a letter from a doctor,” Mattis said.
Hey, fuck that guy. He made this ha, ha, not funny joke in a scripted speech at the fancy white-tie Al Smith Dinner. This wasn't a criticism of Trump. He followed it up with a crack that he didn't take Trump's criticism seriously because the criticizes every military man except Colonel Sanders. He's apologizing for Trump.
This is the guy who goes around on his book tour refusing to answer any questions about his time in the White House because he owes Trump "a duty of silence." The same guy who never misses an opportunity to trash Barrack Obama, who he also served under. The same guy who got millions of dollars on the board of the grifter blood testing company Theranos trying to push its quackery medicine on the U.S. Army.
If he actually gave a shit about his country he wouldn't be functioning, to this day, as a Trump enabler.
posted by JackFlash at 7:45 AM on October 18, 2019 [76 favorites]
Hey, fuck that guy. He made this ha, ha, not funny joke in a scripted speech at the fancy white-tie Al Smith Dinner. This wasn't a criticism of Trump. He followed it up with a crack that he didn't take Trump's criticism seriously because the criticizes every military man except Colonel Sanders. He's apologizing for Trump.
This is the guy who goes around on his book tour refusing to answer any questions about his time in the White House because he owes Trump "a duty of silence." The same guy who never misses an opportunity to trash Barrack Obama, who he also served under. The same guy who got millions of dollars on the board of the grifter blood testing company Theranos trying to push its quackery medicine on the U.S. Army.
If he actually gave a shit about his country he wouldn't be functioning, to this day, as a Trump enabler.
posted by JackFlash at 7:45 AM on October 18, 2019 [76 favorites]
suelac: Mulvaney just issued a statement flatly contradicting himself, claiming there was no quid pro quo.
xammerboy: Mr. Mulvaney said the hotel would put on the summit “at cost.” “I think the president has pretty much made it very clear since he got here that he doesn’t profit from being here,” he said. “He has no interest in profit from being here.”
Trump’s lies are not the problem. It’s the millions who swallow them who really matter ( Nick Cohen for The Guardian, Feb 4, 2017)
posted by filthy light thief at 7:48 AM on October 18, 2019 [10 favorites]
xammerboy: Mr. Mulvaney said the hotel would put on the summit “at cost.” “I think the president has pretty much made it very clear since he got here that he doesn’t profit from being here,” he said. “He has no interest in profit from being here.”
Trump’s lies are not the problem. It’s the millions who swallow them who really matter ( Nick Cohen for The Guardian, Feb 4, 2017)
Compulsive liars shouldn’t frighten you. They can harm no one, if no one listens to them. Compulsive believers, on the other hand: they should terrify you. Believers are the liars’ enablers. Their votes give the demagogue his power. Their trust turns the charlatan into the president. Their credulity ensures that the propaganda of half-calculating and half-mad fanatics has the power to change the world.And/or the lies are about taking one of representative democracy’s creeds – authenticity – and turning it on its head. (Why Europe’s new populists tell so many lies, previously).
posted by filthy light thief at 7:48 AM on October 18, 2019 [10 favorites]
The Unraveling of Donald Trump (Peter Nicholas, The Atlantic) As the impeachment inquiry intensifies, some associates of the president predict that his already erratic behavior is going to get worse.
“He’s grown more comfortable in the job and less willing to assimilate new information and trust new advisers,” a former White House official told me. “He’s decided to throw caution to the wind and go it alone, especially when he’s stressed and feels under attack and threatened in various ways. Then his worst impulses and vices shine through.”posted by box at 7:50 AM on October 18, 2019 [10 favorites]
....
“I think what we’re viewing, if you think about the human side of it, is the man has no life. He just has no life,” the person close to him told me.
Compulsive liars shouldn’t frighten you. They can harm no one, if no one listens to them. Compulsive believers, on the other hand: they should terrify you. Believers are the liars’ enablers. Their votes give the demagogue his power. Their trust turns the charlatan into the president. Their credulity ensures that the propaganda of half-calculating and half-mad fanatics has the power to change the world.
It's honestly a lot of chickens coming home to roost. When people get given a shit deal by a capitalist, do they blame the capitalist? Sure. But what are they going to do about it? That guy has money, connections, power. The system isn't just made for the capitalist, it's made by the capitalist. But they still want some semblance of justice. So they turn their vengeance towards the only thing in the whole fakakta they think they can do something about, the immigrants. They want to believe the lies that charlatans and demagogues tell them because otherwise it means they have no power and they just have to sit there and take it. The system has failed them, so burn it all down unless they get theirs.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:11 AM on October 18, 2019 [7 favorites]
It's honestly a lot of chickens coming home to roost. When people get given a shit deal by a capitalist, do they blame the capitalist? Sure. But what are they going to do about it? That guy has money, connections, power. The system isn't just made for the capitalist, it's made by the capitalist. But they still want some semblance of justice. So they turn their vengeance towards the only thing in the whole fakakta they think they can do something about, the immigrants. They want to believe the lies that charlatans and demagogues tell them because otherwise it means they have no power and they just have to sit there and take it. The system has failed them, so burn it all down unless they get theirs.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:11 AM on October 18, 2019 [7 favorites]
“I think what we’re viewing, if you think about the human side of it, is the man has no life. He just has no life,” the person close to him told me.
Some people think getting to do nothing is the biggest perk of being rich and powerful; they're the ones who like sitting around in fancy rooms and being waited on hand and foot. Other people think getting to do all the things is the biggest perk of being rich and powerful. They're travelling the world and making a difference. Vis-a-vis presidents, Obama, Clinton, Carter, are the latter; most modern Republican presidents (with the possible exception of Bush II)--and none more so than Trump-- are the former.
posted by carmicha at 8:21 AM on October 18, 2019 [7 favorites]
Some people think getting to do nothing is the biggest perk of being rich and powerful; they're the ones who like sitting around in fancy rooms and being waited on hand and foot. Other people think getting to do all the things is the biggest perk of being rich and powerful. They're travelling the world and making a difference. Vis-a-vis presidents, Obama, Clinton, Carter, are the latter; most modern Republican presidents (with the possible exception of Bush II)--and none more so than Trump-- are the former.
posted by carmicha at 8:21 AM on October 18, 2019 [7 favorites]
If you'd asked me three years ago if members of congress would wave away something like this like it's nothing to get upset about, I'd have been incredulous, now I expect it.
Marco Rubio has already said he's completely fine with it. He has absolutely no shame; it's sickening.
posted by Gadarene at 8:26 AM on October 18, 2019 [7 favorites]
If you'd asked me three years ago if members of congress would wave away something like this like it's nothing to get upset about, I'd have been incredulous, now I expect it.
Not just members of Congress; members of the party that claims to be the particular defenders of the Constitution. (Ron Howard narrator voice: They aren't.)
posted by Gelatin at 8:26 AM on October 18, 2019 [5 favorites]
Not just members of Congress; members of the party that claims to be the particular defenders of the Constitution. (Ron Howard narrator voice: They aren't.)
posted by Gelatin at 8:26 AM on October 18, 2019 [5 favorites]
Some people think getting to do nothing is the biggest perk of being rich and powerful; they're the ones who like sitting around in fancy rooms and being waited on hand and foot.
Trump likes to "make deals" and play golf. Except all his deals turn to shit and he would be richer if he'd just coasted off his dad's money. It's really a shame he didn't have a gambling addiction, which might have been enough to burn through the buffer of wealth that has (at least until now) protected him from the consequences of his actions.
posted by Foosnark at 8:31 AM on October 18, 2019 [10 favorites]
Trump likes to "make deals" and play golf. Except all his deals turn to shit and he would be richer if he'd just coasted off his dad's money. It's really a shame he didn't have a gambling addiction, which might have been enough to burn through the buffer of wealth that has (at least until now) protected him from the consequences of his actions.
posted by Foosnark at 8:31 AM on October 18, 2019 [10 favorites]
The Unraveling of Donald Trump
He’s decided to throw caution to the wind and go it alone, especially when he’s stressed and feels under attack and threatened in various ways. Then his worst impulses and vices shine through.
The same headlines and stories for three years. Four including the campaign.
As a wise man who now enjoys over 50% favorability among Democrats once said: "Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. G'fool me can't get fooled again."
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:35 AM on October 18, 2019 [10 favorites]
He’s decided to throw caution to the wind and go it alone, especially when he’s stressed and feels under attack and threatened in various ways. Then his worst impulses and vices shine through.
The same headlines and stories for three years. Four including the campaign.
As a wise man who now enjoys over 50% favorability among Democrats once said: "Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. G'fool me can't get fooled again."
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:35 AM on October 18, 2019 [10 favorites]
Believers are the liars’ enablers.
I just saw on Twitter an interesting point: the Christian Right is drawn to Trump because he communicates his message using the political equivalent of parables. He slid neatly into the giant "seriously but not literally" hole that the Evangelicals have been holding open to explain the contradictions of Biblical literalism.
posted by Etrigan at 8:38 AM on October 18, 2019 [16 favorites]
I just saw on Twitter an interesting point: the Christian Right is drawn to Trump because he communicates his message using the political equivalent of parables. He slid neatly into the giant "seriously but not literally" hole that the Evangelicals have been holding open to explain the contradictions of Biblical literalism.
posted by Etrigan at 8:38 AM on October 18, 2019 [16 favorites]
Carmicha said: I doubt rich people ever go to the Doral, at least not more than once.
This is true of all Trump properties I've been forced to attend. They're midrate 3 star at best, with terrible service, crap linens, ridiculously overpriced everything, and decor from a well appointed brothel. I would choose a Hilton Garden Suites off the highway before I would choose a Trump property on purpose.
Frankly, emoluments or no, he should be impeached just for making foreign leaders have to act like that is what constitutes a luxury hotel in this country. There's a reason a ton of foreign leaders have booked blocks of rooms at Trump properties, but then stayed at better hotels, just recognizing that the fee to Donald is just part of doing business with the United States.
If him moving the G7 to Doral doesn't make the House add emoluments to the impeachment charges, then I will be sadly disappointed in them. This is a no-brain winner, even easily explained to the redhats.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 8:46 AM on October 18, 2019 [25 favorites]
This is true of all Trump properties I've been forced to attend. They're midrate 3 star at best, with terrible service, crap linens, ridiculously overpriced everything, and decor from a well appointed brothel. I would choose a Hilton Garden Suites off the highway before I would choose a Trump property on purpose.
Frankly, emoluments or no, he should be impeached just for making foreign leaders have to act like that is what constitutes a luxury hotel in this country. There's a reason a ton of foreign leaders have booked blocks of rooms at Trump properties, but then stayed at better hotels, just recognizing that the fee to Donald is just part of doing business with the United States.
If him moving the G7 to Doral doesn't make the House add emoluments to the impeachment charges, then I will be sadly disappointed in them. This is a no-brain winner, even easily explained to the redhats.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 8:46 AM on October 18, 2019 [25 favorites]
He slid neatly into the giant "seriously but not literally" hole that the Evangelicals have been holding open to explain the contradictions of Biblical literalism.
Meh. Biblical 'literalism' was invented entirely to enable racism and slavery. That's your nexus right there between Trump and the white fundagelical crowd. No need to reach further for second-order excuses. That observation isn't wrong, but it isn't necessary either.
posted by bcd at 8:48 AM on October 18, 2019 [19 favorites]
Meh. Biblical 'literalism' was invented entirely to enable racism and slavery. That's your nexus right there between Trump and the white fundagelical crowd. No need to reach further for second-order excuses. That observation isn't wrong, but it isn't necessary either.
posted by bcd at 8:48 AM on October 18, 2019 [19 favorites]
Remember when he was "smart" to not pay his taxes? Same for making money off his hotels while Prez. No one who loves him will care at all.
posted by agregoli at 8:56 AM on October 18, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by agregoli at 8:56 AM on October 18, 2019 [7 favorites]
Donald Trump’s sanity is not the question. The real issue is how he got into office
Gary Younge/The Guardian
Gary Younge/The Guardian
While writing a New Yorker profile on Donald Trump in the late 1990s, Mark Singer attempted to discover something about the businessman’s private thoughts, as opposed to his outsized, public persona. When Singer asked him what he thought about when shaving in front of the mirror, Trump did not really understand the question....
“OK, I guess I’m asking, ‘do you consider yourself ideal company?’” Singer said. “You really want to know what I consider ideal company?” replied Trump. “A total piece of ass.”
These inclinations were clear when he stood for the presidency. He has been every bit as bigoted, undisciplined, indiscreet, thin-skinned and braggadocious as his campaign promised. And he won.posted by mumimor at 8:57 AM on October 18, 2019 [14 favorites]
This was not because people didn’t see those things, but because they either didn’t care, cared about other things more, preferred him to the alternative, or simply didn’t show up. As such, his victory marked a high point for the naked appeal of white supremacy in particular and rightwing populism in general, and a low point for the centre-left, neoliberal agenda.
True, he did not win the popular vote, but nonetheless close to 63 million people voted for him. True, his party lost the House of Representatives in the 2018 mid-term elections. But they also gained two seats in the Senate – the first time the party holding the presidency has achieved that since 2002 – in the wake of a synagogue shooting and mail-bomb attacks inspired by his rhetoric. True, more than half of the country wants to impeach him; but about 40% still approve of the job he’s doing. The one thing that stands between him and impeachment is the party behind him in both houses.
I don't think there is a metaphor that can handle this.
I've taken to calling it 'The Moron-Contra Affair"
posted by pseudophile at 8:58 AM on October 18, 2019 [24 favorites]
I've taken to calling it 'The Moron-Contra Affair"
posted by pseudophile at 8:58 AM on October 18, 2019 [24 favorites]
I don't think there is a metaphor that can handle this.
I'm waiting for it to be done so that it can be used as a pungent metaphor for something else.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:10 AM on October 18, 2019 [13 favorites]
I'm waiting for it to be done so that it can be used as a pungent metaphor for something else.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:10 AM on October 18, 2019 [13 favorites]
These inclinations were clear when he stood for the presidency. He has been every bit as bigoted, undisciplined, indiscreet, thin-skinned and braggadocious as his campaign promised. And he won.
This was not because people didn’t see those things, but because they either didn’t care, cared about other things more, preferred him to the alternative, or simply didn’t show up.
Hmm, I think Younge missed the "and they really liked it" option.
posted by gusottertrout at 9:22 AM on October 18, 2019 [20 favorites]
This was not because people didn’t see those things, but because they either didn’t care, cared about other things more, preferred him to the alternative, or simply didn’t show up.
Hmm, I think Younge missed the "and they really liked it" option.
posted by gusottertrout at 9:22 AM on October 18, 2019 [20 favorites]
Someone on Quora asked “Why do some British people not like Donald Trump?” Nate White, an articulate and witty writer from England wrote the following response:
posted by adamvasco at 10:26 AM on October 18, 2019 [39 favorites]
posted by adamvasco at 10:26 AM on October 18, 2019 [39 favorites]
On my phone, not sure if this has been linked yet: Vanity Fair on the money flowing into Trump DC..
posted by suelac at 10:27 AM on October 18, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by suelac at 10:27 AM on October 18, 2019 [12 favorites]
That VF piece is some quality reporting.
Of the 33 people to have served in Trump’s cabinet, 25 of them have been spotted at his DC hotel. So have at least 6 of the 17 Republican members of the House Oversight and Reform Committee. Rep. Jim Jordan, the top GOP lawmaker on that panel, has spent about $22,000 of campaign funds at the hotel while also trying to thwart House investigations into its lease and Trump’s finances. Twenty-six out of 53 Republican senators have either appeared at the hotel or are affiliated with campaigns or committees that have spent funds there. Combined, the Trump hotel DC has taken in more than $1.1 million from just the Republican National Committee, Trump’s campaign, and committees headed by Vice President Mike Pence and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. And over the summer, pro-Trump super PAC America First Action shattered the $500,000 mark in total spending, just at that property. The president profits from all of this business.posted by box at 10:40 AM on October 18, 2019 [21 favorites]
Kasich says he'll vote for impeachment.
posted by Devonian at 11:29 AM on October 18, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Devonian at 11:29 AM on October 18, 2019 [1 favorite]
I mean, that's great, but Kasich is a governor. He can't vote for impeachment OR removal.
posted by rikschell at 11:35 AM on October 18, 2019 [25 favorites]
posted by rikschell at 11:35 AM on October 18, 2019 [25 favorites]
I put together an emoluments thread. There are important matters to this and it isn't part of the official impeachment proceedings (as of yet).
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 11:36 AM on October 18, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 11:36 AM on October 18, 2019 [17 favorites]
I mean, that's great, but Kasich is a governor. He can't vote for impeachment OR removal.
Ex-governor. Either way, basically the same as announcing "MrGuilt would vote for impeachment." Which he would.
posted by MrGuilt at 11:36 AM on October 18, 2019 [4 favorites]
Ex-governor. Either way, basically the same as announcing "MrGuilt would vote for impeachment." Which he would.
posted by MrGuilt at 11:36 AM on October 18, 2019 [4 favorites]
Kasich says he'll vote for impeachment.
I mean, that's great, but Kasich is a governor. He can't vote for impeachment OR removal.
He's not even that. His term ended this year. The story more precisely says that Kasich has come out in favor of impeachment.
posted by Etrigan at 11:37 AM on October 18, 2019 [1 favorite]
I mean, that's great, but Kasich is a governor. He can't vote for impeachment OR removal.
He's not even that. His term ended this year. The story more precisely says that Kasich has come out in favor of impeachment.
posted by Etrigan at 11:37 AM on October 18, 2019 [1 favorite]
The story more precisely says that Kasich has come out in favor of impeachment.
And more precisely yet, he said he would vote for an impeachment inquiry if he were in the House. He did not say anything about voting for removal if in the Senate.
Same weasel as always.
posted by JackFlash at 12:58 PM on October 18, 2019 [11 favorites]
And more precisely yet, he said he would vote for an impeachment inquiry if he were in the House. He did not say anything about voting for removal if in the Senate.
Same weasel as always.
posted by JackFlash at 12:58 PM on October 18, 2019 [11 favorites]
And he also had to throw in some gratuitous insults at the Democrats for doing their impeaching all wrong.
posted by JackFlash at 1:01 PM on October 18, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 1:01 PM on October 18, 2019 [2 favorites]
Kasich is only thinking about saving 4 years on his presidential run timeline.
posted by BeginAgain at 1:42 PM on October 18, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by BeginAgain at 1:42 PM on October 18, 2019 [5 favorites]
WaPo: 2 p.m.: Republican lawmaker won’t rule out impeaching Trump, compares him to Nixon
GOP Rep. Francis Rooney (Fla.) offered a damning assessment of Mulvaney, defended career diplomats, and said he’s not afraid of the president’s wrath. Rooney said Friday he’s had Watergate on his mind lately, specifically that critics called it a witch hunt before it was clear how bad it really was. He won’t rule out impeaching Trump, he said, before knowing all the facts.posted by katra at 2:22 PM on October 18, 2019 [30 favorites]
Rooney said he “couldn’t believe” Mulvaney’s admission of a quid pro quo and his later reversal. “I was shocked that he said that stuff. When the president has said many times there wasn’t a quid pro quo. . . . . and now Mick Mulvaney goes up and says, ‘Yeah, it was all part of the whole plan!’ ” Rooney said. As for Mulvaney walking back his comments, the congressman said, “You know, this is a funny business. How in life can you do those kinds of things when you’ve just said it right there on national TV.”
Rooney also said that the State Department officials testifying in the impeachment proceedings “are not partisan people” and that he’s eager to hear from former national security adviser John Bolton. [...]
And Trump’s wrath?
“What’s he going to do to me? I mean, he can say bad things, but it’s just what it is,” Rooney said. “There’s a lot of people around who are seriously concerned about being criticized by the president. Seriously. I just want to call them as I see it. I want to get the facts and do the right thing because I’ll be looking at my children a lot longer than I’m looking to anybody in this building.”
Josh Marshall, TPM, on a Bloomberg story: "And there it is, the other quid pro quo. Notorious Ukrainian oligarch Dmitry Firtash would help Rudy and DiGenova and Toensing cook up dirt on Joe Biden. In return, they’d work with Trump to get US corruption charges against Firtash tossed. Firtash has been fighting extradition to the US on federal corruption charges since 2014." More from TPM on this: The Debunked Biden Allegations Are Incredibly Useful To Dmitry Firtash.
posted by MonkeyToes at 3:50 PM on October 18, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by MonkeyToes at 3:50 PM on October 18, 2019 [17 favorites]
He slid neatly into the giant "seriously but not literally" hole that the Evangelicals have been holding open to explain the contradictions of Biblical literalism.
AKA Doublethink.
posted by sexyrobot at 4:11 PM on October 18, 2019 [3 favorites]
AKA Doublethink.
posted by sexyrobot at 4:11 PM on October 18, 2019 [3 favorites]
Democrats are zeroing in on Rudy Giuliani to impeach Trump (Politico)
“Rudy Giuliani is Donald Trump, and Donald Trump is Rudy Giuliani,” said Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee. After a week of depositions from key figures in the impeachment inquiry, Democrats are coalescing around a push to prove that Trump committed impeachable offenses at least partly by showing that Trump had intimate knowledge of and directed Giuliani’s plans, goals and tactics.posted by katra at 4:28 PM on October 18, 2019 [3 favorites]
[...] “I’m pretty sure they’re not just talking about the weather and their golf games,” [Rep. Harley Rouda (D-Calif.)] quipped in a brief interview, referencing the pair’s frequent meetings and phone calls. “Especially when it’s also very clear from the evidence that President Trump directed members of the State Department to work directly with Giuliani in their efforts in Ukraine. So the nexus is there. There is no debating the facts.”
[...] “We’ve seen this movie before, with Michael Cohen,” Rouda said. “Giuliani’s going to get thrown under the bus. The president's going to make it sound like ‘I didn’t tell him to do this or that, he was rogue, he went out on his own.’ And we all know that’s not true, but I think we can all lay a bet down on how this story ends. And that’s what you’re going to see.” [...]
Perhaps more importantly, though, Republicans have indicated they’re uncomfortable with Giuliani’s behavior toward Ukraine and have questioned his methods and mission. Though Trump’s allies are careful to pin any questionable conduct on Giuliani alone, Democrats see their unwillingness to defend Giuliani’s efforts in Ukraine as an opening to tie potential wrongdoing to the president. [...]
There are indications, though, that some House Republicans are beginning to question Trump’s handling of Ukraine. “It’s painful to me to see this kind of amateur diplomacy riding roughshod over our State Department apparatus,” said Rep. Francis Rooney (R-Fla.), a former ambassador and a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
And here's the Bloomberg story: To Win Giuliani’s Help, Oligarch’s Allies Pursued Biden Dirt. "Associates of a Ukrainian oligarch fighting extradition to the U.S. were working to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden last summer in an effort to get Rudy Giuliani’s help in the oligarch’s legal case, according to three people familiar with the exchanges."
posted by MonkeyToes at 4:38 PM on October 18, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by MonkeyToes at 4:38 PM on October 18, 2019 [10 favorites]
It's painful to you, Francis Rooney? The awkward, amateur diplomacy? That's your best shot? Trump's government continues to be more than painful to the immigrant/refugee children, families, and adults his administration has imprisoned. To the dying Kurds he helped kill. To the people of color and native peoples and LGBTQ folks and everyone else his administration, judges, and party are continuing to work hard to disenfranchise, destroy, fire, rob, or ruin in other ways.
As the British writer cited above wrote, Trump "is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of shit. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum."
Trump's impeachment cannot come fast enough for me. In the meantime, Ezra Klein is launching a new podcast on October 19, called Impeachment, Explained. Have no idea how good it will be but plan to listen to the first one asap.
posted by Bella Donna at 4:53 PM on October 18, 2019 [13 favorites]
As the British writer cited above wrote, Trump "is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of shit. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum."
Trump's impeachment cannot come fast enough for me. In the meantime, Ezra Klein is launching a new podcast on October 19, called Impeachment, Explained. Have no idea how good it will be but plan to listen to the first one asap.
posted by Bella Donna at 4:53 PM on October 18, 2019 [13 favorites]
Rep. Rooney is also the first Republican to call for Rick Perry to answer the House subpoena (Politico).
posted by katra at 5:14 PM on October 18, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by katra at 5:14 PM on October 18, 2019 [6 favorites]
Associates of a Ukrainian oligarch fighting extradition to the U.S. were working to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden
It sure would be interesting to see Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing tied in to an illegal effort to solicit $1 million worth of Biden dirt from a foreign oligarch in exchange for dropping a US extradition case.
Joe and Victoria are dirty lawyers that go back decades to the hunting of Clinton. diGenova goes back even farther to the sting and entrapment case against DC Mayor Marion Berry. He was the Republican special investigator that gave the GHW Bush administration a pass for illegally searching Bill Clinton's passport history in way back in 1992 when Clinton was running against Bush. Illegally soliciting campaign dirt. I detect a pattern here.
Toensing was a lawyer for Linda Tripp in the Monica Lewinsky investigation. They were involved in the illegal leaks from the Starr impeachment investigation and were on cable TV news shows almost every day for months. They next turned up defending Scooter Libby in the illegal leaking of the covert status of Valerie Plame. Toensing also represented Blackwater executive Erik Prince.
And now they turn up working with Guiliani on illegal extortion and solicitation. Couldn't happen to a lovelier couple.
posted by JackFlash at 5:24 PM on October 18, 2019 [40 favorites]
It sure would be interesting to see Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing tied in to an illegal effort to solicit $1 million worth of Biden dirt from a foreign oligarch in exchange for dropping a US extradition case.
Joe and Victoria are dirty lawyers that go back decades to the hunting of Clinton. diGenova goes back even farther to the sting and entrapment case against DC Mayor Marion Berry. He was the Republican special investigator that gave the GHW Bush administration a pass for illegally searching Bill Clinton's passport history in way back in 1992 when Clinton was running against Bush. Illegally soliciting campaign dirt. I detect a pattern here.
Toensing was a lawyer for Linda Tripp in the Monica Lewinsky investigation. They were involved in the illegal leaks from the Starr impeachment investigation and were on cable TV news shows almost every day for months. They next turned up defending Scooter Libby in the illegal leaking of the covert status of Valerie Plame. Toensing also represented Blackwater executive Erik Prince.
And now they turn up working with Guiliani on illegal extortion and solicitation. Couldn't happen to a lovelier couple.
posted by JackFlash at 5:24 PM on October 18, 2019 [40 favorites]
Yeah, lower-order GOP house members in tight districts are smelling blood in the water, and looking toward the future, in a cycle or two, when they can become the face of 'the New Republican Party'. The GOP's vaunted lockstep is mis-stepping.
posted by eclectist at 6:05 PM on October 18, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by eclectist at 6:05 PM on October 18, 2019 [9 favorites]
Why Firing Mick Mulvaney Is Riskier Than Keeping Him (Elaina Plott and Peter Nicholas, Atlantic)
Bolton’s uncertain loyalty in this pivotal moment has convinced many of Trump’s allies that, eager as the president may be to oust him, Mulvaney is better kept inside of the White House. According to the current and former White House officials and others close to the president, people have been urging Trump to hold his acting chief in place, telling him that the risk of an aggrieved ex-official on the outside far outweighs any annoyances Trump may have with him. As President Lyndon Johnson famously said about then–FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, it’s better to keep him inside the tent “pissing out” than the opposite.Friends With Benefits: Donald and Rudy’s Long, Strange Partnership (Michael Kruse, Politico Magazine)
And now here they are, Trump and Giuliani, staring at the prospect of Trump’s impeachment before the new year. Trump recently started to distance himself from Giuliani, according to a former senior administration official, before being told that was a bad idea. Even as allies grow increasingly frustrated with Giuliani’s loose-lipped, on-air antics, cast-aside aides can turn into enemies, and that, the thinking goes, is the last thing this administration needs at this moment of heightening risk. “I don’t think Trump has any choice now but to keep Giuliani close,” the senior administration official said.General discontent: how the president's military men turned on Trump (Guardian)
The new sense of license to criticize Trump among military leaders originated with the president’s highly contentious decision last week to pull US troops from northern Syria. The sudden move has paved the way for a Turkish invasion that has put a prominent US ally in the fight against Isis, the Syrian Kurds, in mortal danger.posted by katra at 6:55 PM on October 18, 2019 [5 favorites]
Growing number of Republicans struggle to defend Trump on G-7 choice, Ukraine and Syria (WaPo)
In interviews with more than 20 GOP lawmakers and congressional aides in the past 48 hours, many said they were repulsed by Trump’s decision to host an international summit at his own resort and incensed by acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney’s admission — later withdrawn — that U.S. aid to Ukraine was withheld for political reasons. Others expressed anger over the president’s abandonment of Kurdish allies in Syria. [...]posted by katra at 7:55 PM on October 18, 2019 [9 favorites]
The GOP’s rising frustration is a break from the past three years, when congressional Republicans almost uniformly defended Trump through a series of scandals that engulfed the White House. There’s now a growing sense among a quiet group of Republicans that the president is playing with fire, taking their loyalty for granted as they’re forced to “defend the indefensible,” as a senior House Republican said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to talk frankly.
That senior House Republican is a real Profile in Cowardice.
posted by biogeo at 8:48 PM on October 18, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by biogeo at 8:48 PM on October 18, 2019 [17 favorites]
Exclusive: Giuliani pushed Trump administration to grant a visa to a Ukrainian official promising dirt on Democrats (CNN)
Kent, the deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, testified that around January 2019 Giuliani requested a visa for former Ukrainian prosecutor-general Viktor Shokin to travel to the United States. Shokin had been pushed out of his position as Ukraine's top prosecutor in 2016 after pressure from Western leaders, including Biden, over concerns that he was not pursuing corruption cases.posted by katra at 9:29 PM on October 18, 2019 [13 favorites]
Giuliani has previously told CNN he wanted to interview Shokin in person because the Ukrainian promised to reveal dirt on Democrats.
Kent told congressional investigators the State Department had objected to the request, and State did not grant the visa. Giuliani, Kent said, then appealed to the White House to have State reverse its decision. Shokin's visa was never granted, although Giuliani eventually spoke with Shokin over Skype.
The incident reveals how Giuliani's work to dig up dirt on Democrats went much further than previously understood -- and included an attempt to directly influence the actions of the federal government.
You know, I was alive during Watergate, and watched a lot of it on TV. Granted, I was a preteen, but I had very politically active parents, so I was probably more politically aware than many of my peers.
Watergate divided the country, especially in the beginning, but even then, it never felt like the cult of personality that it feels like now. Perhaps because Tricky Dick had the charisma of a used tissue, and Donny knows how to work a stage. But Trump had a rally in the big town an hour from me yesterday, and traffic across the metroplex was nightmarish, because there was a big, and I mean big, influx of people who came to worship at the Church of Hate and Chaos.
I considered going to counter demonstrate, but I'm having trouble moving right now, and wasn't sure I could get out of the way if the Promise Keepers got rough, or the cops did, or if the crowd turned dangerous. Any and all of which were possible. Someone did get arrested in a bullet proof jacket and, iirc an assault rifle and ammo.
Trump is a problem, as president certainly, but he will also be problematic as an impeached removed president. He is a state funded cult leader, and his cult is armed, dangerous, and looking for an excuse.
He needs to be impeached. He needs to be removed. But we absolutely need the Republicans to stand up and vote for impeachment. They have to realize how dangerous the situation is, and somehow, we need to make them care. Of course, I say that when my Senators are Cruz and Cornyn, and since they're both souless eldrich horrors in skin suits, I don't hold out much hope of bringing them to the light, but still I call and write regularly, and we should all perhaps get back in the habit of bugging our elected officials to do something to stop the fall of Rome.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 10:48 PM on October 18, 2019 [34 favorites]
Watergate divided the country, especially in the beginning, but even then, it never felt like the cult of personality that it feels like now. Perhaps because Tricky Dick had the charisma of a used tissue, and Donny knows how to work a stage. But Trump had a rally in the big town an hour from me yesterday, and traffic across the metroplex was nightmarish, because there was a big, and I mean big, influx of people who came to worship at the Church of Hate and Chaos.
I considered going to counter demonstrate, but I'm having trouble moving right now, and wasn't sure I could get out of the way if the Promise Keepers got rough, or the cops did, or if the crowd turned dangerous. Any and all of which were possible. Someone did get arrested in a bullet proof jacket and, iirc an assault rifle and ammo.
Trump is a problem, as president certainly, but he will also be problematic as an impeached removed president. He is a state funded cult leader, and his cult is armed, dangerous, and looking for an excuse.
He needs to be impeached. He needs to be removed. But we absolutely need the Republicans to stand up and vote for impeachment. They have to realize how dangerous the situation is, and somehow, we need to make them care. Of course, I say that when my Senators are Cruz and Cornyn, and since they're both souless eldrich horrors in skin suits, I don't hold out much hope of bringing them to the light, but still I call and write regularly, and we should all perhaps get back in the habit of bugging our elected officials to do something to stop the fall of Rome.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 10:48 PM on October 18, 2019 [34 favorites]
Republicans... have to realize how dangerous the situation is, and somehow, we need to make them care.
It's pretty likely that Republican members of the Senate have an up-close view of not only the visible shenanigans but bonkers stuff we don't even know about. So I think we've been seeing what they actually do care about, what their true values are for most of the last 2-3 years.
posted by wildblueyonder at 12:24 AM on October 19, 2019 [12 favorites]
It's pretty likely that Republican members of the Senate have an up-close view of not only the visible shenanigans but bonkers stuff we don't even know about. So I think we've been seeing what they actually do care about, what their true values are for most of the last 2-3 years.
posted by wildblueyonder at 12:24 AM on October 19, 2019 [12 favorites]
So, quick question about Mulvaney’s original statement. The reporter clarified “What you’re describing is a quid pro quo...” and Mulvaney responded in the affirmative, saying “We do that all the time with foreign policy.” (Emphasis mine)
...is anyone looking into every other foreign policy decision they ever made?
posted by Weeping_angel at 1:14 AM on October 19, 2019 [6 favorites]
...is anyone looking into every other foreign policy decision they ever made?
posted by Weeping_angel at 1:14 AM on October 19, 2019 [6 favorites]
I had kind of assumed he was trying to create a false equivalence between demanding concessions in the American interest in return for aid or other favors and demanding personal benefit in return for aid or other favors.
posted by bardophile at 1:40 AM on October 19, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by bardophile at 1:40 AM on October 19, 2019 [19 favorites]
I saw a news report that the Lieutenant Governor of TX opened for Trump and said that the other side were not opponents, they were enemies. It sure as shit isn't just Trump who are deacons in the church of hate and chaos. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that Republican leadership as a whole feel differently--I think this is just another one of the quiet parts that are starting to get said out loud.
posted by Sublimity at 4:23 AM on October 19, 2019 [20 favorites]
posted by Sublimity at 4:23 AM on October 19, 2019 [20 favorites]
Republican members of the Senate have an up-close view of not only the visible shenanigans but bonkers stuff we don't even know about.
Indeed, Russia, corruption, their own campaigns, the NRA. NPR on Senate Finance Comm report concluding NRA as Russian assets, also previously Seven GOP lawmakers make a misguided trip to Russia
posted by Harry Caul at 5:19 AM on October 19, 2019 [11 favorites]
Indeed, Russia, corruption, their own campaigns, the NRA. NPR on Senate Finance Comm report concluding NRA as Russian assets, also previously Seven GOP lawmakers make a misguided trip to Russia
posted by Harry Caul at 5:19 AM on October 19, 2019 [11 favorites]
NPR on Senate Finance Comm report concluding NRA as Russian assets
posted by Harry Caul at 6:44 AM on October 19, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 6:44 AM on October 19, 2019 [17 favorites]
Somewhat answering my own question from above (how informed is McConnell's "by Thanksgiving" impeachment schedule), the answer appears to be - no surprise - that he's just making shit up.
“I have no idea”: Pelosi shuts down Senate Republicans’ impeachment timeline The TL:DR being that while various Congressional Dems have various opinions about the schedule they might like to see, Pelosi is in no way going to even begin to speculate about an official impeachment date.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:36 AM on October 19, 2019 [17 favorites]
“I have no idea”: Pelosi shuts down Senate Republicans’ impeachment timeline The TL:DR being that while various Congressional Dems have various opinions about the schedule they might like to see, Pelosi is in no way going to even begin to speculate about an official impeachment date.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:36 AM on October 19, 2019 [17 favorites]
New Impeachment Poll: Quid Pro Quo Trouble Ahead (Lawfare)
The latest University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll fielded by Nielsen Scarborough [...] could spell major trouble for the president’s public standing ahead, including among Republicans: We asked: “In general, do you believe it is an impeachable offense if the president of the United States invites foreign leaders/entities to interfere in U.S. elections?” Two thirds of respondents, including 46 percent of Republicans and 58 percent of Independents said yes.posted by katra at 9:31 AM on October 19, 2019 [12 favorites]
'Overrated general' Mattis laughs off Trump barb at charity gala, Stars and Stripes, Tom McElroy (Associated Press), October 17, 2019:
posted by cenoxo at 10:52 AM on October 19, 2019 [7 favorites]
Former U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis is laughing off an insult hurled at him by President Donald Trump. Speaking at a New York charity event Thursday the day after Trump demeaned him as "the world's most overrated general," Mattis joked that he took it as a compliment....and then, between rounds of golf, he let them go.
"I'm not just an overrated general. I'm the greatest, the world's most overrated," he told diners at the annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner. "I'm honored to be considered that by Donald Trump because he also called Meryl Streep an overrated actress," he said. "So I guess I'm the Meryl Streep of generals, and frankly that sounds pretty good to me."
Trump lashed out at his former defense secretary Wednesday, during a contentious White House meeting with members of Congress. The meeting was intended to be a bipartisan discussion of Trump's decision to pull U.S. forces from northern Syria, but it broke up after a testy exchange between Trump and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Before the walkout, Trump disparaged Mattis, who had argued as defense secretary that U.S. troops were needed in Syria to prevent a resurgence of Islamic State fighters. Trump said Mattis was "the world's most overrated general. You know why? He wasn't tough enough."
"I captured ISIS," Trump went on to say.
posted by cenoxo at 10:52 AM on October 19, 2019 [7 favorites]
Trump veterans see a presidency veering off the rails (Politico)
The G.O.P. will not be able to postpone a reckoning on Donald Trump’s presidency for much longer.
“Your Year Three team is very different from the Year One team in terms of the type of people and how they view their role and how Trump views their role,” said the former official. “He’s not looking for people to offer contrary opinions or to urge caution or try to restrain him in any way, and the people there don’t view that as their role either.”The Crisis of the Republican Party (NYT Editorial Board)
The letter to Erdogan is a case in point, former officials note: It shows that Trump is more directly in charge of what goes on at the White House than ever before.
Earlier in his tenure, when the president was going to write a foreign leader, officials at the State Department and the National Security Council would usually draft a version and the president would try to “insert some of his Trumpisms into it” before other officials worked with him to get to a letter that everyone was comfortable with, said the former official. But with experienced bureaucratic warriors like Jim Mattis and national security adviser John Bolton now gone, there are few senior foreign policy officials left to stand in Trump’s way.
“You wouldn’t have a letter to a foreign leader that was just like dictated on the back of a napkin by him,” said the former official. “He’s even more personally and individually in the driver’s seat and doing things on his own.”
The G.O.P. will not be able to postpone a reckoning on Donald Trump’s presidency for much longer.
Some Republicans have clearly believed that they could control the president by staying close to him and talking him out of his worst ideas. Ask Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina — who has spent the last two years prostrating himself before Mr. Trump in the hope of achieving his political goals, including protecting the Kurds — how that worked out. Mr. Graham isn’t alone, of course; there is a long list of politicians who have debased themselves to please Mr. Trump, only to be abandoned by him like a sack of rotten fruit in the end. That’s the way of all autocrats; they eventually turn on everyone save perhaps their own relatives, because no one can live up to their demands for fealty.posted by katra at 10:58 AM on October 19, 2019 [13 favorites]
Trump veterans see a presidency veering off the rails
Republicans are such a lagging indicator on Trump, they're always following him down rather than setting any standards, any at all. "Sure the wings are on fire and we've lost a lot of altitude, but we're still in the air and the pilot is at the controls." These people are given wayy too much deference in their media interactions, they themselves are a lagging indicator on the Newton's Third Law of journalism vis a vis Trump.
posted by rhizome at 11:34 AM on October 19, 2019 [6 favorites]
Republicans are such a lagging indicator on Trump, they're always following him down rather than setting any standards, any at all. "Sure the wings are on fire and we've lost a lot of altitude, but we're still in the air and the pilot is at the controls." These people are given wayy too much deference in their media interactions, they themselves are a lagging indicator on the Newton's Third Law of journalism vis a vis Trump.
posted by rhizome at 11:34 AM on October 19, 2019 [6 favorites]
Hey, Harry Caul, thanks for those links - I hadn't heard about the Senate Finance Comm report concluding NRA as Russian assets NPR report. Very interesting.
Could you repaste your link for "Russia, corruption, their own campaigns, the NRA"? I think the link is broken.
Thank you!
posted by kristi at 12:49 PM on October 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
Could you repaste your link for "Russia, corruption, their own campaigns, the NRA"? I think the link is broken.
Thank you!
posted by kristi at 12:49 PM on October 19, 2019 [4 favorites]
Not to throw cold water on that finance committee report but it appears to have only been signed by the Democratic members.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 1:25 PM on October 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Big Al 8000 at 1:25 PM on October 19, 2019 [3 favorites]
Because why would Republican Senators sign on to a report that concludes that most of them received illegally-laundered Russian money to support their campaigns?
posted by LooseFilter at 1:32 PM on October 19, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by LooseFilter at 1:32 PM on October 19, 2019 [13 favorites]
Not to throw cold water on that finance committee report but it appears to have only been signed by the Democratic members.
Well, it is the minority staff report.
Senate Finance Committee Minority Staff Report:
The NRA and Russia: How a Tax-Exempt Organization Became a Foreign Asset
Senate Finance Committee Majority Staff Report accompanying the Minority Staff Report:
The NRA and Russia: Nuh-uh!
posted by Avelwood at 2:37 PM on October 19, 2019 [7 favorites]
Well, it is the minority staff report.
Senate Finance Committee Minority Staff Report:
The NRA and Russia: How a Tax-Exempt Organization Became a Foreign Asset
Senate Finance Committee Majority Staff Report accompanying the Minority Staff Report:
The NRA and Russia: Nuh-uh!
posted by Avelwood at 2:37 PM on October 19, 2019 [7 favorites]
Very briefly: katra I just wanted to say thank so much for all the work you’ve poured into this thread. It’s been a godsend to have this distillation available during a particularly brutal crunch cycle. It’s the first thing I check after waking up while the caffeine pills kick in, and I wish you had a ko-fi or something so I could toss you $5. Seriously: huge thanks.
posted by Ryvar at 3:59 PM on October 19, 2019 [39 favorites]
posted by Ryvar at 3:59 PM on October 19, 2019 [39 favorites]
WaPo: 2 p.m.: Republican lawmaker won’t rule out impeaching Trump, compares him to Nixon
GOP Rep. Francis Rooney (Fla.) offered a damning assessment of Mulvaney, defended career diplomats, and said he’s not afraid of the president’s wrath. Rooney said Friday he’s had Watergate on his mind lately, specifically that critics called it a witch hunt before it was clear how bad it really was. He won’t rule out impeaching Trump, he said, before knowing all the facts. [...]
-- posted by katra at 5:22 PM on October 18
CNN, October 19, 2019 (less than a day later): Republican congressman open to impeaching Trump announces retirement
Rooney, who won his first election in 2016, said he initially thought his goals would take three terms, "but I think I've done it in less than two."
posted by Iris Gambol at 4:03 PM on October 19, 2019 [20 favorites]
GOP Rep. Francis Rooney (Fla.) offered a damning assessment of Mulvaney, defended career diplomats, and said he’s not afraid of the president’s wrath. Rooney said Friday he’s had Watergate on his mind lately, specifically that critics called it a witch hunt before it was clear how bad it really was. He won’t rule out impeaching Trump, he said, before knowing all the facts. [...]
-- posted by katra at 5:22 PM on October 18
CNN, October 19, 2019 (less than a day later): Republican congressman open to impeaching Trump announces retirement
posted by Iris Gambol at 4:03 PM on October 19, 2019 [20 favorites]
AG Barr expands mysterious review into origin of Russia investigation (NBC News)
Hey Ryvar, thank you! I appreciate the opportunity to try to keep track of the impeachment news vortex, and one way to help keep it going could be to help fund Metafilter!!!
posted by katra at 5:49 PM on October 19, 2019 [39 favorites]
A review launched by Attorney General William Barr into the origins of the Russia investigation has expanded significantly amid concerns about whether the probe has any legal or factual basis, multiple current and former officials told NBC News. [...] When White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney sought Thursday to justify President Donald Trump’s efforts to pressure Ukraine, he called the Durham review “an ongoing investigation by our Department of Justice into the 2016 election.“Very briefly: katra I just wanted to say thank so much for all the work you’ve poured into this thread. It’s been a godsend to have this distillation available during a particularly brutal crunch cycle. It’s the first thing I check after waking up while the caffeine pills kick in, and I wish you had a ko-fi or something so I could toss you $5. Seriously: huge thanks.
Mulvaney added: "So you’re saying the president of the United States, the chief law enforcement person, cannot ask somebody to cooperate with an ongoing public investigation into wrongdoing?” Mulvaney said. [...] Mulvaney appeared to be referencing a conspiracy theory, mentioned by President Trump in his July phone call with the Ukrainian president, that a Democratic National Committee computer server hacked by Russian intelligence agents is actually in Ukraine.
Under that discredited theory, Ukraine, not Russia, hacked the Democrats in 2016. To believe that, one would have to doubt the unanimous assessment of the intelligence community and the findings of Congressional intelligence committees who have examined the classified evidence, including Republican Trump supporters. President Trump’s first homeland security adviser, Tom Bossert, said on ABC last month that he was frustrated about the president’s embrace of that falsehood. "It’s not only a conspiracy, it is completely debunked," Bossert said. "And at this point I am deeply frustrated with what he and the legal team is doing and repeating that debunked theory to the president. It sticks in his mind when he hears it over and over again and for clarity here ... let me just again repeat that it has no validity.”
Hey Ryvar, thank you! I appreciate the opportunity to try to keep track of the impeachment news vortex, and one way to help keep it going could be to help fund Metafilter!!!
posted by katra at 5:49 PM on October 19, 2019 [39 favorites]
Strike one article of impeachment? Mediaite: BREAKING: Trump Announces Doral Resort No Longer Host Site for G-7.
posted by adamg at 7:41 PM on October 19, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by adamg at 7:41 PM on October 19, 2019 [8 favorites]
Right after Republicans had been defending him, Trump saws off the branch his allies were using.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:47 PM on October 19, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:47 PM on October 19, 2019 [7 favorites]
Yeah, but I don't buy he did this because Democrats were freaking out. It's more likely Mitch told Trump the party's over. Also, I give props to naming the bill going after Trump the THUG (Trump’s Heist Undermines the G-7) Act. Tell me Senator, how are you going to vote on the THUG Act?
posted by xammerboy at 8:00 PM on October 19, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 8:00 PM on October 19, 2019 [5 favorites]
New York Congresswoman Seeks Disbarment of Giuliani (WSJ)
Rep. Kathleen Rice (D., N.Y.) has asked the state committee in charge of licenses for New York attorneys to begin an investigation into what she calls misconduct by Rudy Giuliani, President Trump’s personal lawyer, saying she believes he should be disbarred.posted by katra at 8:51 PM on October 19, 2019 [24 favorites]
“Mr. Giuliani’s comments in the media alone provide substantial basis to believe that he has repeatedly and egregiously engaged in conduct that adversely reflects on his honesty, trustworthiness, and fitness as a lawyer,” she wrote in a letter to the Attorney Grievance Committee for the New York Supreme Court’s First Judicial Department. His conduct “also necessitates a complete investigation to determine whether he advised his client, the President, to engage in conduct that is illegal or fraudulent,” she alleged. [...]
Attorney discipline investigations are confidential in New York. If there is a finding of misconduct, the court can issue a private admonition or impose a public punishment ranging from censure to suspension or disbarment. A spokeswoman for the committee said complaints and investigations aren’t disclosed unless there is a punishment announced.
Ms. Rice is a former New York district attorney and federal prosecutor who was a co-chair of the Moreland Commission, a panel established to probe political corruption in New York. She doesn’t hold a seat on any of the congressional panels leading the impeachment probe, but her request does show the extent to which Mr. Giuliani has become a focus for Congress.
Mick Mulvaney Struggles to Explain Comments on Ukraine (NYT)
“I recognize that I didn’t speak clearly, maybe, on Thursday,” he said. “Folks misinterpreted what I said. But the facts are absolutely clear and they are there for everyone to see.” He said there could not have been a quid pro quo because “the money flowed without any connection whatsoever to the D.N.C. server.” [...]Mulvaney continues to back away from quid pro quo, as top diplomat defends Giuliani’s role in Ukraine (WaPo)
But Mr. Mulvaney doubled down Sunday on his assertion that the president had a right to demand information about the investigation into the unfounded theory that Ukraine, not Russia, was involved in hacking and releasing Democratic Party emails during the 2016 election. “It is legitimate for the president to want to know what’s going on with the ongoing investigation into the server,” Mr. Mulvaney said. “Can I see how people took that the wrong way? Absolutely.”
Yet current and former officials who have been providing testimony to the House’s impeachment probe paint a different picture. According to their statements as described by people familiar with their closed-door testimony, the administration was pushing for Ukrainian leaders to conduct investigations into the server and the role of former vice president Joseph R. Biden’s son Hunter on the board of Ukrainian energy giant Burisma — probes Trump himself referenced in a July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. [...]posted by katra at 10:45 AM on October 20, 2019 [4 favorites]
Speaking on ABC’s This Week, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo refused to say whether Giuliani had been acting in Ukraine with his blessing, arguing that it was his “consistent policy … not to talk about the internal deliberations” of the administration. But he defended the decision to bring in an outside figure like Giuliani, arguing that “it happens all the time.” [...] But others vehemently disagree. [...] And not just Democrats are upset. According to former top National Security Council director for Russia and Europe Fiona Hill’s testimony, former national security adviser John Bolton was livid at Giuliani’s involvement, calling him a “hand grenade.” [...] The committees have not yet struck a deal with Bolton to testify in their impeachment probe, though there is significant interest among the panels conducting the investigation to have him come forward.
There appears to be bipartisan interest as well in hearing from Giuliani. Meanwhile Pompeo said Sunday that he would “do everything I’m required to do by law” if asked to come forward and testify in the probe.
Man, Michael Cohen had to plead guilty to felony to get disbarred in NY. (I like Rep. Rice. When Rep. Matt Gaetz posted that creepy tweet during Cohen's trial, she submitted the formal complaint to the House Ethics Committee; there's now an investigation into possible witness tampering and intimidation.)
FWIW, last month Sen. Kamala Harris... suggested disbarring President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and said she was asking the inspector general of the State Department to investigate whether department officials helped Giuliani engage in official business with Ukraine. [...] She also suggested earlier Thursday night on MSNBC: “The New York bar association needs to investigate Giuliani and probably disbar him.” (Politico, September 27, 2019)
Rice is requesting that the state committee investigate, because the NYSBA can't: "Legal authority for attorney discipline, NYSBA President Hank Greenberg said, rests solely with grievance committees, which are appointed by the appellate divisions of the state Supreme Court." (law.com, September 27, 2019)
posted by Iris Gambol at 12:11 PM on October 20, 2019 [3 favorites]
FWIW, last month Sen. Kamala Harris... suggested disbarring President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and said she was asking the inspector general of the State Department to investigate whether department officials helped Giuliani engage in official business with Ukraine. [...] She also suggested earlier Thursday night on MSNBC: “The New York bar association needs to investigate Giuliani and probably disbar him.” (Politico, September 27, 2019)
Rice is requesting that the state committee investigate, because the NYSBA can't: "Legal authority for attorney discipline, NYSBA President Hank Greenberg said, rests solely with grievance committees, which are appointed by the appellate divisions of the state Supreme Court." (law.com, September 27, 2019)
posted by Iris Gambol at 12:11 PM on October 20, 2019 [3 favorites]
"Rice is requesting that the state committee investigate, because the NYSBA can't: "Legal authority for attorney discipline, NYSBA President Hank Greenberg said, rests solely with grievance committees, which are appointed by the appellate divisions of the state Supreme Court.""
This isn't really a gaffe by Harris; every state organizes their bar admissions people, ongoing attorney roster, and attorney disciplinary group in different ways. In some states the state bar association is managed by the courts and is very official; in other states it's a voluntary organization, and being "admitted to the bar" is separate from joining the state bar association. When speaking colloquially and/or generally about an unethical lawyer, one typically says, "Someone should report that guy to the bar." Illinois attorneys will say to each other, "I'm filing an ethics complaint with the bar," when they clearly mean (and know they mean, because we have to register with it every single year) "I'm filing an ethics complaint with the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission," (aka the IARDC); our bar association is purely voluntary. I'm a member of the Illinois bar (as in, I am licensed to practice law), but I'm not a member of the Illinois State Bar Association.
The State Bar of California, unsurprisingly, is the official, state-sanctioned, state-run attorney registration and disciplinary body in California. (The voluntary affinity/lobbying association is the California Lawyers Association.) New York, otoh, is on the Illinois model, where the NY State Bar Association is the voluntary lobbying organization, the New York Commission on Statewide Attorney Discipline is where you file the complaints. When Harris is calling on the NY bar to investigate Giuliani, she clearly means "whatever New York's official attorney registration and disciplinary body is," both because "bar" is the colloquial word for that AND because California has a unified, mandatory state bar association that actually does that, so that would tend to be the system she refers to, since most lawyers don't pay a lot of attention to the specific organization of bars in states where they are not licensed. If she were actually going to file a complaint, she'd take the 30 seconds to google the proper place to file it.
(I'm mainly aware because my husband is licensed in three states, two of which have unified, official, state-run bar associations and one of which has a voluntary bar association and a state-run disciplinary commission instead.)
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 12:29 PM on October 20, 2019 [21 favorites]
This isn't really a gaffe by Harris; every state organizes their bar admissions people, ongoing attorney roster, and attorney disciplinary group in different ways. In some states the state bar association is managed by the courts and is very official; in other states it's a voluntary organization, and being "admitted to the bar" is separate from joining the state bar association. When speaking colloquially and/or generally about an unethical lawyer, one typically says, "Someone should report that guy to the bar." Illinois attorneys will say to each other, "I'm filing an ethics complaint with the bar," when they clearly mean (and know they mean, because we have to register with it every single year) "I'm filing an ethics complaint with the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission," (aka the IARDC); our bar association is purely voluntary. I'm a member of the Illinois bar (as in, I am licensed to practice law), but I'm not a member of the Illinois State Bar Association.
The State Bar of California, unsurprisingly, is the official, state-sanctioned, state-run attorney registration and disciplinary body in California. (The voluntary affinity/lobbying association is the California Lawyers Association.) New York, otoh, is on the Illinois model, where the NY State Bar Association is the voluntary lobbying organization, the New York Commission on Statewide Attorney Discipline is where you file the complaints. When Harris is calling on the NY bar to investigate Giuliani, she clearly means "whatever New York's official attorney registration and disciplinary body is," both because "bar" is the colloquial word for that AND because California has a unified, mandatory state bar association that actually does that, so that would tend to be the system she refers to, since most lawyers don't pay a lot of attention to the specific organization of bars in states where they are not licensed. If she were actually going to file a complaint, she'd take the 30 seconds to google the proper place to file it.
(I'm mainly aware because my husband is licensed in three states, two of which have unified, official, state-run bar associations and one of which has a voluntary bar association and a state-run disciplinary commission instead.)
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 12:29 PM on October 20, 2019 [21 favorites]
Oh, I didn't mean to imply it was a gaffe by Harris -- only that Rice was picking up that torch, and why calling on the state committee to investigate was appropriate in this instance. (I'm aware because I'm from NY and live in CA, and things are weird here.)
posted by Iris Gambol at 12:40 PM on October 20, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Iris Gambol at 12:40 PM on October 20, 2019 [2 favorites]
House Intelligence Committee members call on Giuliani to testify (Politico)
In interviews with CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) said that Giuliani was key to understanding pressure the Trump administration placed on the Ukrainian government to investigate Vice President Joe Biden and his family, while Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas) said testimony from the former New York mayor would be helpful. [...]Mick Mulvaney's bad week just got worse (Politico)
Administration officials did not directly criticize Giuliani’s work on Sunday. “John Bolton never complained to me about it, no one at NSC ever complained to me about anything that was going on,” Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, said in an interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace.
Rahm Emanuel, the former chief of staff to President Barack Obama and a former mayor of Chicago, had his own advice for Mulvaney on [ABC News’ “This Week With George Stephanopoulos”]: “Get yourself a lawyer and do it fast.”posted by katra at 3:36 PM on October 20, 2019 [4 favorites]
I'm not optimistic about getting info from Giuliani. You could throw that guy in jail and he would insist he wasn't really there.
posted by xammerboy at 7:10 PM on October 20, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 7:10 PM on October 20, 2019 [9 favorites]
You could throw that guy [Giuliani] in jail and he would insist he wasn't really there.
That's a chance i'm willing to take.
posted by Gelatin at 7:33 PM on October 20, 2019 [32 favorites]
That's a chance i'm willing to take.
posted by Gelatin at 7:33 PM on October 20, 2019 [32 favorites]
Trump reversed course on hosting G-7 at his club after learning that impeachment-weary Republicans were tired of defending him (WaPo)
Democrats, meanwhile, continued to blast Trump for awarding the massive government contract to his own company and said they might add the alleged “emoluments” violation to the articles of impeachment they are preparing. [...]posted by katra at 9:46 PM on October 20, 2019 [14 favorites]
Before he took office, Trump made the unprecedented decision to keep ownership of his businesses — but he promised that he would never use his new power to help them. The Trump Organization’s lawyers promised to avoid even the appearance of “any advantage derived from the Office of the Presidency.”
But in practice, Trump has continued to boost his businesses — by talking them up and by visiting them repeatedly, with aides and fellow Republicans in tow. Trump has visited his properties more than 130 times while in office. As of this summer, those visits had brought him more than $1.6 million in payments from the federal government and Republican campaign groups, which rented Trump’s ballrooms for fundraisers.
In the past 18 months, Trump has made even more expensive visits to his properties in Ireland, Scotland and South Florida — visits that took him far out of his way from the official business of his trips. He also suggested Vice President Pence do the same: Pence built his own detour into an official trip and spent extra hours commuting so he could stay at Trump’s club in remote southwestern Ireland. These trips bring attention to Trump’s properties, and they bring revenue.
Trump reversed course on hosting G-7 at his club after learning that impeachment-weary Republicans were tired of defending him
I don't even care that he changed his mind. The mere fact that he wanted to do this in the first place is impeachment-worthy.
posted by Faint of Butt at 3:40 AM on October 21, 2019 [18 favorites]
I don't even care that he changed his mind. The mere fact that he wanted to do this in the first place is impeachment-worthy.
posted by Faint of Butt at 3:40 AM on October 21, 2019 [18 favorites]
The G-7 stunt suggests that all of the self-dealing outlined by WaPo should be included in the impeachment - if the G-7 contract "made it more difficult to keep Senate Republicans in a unified front against impeachment proceedings," then how can they defend him on the rest of it?
posted by katra at 6:33 AM on October 21, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by katra at 6:33 AM on October 21, 2019 [8 favorites]
Justice Dept. confirms Trump Jr. and McGahn did not testify to Mueller grand jury (Politico)
The disclosure was set in motion by Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., who ruled last week that Justice Department attorneys had deleted too much information from a court filing last month in an ongoing legal dispute over Attorney General William Barr’s refusal to share with House lawmakers grand jury-related information in Mueller’s final report.posted by katra at 6:42 AM on October 21, 2019 [4 favorites]
Howell’s opinion, issued Thursday, suggested it was perplexing why Trump Jr. and McGahn were not subpoenaed to testify before the grand jury.
[...] The Mueller report says Trump Jr. declined a voluntary interview, but several lines that follow that statement are blacked out. Lawyers for other witnesses in the probe have said they believe Trump Jr.’s attorneys informed prosecutors he would assert his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination if called to the grand jury and that Mueller’s team elected not to force his testimony by asking a judge to grant him immunity.
[...] In a court filing earlier this month, the Justice Department said the process of sharing so-called 302 reports from the Mueller probe with the House was ongoing. DOJ lawyers said they had yet to turn over the summaries of interviews with McGahn, former national security adviser Michael Flynn, former Trump aide Steve Bannon and former White House communications director Hope Hicks.
Graham open to other evidence on impeachment (Axios)
In an interview with "Axios on HBO," Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of President Trump's most vital allies on Capitol Hill, opened the door to changing his mind on impeachment if there turns out to be what he considers a quid pro quo. [...]posted by katra at 6:48 AM on October 21, 2019 [5 favorites]
"Sure. I mean ... show me something that ... is a crime," Graham told Axios' Jonathan Swan. "If you could show me that, you know, Trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo, outside the phone call, that would be very disturbing." [...]
At the very time he needs a Republican fortress against impeachment, GOP lawmakers are furious at him over his rash pullback in Syria. In the interview, Graham called Trump's abandonment of the Kurds "dishonorable" and a "sh*tshow."
No, We Won’t Just ‘Get Over It’ (Charles Blow, NYT Opinion)
A Pew Research Poll released last week found that 58 percent of Americans, including a quarter of Republicans, believe that Trump has done things that are grounds for impeachment.posted by katra at 6:57 AM on October 21, 2019 [9 favorites]
No matter how much he says that the call he made to the president of Ukraine was perfect, no matter how much he attacks the whistle-blower, no matter how much he lies, most Americans see through it and are appalled by it.
And now that Mulvaney has made the disastrous mistake of actually telling the truth, some Republicans are even signaling that they are open to at least entertaining a vote to impeach the president.
This is another step that is important to the repairing of the country. It’s not that I believe that the Senate would be in any danger of actually voting to convict and remove Trump. It’s that we need to know that at least some of these Republican men and women who make our laws are not totally craven and devoid of morality.
If Graham doesn't think we have enough evidence now, I can't see what would actually change his mind.
posted by octothorpe at 6:59 AM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 6:59 AM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
Mulvaney faced ouster before impeachment crisis took over (CNN)
A source familiar with the President's thinking told CNN that after watching media coverage this weekend about Mulvaney's Thursday news conference and performance attempting to clean it up, the President has grown increasingly frustrated with his acting chief of staff's ability to properly communicate the White House's impeachment strategy.posted by box at 6:59 AM on October 21, 2019 [5 favorites]
....
"We all get turned into a pretzel defending Trump. That's the sad reality," a separate source close to the White House said.
"Sure. I mean ... show me something that ... is a crime," Graham told Axios' Jonathan Swan.
Graham in 1999 Re: Clinton's impeachment: No crime necessary. It's about the integrity of the Office.
Graham in 2019 Re: Trump's impeachment: "Show me a crime."
posted by zakur at 7:02 AM on October 21, 2019 [54 favorites]
Graham in 1999 Re: Clinton's impeachment: No crime necessary. It's about the integrity of the Office.
Graham in 2019 Re: Trump's impeachment: "Show me a crime."
posted by zakur at 7:02 AM on October 21, 2019 [54 favorites]
White House Moves Testing Republican Support for Trump (WSJ)
The House impeachment inquiry is reducing the president’s margin for error with members of his party
The House impeachment inquiry is reducing the president’s margin for error with members of his party
Mr. Trump’s support within his party will face fresh tests this week, as key witnesses from the State Department and Pentagon are expected to testify in closed hearings before a trio of House committees on the president’s dealings with Ukraine.posted by katra at 7:12 AM on October 21, 2019 [3 favorites]
[...] Republicans are making clear to the White House that it is becoming harder to justify blanket support for the president in the wake of recent events. “What you have in recent days are landfills of toxic talking points,” said Rick Tyler, the communications director for Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s 2016 Republican presidential bid. “It’s systematic mismanagement.” [...]
Mr. Trump wasn’t bothered by Mr. Mulvaney’s performance on Thursday and has relayed to Mr. Mulvaney that he is doing a “great job,” White House officials said. [...] White House attorneys told Mr. Trump that Mr. Mulvaney’s comments would complicate their defense of him. Republican lawmakers started calling contacts in the White House legislative affairs office to make similar points.
Those concerns weren’t shared by the president, who watched Mr. Mulvaney’s news conference while flying to Dallas for campaign events, but Mr. Trump agreed under pressure from his attorneys to have Mr. Mulvaney issue a statement walking back his remarks, according to people familiar with the matter. The statement didn’t acknowledge a misstep but did contradict the remarks.
Graham in 2019 Re: Trump's impeachment: "Show me a crime."
Outside the phone call where you've already showed me the crime.
posted by xammerboy at 7:21 AM on October 21, 2019 [12 favorites]
Outside the phone call where you've already showed me the crime.
posted by xammerboy at 7:21 AM on October 21, 2019 [12 favorites]
Graham will always need evidence of one more crime before he's ready to remove Trump. Get rock solid evidence of three crimes and he'll need four.
posted by sotonohito at 7:26 AM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by sotonohito at 7:26 AM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
Graham will always need evidence of one more crime before he's ready to remove Trump. Get rock solid evidence of three crimes and he'll need four.
Which means the so-called "liberal media" should stop asking what it'll take for Graham to impeach and instead ask why he isn't willing to impeach over what Trump did when he was eager to impeach Clinton over far less.
posted by Gelatin at 7:32 AM on October 21, 2019 [34 favorites]
Which means the so-called "liberal media" should stop asking what it'll take for Graham to impeach and instead ask why he isn't willing to impeach over what Trump did when he was eager to impeach Clinton over far less.
posted by Gelatin at 7:32 AM on October 21, 2019 [34 favorites]
Which means the so-called "liberal media" should stop asking what it'll take for Graham to impeach and instead ask
Now that the WSJ is reporting "Mr. Trump wasn’t bothered by Mr. Mulvaney’s performance" and while "White House attorneys told Mr. Trump that Mr. Mulvaney’s comments would complicate their defense of him," "[t]hose concerns weren’t shared by the president," is that the type of evidence "outside of the phone call" that he is referring to?
posted by katra at 7:47 AM on October 21, 2019
Now that the WSJ is reporting "Mr. Trump wasn’t bothered by Mr. Mulvaney’s performance" and while "White House attorneys told Mr. Trump that Mr. Mulvaney’s comments would complicate their defense of him," "[t]hose concerns weren’t shared by the president," is that the type of evidence "outside of the phone call" that he is referring to?
posted by katra at 7:47 AM on October 21, 2019
Trump's Rudy problem (Axios)
Amid near-daily revelations of Rudy Giuliani’s “shadow” foreign policy, senior administration officials are worried that more information could surface connecting official Trump administration policy to Giuliani's personal financial gain. [...]posted by katra at 7:54 AM on October 21, 2019 [14 favorites]
These concerns with Giuliani aren't new: [...]
In June, Axios broke a story about leaked vetting documents that the Trump transition team and the Republican National Committee compiled in the fall of 2016. While vetting Giuliani, they found so many red flags that he was ultimately prevented from serving at the State Department.
Giuliani’s file was so thick, they took the rare step of producing a separate dossier to cover his extensive foreign business entanglements.
A former Trump transition team member said senior Trump aides made clear that Giuliani could not be confirmed as secretary of state because of his foreign business ties, and the job of the vetting team was to show Giuliani why “he really shouldn’t put himself through a Senate confirmation.”
Which means the so-called "liberal media" should stop asking what it'll take for Graham to impeach and instead ask why he isn't willing to impeach over what Trump did when he was eager to impeach Clinton over far less.
This is one of the things that's always bothered me. Clinton wasn't removed when he was most definitely guilty on one of the charges (perjury). If the removal process is going to be political, let it be political. It seems a bit cynical to come back twenty years later and demand integrity and an apolitical process when he's already been burned by that same process being completely political. Clinton's impeachment but non-removal set a precedent. A bad one. Sadly the chicken that came home to roost is impetuous and has highly advanced dementia.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:04 AM on October 21, 2019 [2 favorites]
This is one of the things that's always bothered me. Clinton wasn't removed when he was most definitely guilty on one of the charges (perjury). If the removal process is going to be political, let it be political. It seems a bit cynical to come back twenty years later and demand integrity and an apolitical process when he's already been burned by that same process being completely political. Clinton's impeachment but non-removal set a precedent. A bad one. Sadly the chicken that came home to roost is impetuous and has highly advanced dementia.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:04 AM on October 21, 2019 [2 favorites]
I, too, think Clinton should have been forced out but not for the perjury. George Conway, of all people, gave what I think is the best explanation for why Clinton shouldn’t have been impeached in his discussion with Preet Bharara from last week. Basically, since the perjury was in a civil trial not related to his official duties and because he didn’t think it represented a larger pattern of lying or misconduct in office, it was probably right to not impeach. I highly recommend listening to it.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 8:55 AM on October 21, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Big Al 8000 at 8:55 AM on October 21, 2019 [2 favorites]
I really think that's a cop out because we should be demanding the absolute best from our representatives, especially the single representative of the country as a whole. A president should be beyond reproach and unimpeachable because of their conduct, not in spite of it.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:57 AM on October 21, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:57 AM on October 21, 2019 [5 favorites]
It would be an equally bad precedent, IMO, to say that if the president did whatever the House claims in its articles of impeachment, the Senate must vote to remove, instead of applying its judgment on whether his conduct amounts to a high crime or misdemeanor that requires expulsion from office, which is what the main debate surrounding Clinton’s impeachment (though not his “it depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is” defense) boiled down to. There has to be some standard for the Senate to apply, or what’s stopping a GOP House from pushing through articles of impeachment over any number of Fox News “scandals”?
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:04 AM on October 21, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:04 AM on October 21, 2019 [3 favorites]
WaPo: 9:55 a.m.: Pelosi’s office accuses Trump of having ‘betrayed his oath of office, betrayed our national security’
Pelosi’s office released a four-page “fact sheet” citing the most compelling evidence of what Democrats have cast as a gross abuse of power by Trump. The citations are divided into three categories: “the shakedown,” “the pressure campaign” and “the cover up.”Democrats' lay out case for Trump impeachment probe, more key witnesses set to appear (Reuters)
The releases “encapsulate all the evidence uncovered to date about the president’s months-long pressure campaign to undermine the 2020 election and the extent to which he abused his power by using the levers of government to advance the scheme,” according to the office of Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House of Representatives.posted by katra at 9:08 AM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
They also showed how Democrats may approach the charges, or articles of impeachment, they are expected to draw up at the conclusion of the probe. [...] Democrats said their fact sheet and video show Trump “believes he is above the law” and that “House Republicans’ complicity and silence only serves to keep him there.”
I'm an immigrant so maybe the values I'm assuming aren't quite there because of the vantage point of outside looking in.
To the rest of the world, the United States portrays itself a certain way. Whether it's leader of the free world, shining city on a hill, beacon of freedom, that American exceptionalism is still there. For better or worse, the United States is the standard bearer for Western style liberal democracy. When the United States and its people are willing to overlook corruption, and place one man above the law for the sake of political expediency, what does that signal to the world? To the people who would have their countries aspire to be more like the United States?
We (the United States) teach the world that it's ok to have a slice of corruption cake and eat it too. The question is merely how big a slice is too big. How big is the slice? See, that's the thing. It doesn't matter because the United States is doing it, albeit with a much smaller slice, and they're the self-appointed authority on whether you can eat that cake. It ruins the whole cause of liberal democracy. China? They look at what happens, they laugh, they rock up to an African nation, point to the United States, and say "what's liberal democracy done for you lately?"
There has to be some standard for the Senate to apply, or what’s stopping a GOP House from pushing through articles of impeachment over any number of Fox News “scandals”?
Let's start with some sort of crime that can be indicted, like a misdemeanor, and go from there. Perhaps all the way up to high crimes? Clinton did something that would give a normal person a criminal record. That should be the bare minimum of a starting point of a standard to hold any President unqualified for office.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:11 AM on October 21, 2019 [9 favorites]
To the rest of the world, the United States portrays itself a certain way. Whether it's leader of the free world, shining city on a hill, beacon of freedom, that American exceptionalism is still there. For better or worse, the United States is the standard bearer for Western style liberal democracy. When the United States and its people are willing to overlook corruption, and place one man above the law for the sake of political expediency, what does that signal to the world? To the people who would have their countries aspire to be more like the United States?
We (the United States) teach the world that it's ok to have a slice of corruption cake and eat it too. The question is merely how big a slice is too big. How big is the slice? See, that's the thing. It doesn't matter because the United States is doing it, albeit with a much smaller slice, and they're the self-appointed authority on whether you can eat that cake. It ruins the whole cause of liberal democracy. China? They look at what happens, they laugh, they rock up to an African nation, point to the United States, and say "what's liberal democracy done for you lately?"
There has to be some standard for the Senate to apply, or what’s stopping a GOP House from pushing through articles of impeachment over any number of Fox News “scandals”?
Let's start with some sort of crime that can be indicted, like a misdemeanor, and go from there. Perhaps all the way up to high crimes? Clinton did something that would give a normal person a criminal record. That should be the bare minimum of a starting point of a standard to hold any President unqualified for office.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:11 AM on October 21, 2019 [9 favorites]
Impeachment has never been limited to indictable crimes, and shouldn't be. The Founding Fuckups should've stuck with the original "malpractice or neglect of duty" instead of "high crimes and misdemeanors."
Speaking of "high crimes and misdemeanors,"
posted by kirkaracha at 9:19 AM on October 21, 2019 [12 favorites]
Speaking of "high crimes and misdemeanors,"
These terms, when used to describe political offences, have a signification coextensive with, or rather analogous to, but yet more extensive than their legal acceptation; for, as John Quincy Adams said, “the Legislature was vested with power of impeaching and removing for trivial transgressions beneath the cognizance of the law.”Ceterum autem censeo Trump delenda est
posted by kirkaracha at 9:19 AM on October 21, 2019 [12 favorites]
Impeachment has never been limited to indictable crimes, and shouldn't be.
Never said they shouldn't be. Indictable crimes on the other hand should be 100% be grounds for impeachment but also serve as a clear differentiator from Fox thinking a tan suit is impeachable.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:26 AM on October 21, 2019 [1 favorite]
Never said they shouldn't be. Indictable crimes on the other hand should be 100% be grounds for impeachment but also serve as a clear differentiator from Fox thinking a tan suit is impeachable.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:26 AM on October 21, 2019 [1 favorite]
The example I've heard is that if the President didn't show up to work for six months, he or she could be impeached despite no crime having occurred.
I have to agree with Big Al that if we're in danger of leading the world astray down the path of corruption, specifically in Clinton's case looking the other way on sexual impropriety in the workplace is more of a peril than the perjury resulting from political maneuvering seeking to exploit it.
posted by XMLicious at 9:39 AM on October 21, 2019 [2 favorites]
I have to agree with Big Al that if we're in danger of leading the world astray down the path of corruption, specifically in Clinton's case looking the other way on sexual impropriety in the workplace is more of a peril than the perjury resulting from political maneuvering seeking to exploit it.
posted by XMLicious at 9:39 AM on October 21, 2019 [2 favorites]
Trump slams 'phony Emoluments Clause' over scrapped G7 plans (Guardian)
Taking questions from reporters about his canceled plans to hold the June G7 summit at his Florida resort, Trump appeared dismissive of a constitutional clause forbidding federal officeholders from accepting gifts from foreign states. [...]posted by katra at 9:54 AM on October 21, 2019 [24 favorites]Eli Stokols (@EliStokols) Real Trump quotes just now on G7, via pool:
“I own a property in Florida.”
“I don’t need promotion. I don’t need promotion.”
“It would have been the best G-7 ever.”
“You people with this phony Emoluments Clause.” (!)
“If you’re rich, it doesn’t matter.”
October 21, 2019
if the President didn't show up to work for six months
If tweeting about stuff that has nothing to do with governing equaled not showing up, he'd be long gone.
posted by Namlit at 9:54 AM on October 21, 2019 [1 favorite]
If tweeting about stuff that has nothing to do with governing equaled not showing up, he'd be long gone.
posted by Namlit at 9:54 AM on October 21, 2019 [1 favorite]
“If you’re rich, it doesn’t matter.”
The live blog calls this "a quote for the ages."
posted by Preserver at 9:57 AM on October 21, 2019 [32 favorites]
The live blog calls this "a quote for the ages."
posted by Preserver at 9:57 AM on October 21, 2019 [32 favorites]
“If you’re rich, it doesn’t matter.”
The live blog calls this "a quote for the ages."
“When you’re a star they let you do it,” Trump says in the recording, which was obtained by the Washington Post and released on Friday [October 8, 2016]. “You can do anything.”
Oh, for the idyllic days of Bushisms (Slate, 2000). We're dying under an ever-growing pile of "quotes for the ages," while the GOP is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Or they bash Trump under a semi-anonymous Twitter account, like Mitt Romney aka Pierre Delecto (NPR, Oct. 21, 2019), or James Comey aka Reinhold Niebuhr (Washington Post, November 6, 2017).
posted by filthy light thief at 10:07 AM on October 21, 2019 [6 favorites]
The live blog calls this "a quote for the ages."
“When you’re a star they let you do it,” Trump says in the recording, which was obtained by the Washington Post and released on Friday [October 8, 2016]. “You can do anything.”
Oh, for the idyllic days of Bushisms (Slate, 2000). We're dying under an ever-growing pile of "quotes for the ages," while the GOP is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Or they bash Trump under a semi-anonymous Twitter account, like Mitt Romney aka Pierre Delecto (NPR, Oct. 21, 2019), or James Comey aka Reinhold Niebuhr (Washington Post, November 6, 2017).
posted by filthy light thief at 10:07 AM on October 21, 2019 [6 favorites]
I really think that's a cop out because we should be demanding the absolute best from our representatives, especially the single representative of the country as a whole. A president should be beyond reproach and unimpeachable because of their conduct, not in spite of it.
Clinton definitely screwed up but you have to place it in context. Unless you lived through it you might not see it that way.
Republicans had a continuous, on-going investigation of Bill Clinton for over 10 years. Yes, it started before he took office and continued after he left. They investigated his Christmas cards, they investigated the suicide of a friend, they investigated the White House travel agency, they even investigated their cat - no lie.
If you investigate anyone for over 10 years, you are bound to find something in their lives that they are embarrassed about. Think about your own life or your spouse or your friends. If you demand perfection, you are never going to find it.
The public who lived through it, 10 years, every single day a new investigation, realized it was all bullshit. And they weren't inclined to turn out a president who was genuinely popular just because he lied about his sex life. People were more angry about the bullshit Republican harassment than they were about Clinton's failings. He was more popular after impeachment than before. And that is why he was not removed from office.
posted by JackFlash at 10:09 AM on October 21, 2019 [52 favorites]
Clinton definitely screwed up but you have to place it in context. Unless you lived through it you might not see it that way.
Republicans had a continuous, on-going investigation of Bill Clinton for over 10 years. Yes, it started before he took office and continued after he left. They investigated his Christmas cards, they investigated the suicide of a friend, they investigated the White House travel agency, they even investigated their cat - no lie.
If you investigate anyone for over 10 years, you are bound to find something in their lives that they are embarrassed about. Think about your own life or your spouse or your friends. If you demand perfection, you are never going to find it.
The public who lived through it, 10 years, every single day a new investigation, realized it was all bullshit. And they weren't inclined to turn out a president who was genuinely popular just because he lied about his sex life. People were more angry about the bullshit Republican harassment than they were about Clinton's failings. He was more popular after impeachment than before. And that is why he was not removed from office.
posted by JackFlash at 10:09 AM on October 21, 2019 [52 favorites]
“You people with this phony Emoluments Clause.” (!)
...said the man who swore an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.
That statement alone should be an impeachable offense.
More to the point, impeachment can and should reflect Congress' juddment that Trump is not fit for office, a judgment Hillary Clinton warned us all about in so many words in 2016 and shared by nearly three million more people than voted for him.
posted by Gelatin at 10:36 AM on October 21, 2019 [22 favorites]
...said the man who swore an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.
That statement alone should be an impeachable offense.
More to the point, impeachment can and should reflect Congress' juddment that Trump is not fit for office, a judgment Hillary Clinton warned us all about in so many words in 2016 and shared by nearly three million more people than voted for him.
posted by Gelatin at 10:36 AM on October 21, 2019 [22 favorites]
There’s trouble for Trump and the GOP’s future (Jennifer Rubin, WaPo Opinion)
PRRI’s 10th annual 2019 American Values Survey released Monday paints a picture of a highly polarized electorate. [...]posted by katra at 11:10 AM on October 21, 2019 [16 favorites]
Trump is an effective party recruiter — for Democrats. “More than one in four (27%) say they have become more likely to think of themselves as Democrats, fewer than one in five (17%) say they have become more likely to think of themselves as independents, and only 13% report they have become more likely to think of themselves as Republicans.” [...] Moreover, opposition to Trump is more intense and fixed than is his support, “with three in four (75%) saying there is almost nothing Trump could do to win their approval. … Americans who approve of Trump’s job performance are more open to the idea of changing their mind: Two-thirds (66%) say he could do something to lose their approval.” [...]
There are a few takeaways from the survey. First, Trump (along with those who espouse his brand of right-wing nativism and know-nothingism) is hugely dependent on the overwhelming support of white evangelicals, but in doubling and tripling down on positions and conduct that pleases this core part of his base, he winds up turning off more of the electorate.
Second, that makes evangelicals out of step with the majority of Americans on everything from immigration to climate change to impeachment to beliefs about gender and race. [...] Third, Trump and the GOP’s hyper-dependence on white evangelicals is an electoral problem, given the declining number of white evangelicals who are aging and seeing significant drop off among millennials. [...] Trump and Republicans’ segment is smaller than the rest and is shrinking over time. Republicans are playing a losing hand as the electorate as a whole becomes more diverse and identifies with progressives on policy and cultural issues. It turns out, math matters.
Mod note: Folks, the Clinton impeachment is a totally different impeachment and we need to stay out of the weeds on it here. Thanks.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 11:13 AM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 11:13 AM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
Salon's take on PRRI's polls (see above):
Nothing Will Persuade White Evangelicals to Support Impeachment (Emma Green, The Atlantic)
Nothing Will Persuade White Evangelicals to Support Impeachment (Emma Green, The Atlantic)
New polling suggests that Trump’s base is totally unified behind the president, no matter what investigations might reveal. […]posted by ZeusHumms at 11:38 AM on October 21, 2019 [8 favorites]
A significant portion of Trump’s Republican supporters are open about their belief in his infallibility: 42 percent of Republicans said there is virtually nothing the president could do to lose their approval. Among Republicans who cited Fox News as their primary news source, this number was even higher, at 55 percent. And Trump’s most steadfast supporters are also most likely to condone his behavior: Nearly two-thirds of white evangelicals said Trump has not hurt the dignity of the presidency. By contrast, majorities of all other religious groups said Trump has damaged the image of the office.
These numbers reinforce the idea that some of Trump’s supporters have come to see American politics as an all-out war. […]
Another take on the PRRI polls from WaPo's Philip Bump, The most loyal Trump allies are Republicans who watch Fox News. Basically, those who primarily get their news from Fox rate even higher than evangelicals in the "nothing Trump could do to lose approval" category. For Americans overall, that category is 26% of the population; well, hello crazification factor.
posted by peeedro at 12:05 PM on October 21, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by peeedro at 12:05 PM on October 21, 2019 [13 favorites]
“You people with this phony Emoluments Clause.”
L Bluth with martini gif
posted by angrycat at 12:11 PM on October 21, 2019 [21 favorites]
L Bluth with martini gif
posted by angrycat at 12:11 PM on October 21, 2019 [21 favorites]
Nothing Will Persuade White Evangelicals to Support Impeachment (Emma Green, The Atlantic)
White Evangelicals are different from other Christians.
Take 1: How Evangelicals support white supremacy — even though they reject racism (Salon, republishing an article from Alternet);
Speaking of the end of the world as we know it: Some U.S. Troops May Remain In Northeast Syria To Protect Oil Fields (NPR, Oct. 21, 2019) So much for Trump's stance that this is "not our border," the US is "not a policing agent," and "It is time for us to go home." (BBC, Oct. 17, 2019).
Maybe, and I'm just speculating here, that at some level Evangelicals recognize that Trump is promoting the end of the world, and in doing so, is pushing us all towards the Evangelicals' future dreams. Burn, baby, burn.
posted by filthy light thief at 12:20 PM on October 21, 2019 [10 favorites]
White Evangelicals are different from other Christians.
Take 1: How Evangelicals support white supremacy — even though they reject racism (Salon, republishing an article from Alternet);
Southern Baptists don’t express any genuine interest in eradicating racism from the world ― just the denomination’s own community.Take 2: In Genereal, White Evangelicals Like Racism (Colorblind Christians, citing PRRI's 2018 American Values Survey).
This is true across most of racism-rejecting Evangelicalism. This subset of Christians does not work toward racial equality in society in any organized way. Racial inequality outside the structure isn’t an area of interest or concern. But the reason isn't always obvious to outsiders.
Evangelicals do not avoid participation in racial advocacy because they support racism (although some do). They avoid it because of a genuine theological belief that the world is sinful and people cannot be redeemed outside their own structure. Attempts to eradicate racism in the world are perceived as futile for a religious group that believes in a literal future Armageddon.
Speaking of the end of the world as we know it: Some U.S. Troops May Remain In Northeast Syria To Protect Oil Fields (NPR, Oct. 21, 2019) So much for Trump's stance that this is "not our border," the US is "not a policing agent," and "It is time for us to go home." (BBC, Oct. 17, 2019).
Maybe, and I'm just speculating here, that at some level Evangelicals recognize that Trump is promoting the end of the world, and in doing so, is pushing us all towards the Evangelicals' future dreams. Burn, baby, burn.
posted by filthy light thief at 12:20 PM on October 21, 2019 [10 favorites]
Mick Mulvaney's bad week just got worse (Politico)
Rahm Emanuel, the former chief of staff to President Barack Obama and a former mayor of Chicago, had his own advice for Mulvaney on [ABC News’ “This Week With George Stephanopoulos”]: “Get yourself a lawyer and do it fast.”
Remember he covered up the police execution of a teenager for a year. He is the perfect person to take advice from on this level of criminality and in this kind of time frame.
posted by srboisvert at 12:46 PM on October 21, 2019 [9 favorites]
Rahm Emanuel, the former chief of staff to President Barack Obama and a former mayor of Chicago, had his own advice for Mulvaney on [ABC News’ “This Week With George Stephanopoulos”]: “Get yourself a lawyer and do it fast.”
Remember he covered up the police execution of a teenager for a year. He is the perfect person to take advice from on this level of criminality and in this kind of time frame.
posted by srboisvert at 12:46 PM on October 21, 2019 [9 favorites]
Trump Breaks His Pattern and Retreats on All Fronts (Martin Longman, Washington Monthly)
Suggests that recent reversals on Syria, Ukraine, and the G-7 summit happened because Trump wants to minimize Republican disapproval going into impeachment trials in the Senate.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:53 PM on October 21, 2019 [1 favorite]
Suggests that recent reversals on Syria, Ukraine, and the G-7 summit happened because Trump wants to minimize Republican disapproval going into impeachment trials in the Senate.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:53 PM on October 21, 2019 [1 favorite]
I am on my phone and so I cannot refer back to it easily but earlier in the thread someone pointed out that it is exactly Trump’s pattern to back down when pressured, exactly like the damaged schoolyard bully (who learned it at home by being abused) he has always been. So this idea that he is breaking some other pattern is baffling to me. The guy has been mostly bluster to those whom he cannot control, does not employ, or cannot reward. He absolutely does and has done real damage and terrifying damage when he is in charge and has gotten little to no pushback.
posted by Bella Donna at 1:02 PM on October 21, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by Bella Donna at 1:02 PM on October 21, 2019 [19 favorites]
Trump reversed course on hosting G-7 at his club after learning that impeachment-weary Republicans were tired of defending him (WaPo)
I've been wondering when this was going to happen. Even the most servile lickspittle will only eat so much shit.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:07 PM on October 21, 2019
I've been wondering when this was going to happen. Even the most servile lickspittle will only eat so much shit.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:07 PM on October 21, 2019
Yeah, but G-7 was the straw that broke their backs?! That?
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:12 PM on October 21, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:12 PM on October 21, 2019 [6 favorites]
"Impeachment-weary Republicans" seems like a just-so story. Stephen Miller is just taking a couple of weeks to type up a new episode and to prepare for the "Impeachment" spinoff. Mitch doesn't give a shit, Nunes doesn't give a shit, Republicans don't give a shit. 26% aka The Keyes Constant watches Fox? They don't care. If anything, Trump understands that going into an election year, he's going to need to be able to brag about something, and that's what Miller/Parscale are brainstorming right now.
posted by rhizome at 1:16 PM on October 21, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by rhizome at 1:16 PM on October 21, 2019 [7 favorites]
Yeah, but G-7 was the straw that broke their backs?! That?
Rich white politicians are more offended by the horrible indignity of having to stay at a sub-par hotel near the airport than, say, thousands of latinx children being vanished into concentration camps. Go figure.
posted by bcd at 1:21 PM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
Rich white politicians are more offended by the horrible indignity of having to stay at a sub-par hotel near the airport than, say, thousands of latinx children being vanished into concentration camps. Go figure.
posted by bcd at 1:21 PM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
I think congressional Republicans are afraid of impeachment, and Trump is, too. If the Democrats impeach Trump, at least someone will have stood up to say Trump is not a suitable person for the presidency. He'll always be on the list:
Andrew Johnson
(Richard Nixon)
Bill Clinton
Donald Trump
If Trump gets impeached and Republicans don't convict him, they'll go on record forever as accepting Trump's conduct in office.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:50 PM on October 21, 2019 [12 favorites]
Andrew Johnson
(Richard Nixon)
Bill Clinton
Donald Trump
If Trump gets impeached and Republicans don't convict him, they'll go on record forever as accepting Trump's conduct in office.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:50 PM on October 21, 2019 [12 favorites]
I would like to play poker against that man
posted by wabbittwax at 1:52 PM on October 21, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by wabbittwax at 1:52 PM on October 21, 2019 [7 favorites]
I don't really believe that Republicans are having a hard time defending him, or that this caving is unique compared to all the other times he caved, but I love that that's the story out there, because he's only their strongman until he's generally perceived as weak and then it all crumbles.
posted by jason_steakums at 1:55 PM on October 21, 2019 [25 favorites]
posted by jason_steakums at 1:55 PM on October 21, 2019 [25 favorites]
Trump might expose whistleblower, Schumer tells Intel officials (Politico)
As President Donald Trump continued his attacks on the Ukraine whistleblower on Monday, Chuck Schumer is asking the intelligence community what is being done to protect the source from harm. [...]posted by katra at 2:13 PM on October 21, 2019 [6 favorites]
"In light of the President’s ill-advised statements, his lack of respect for the rule of law and his well-documented habit of condoning violence by his supporters, I am concerned that he may disclose the whistleblower’s identity or cause it to be disclosed by others in the administration," Schumer wrote in a letter to acting DNI Joseph Maguire and IG Michael Atkinson. "If that were to happen, it will be your responsibility to take immediate action to protect the whistleblower from both workplace reprisal and threats to his or her personal safety." [...]
“Do we have to protect a whistleblower who gives a false account? I don’t know. You tell me," Trump told reporters on Monday.
“If you’re rich, it doesn’t matter.”
The live blog calls this "a quote for the ages."
Is it this the source of this quote?
“So whether I lost $2 billion or $5 billion, more or less, it doesn’t make any difference for me. If you’re wealthy, it doesn’t make a difference…I’m doing it for the country.”
Source: Reuters
posted by hat_eater at 3:08 PM on October 21, 2019
The live blog calls this "a quote for the ages."
Is it this the source of this quote?
“So whether I lost $2 billion or $5 billion, more or less, it doesn’t make any difference for me. If you’re wealthy, it doesn’t make a difference…I’m doing it for the country.”
Source: Reuters
posted by hat_eater at 3:08 PM on October 21, 2019
Politico: "Reporters pressed the president about whether his businesses needed a financial boost that the G-7 would have provided, but he vehemently denied needing any help, saying, “If you’re rich, it doesn’t matter.”" (Video via globalnews.ca)
posted by katra at 3:22 PM on October 21, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by katra at 3:22 PM on October 21, 2019 [4 favorites]
Is it this the source of this quote?
Possibly this.
posted by christopherious at 3:38 PM on October 21, 2019
Possibly this.
posted by christopherious at 3:38 PM on October 21, 2019
Mod note: Sorry, deleted one in the name of not reawakening the Clinton impeachment stuff. Also, I realize the streams have gotten crossed a bit, but there's a G-7 Doral resort emoluments thread so it probably makes sense to mostly take related stuff over there.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 3:53 PM on October 21, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 3:53 PM on October 21, 2019 [3 favorites]
so... I would love to see a supercut of republican statements about the Clinton impeachment which run completely contrary to the current republican talking points. You know, get some video, make it visceral...
posted by kaibutsu at 4:01 PM on October 21, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by kaibutsu at 4:01 PM on October 21, 2019 [7 favorites]
The Impeachment Investigation Might Get Its Most Damning Testimony on Tuesday (Greg Walters and Cameron Joseph, Vice News)
Next up: Bill Taylor, a central player in the Ukraine scandal, who’s already made some of the most damning statements on record in the saga. [...]posted by ZeusHumms at 4:31 PM on October 21, 2019 [15 favorites]
Taylor, the top American diplomat to Ukraine, will testify Tuesday in a closed Congressional session about the Trump administration’s attempts to pressure Ukraine to “look into” former Vice President Joe Biden.
“I think Bill will give an account that lays out the way the pressure was exerted on [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky and the Ukrainians, and how he tried to caution against it,” Daniel Fried, a career diplomat and former U.S. ambassador to Poland, predicted to VICE News. “He won’t duck.”
Taylor is an especially unique threat to Trump because he’s a widely-respected career diplomat with inside knowledge on Ukraine, who has already expressed alarm about the pressure campaign in no uncertain terms.
"Maybe, and I'm just speculating here, that at some level Evangelicals recognize that Trump is promoting the end of the world, and in doing so, is pushing us all towards the Evangelicals' future dreams. Burn, baby, burn."
Oh, some absolutely do, and they are completely upfront about it. Evangelicals are huge supporters of Israel not because they believe in a Jewish homeland -- they don't -- but because they believe that the Third Temple needs to be built in Jerusalem, by Jews, before the world can end and Jesus can return. They support not just Israel but whatever the most militant strain in Israeli politics is, to that end. There are MULTIPLE farms in the US devoted to nothing but breeding a perfect all-red calf with not even one white hair, which will be needed to sanctify the Third Temple.
According to these sorts of Evangelicals, Trump is a leader anointed by God (like Cyrus of Persia, is their favorite comparison) to help lead to the end times (even if he is himself not holy, like Cyrus). A minority of Evangelicals actively believe he is the antichrist -- a false messiah who holds himself in the place of Christ -- but because the antichrist's reign is "necessary" for the return of Jesus, they fucking support him. Trump is literally out there claiming messianic titles and it makes some evangelicals orgasm with joy because it forwards their narrative of him as the antichrist, which paves the way for Christ's return. An awful lot of Evangelicals who read Revelations literally believe they can FORCE Jesus to come back by fulfilling all the prerequisites in Revelations.
A huge number of Evangelicals refuse to support anti-global warming initiatives either because a) they think God won't destroy the world again, because Noah and the rainbow, and how dare you suggest otherwise, or b) they think destroying humanity is a GOOD thing b/c it will force Jesus to come back.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 6:48 PM on October 21, 2019 [46 favorites]
Oh, some absolutely do, and they are completely upfront about it. Evangelicals are huge supporters of Israel not because they believe in a Jewish homeland -- they don't -- but because they believe that the Third Temple needs to be built in Jerusalem, by Jews, before the world can end and Jesus can return. They support not just Israel but whatever the most militant strain in Israeli politics is, to that end. There are MULTIPLE farms in the US devoted to nothing but breeding a perfect all-red calf with not even one white hair, which will be needed to sanctify the Third Temple.
According to these sorts of Evangelicals, Trump is a leader anointed by God (like Cyrus of Persia, is their favorite comparison) to help lead to the end times (even if he is himself not holy, like Cyrus). A minority of Evangelicals actively believe he is the antichrist -- a false messiah who holds himself in the place of Christ -- but because the antichrist's reign is "necessary" for the return of Jesus, they fucking support him. Trump is literally out there claiming messianic titles and it makes some evangelicals orgasm with joy because it forwards their narrative of him as the antichrist, which paves the way for Christ's return. An awful lot of Evangelicals who read Revelations literally believe they can FORCE Jesus to come back by fulfilling all the prerequisites in Revelations.
A huge number of Evangelicals refuse to support anti-global warming initiatives either because a) they think God won't destroy the world again, because Noah and the rainbow, and how dare you suggest otherwise, or b) they think destroying humanity is a GOOD thing b/c it will force Jesus to come back.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 6:48 PM on October 21, 2019 [46 favorites]
WaPo: Putin and Hungary’s Orban helped sour Trump on Ukraine
“President Trump’s effort to pressure Ukraine for information he could use against political rivals came as he was being urged to adopt a hostile view of that country by its regional adversaries, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, current and former U.S. officials said.
Trump’s conversations with Putin, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and others reinforced his perception of Ukraine as a hopelessly corrupt country — one that Trump now also appears to believe sought to undermine him in the 2016 U.S. election, the officials said.
Neither of those foreign leaders specifically encouraged Trump to see Ukraine as a potential source of damaging information about Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, nor did they describe Kyiv as complicit in an unsubstantiated 2016 election conspiracy theory, officials said.
But their disparaging depictions of Ukraine reinforced Trump’s perceptions of the country and fed a dysfunctional dynamic in which White House officials struggled to persuade Trump to support the fledgling government in Kyiv instead of exploiting it for political purposes, officials said.
The role played by Putin and Orban, a hard-right leader who has often allied himself with the Kremlin’s positions, was described in closed-door testimony last week by George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state, before House impeachment investigators, U.S. officials said.
Kent cited the influence of those leaders as a factor that helped sour Trump on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the months leading up to their July 25 phone call — a conversation that triggered an extraordinary whistleblower complaint as well as a House impeachment inquiry.”
posted by jocelmeow at 6:53 PM on October 21, 2019 [8 favorites]
“President Trump’s effort to pressure Ukraine for information he could use against political rivals came as he was being urged to adopt a hostile view of that country by its regional adversaries, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, current and former U.S. officials said.
Trump’s conversations with Putin, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and others reinforced his perception of Ukraine as a hopelessly corrupt country — one that Trump now also appears to believe sought to undermine him in the 2016 U.S. election, the officials said.
Neither of those foreign leaders specifically encouraged Trump to see Ukraine as a potential source of damaging information about Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, nor did they describe Kyiv as complicit in an unsubstantiated 2016 election conspiracy theory, officials said.
But their disparaging depictions of Ukraine reinforced Trump’s perceptions of the country and fed a dysfunctional dynamic in which White House officials struggled to persuade Trump to support the fledgling government in Kyiv instead of exploiting it for political purposes, officials said.
The role played by Putin and Orban, a hard-right leader who has often allied himself with the Kremlin’s positions, was described in closed-door testimony last week by George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state, before House impeachment investigators, U.S. officials said.
Kent cited the influence of those leaders as a factor that helped sour Trump on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the months leading up to their July 25 phone call — a conversation that triggered an extraordinary whistleblower complaint as well as a House impeachment inquiry.”
posted by jocelmeow at 6:53 PM on October 21, 2019 [8 favorites]
I would love to see a supercut of republican statements about the Clinton impeachment which run completely contrary to the current republican talking points.
1999 vs. 2019: Senate Republicans’ attitudes on impeachment sure have changed a lot
1999 vs. 2019: Senate Republicans’ attitudes on impeachment sure have changed a lot
Fourteen current members of the Senate were serving in Congress during Clinton’s impeachment proceedings — and at least 10 are striking an entirely different tone with their approach to Trump.GOP veterans of Clinton impeachment urge restraint on Trump
Some have regrets. A few can’t talk about it. Others would do it all again.71 current members of Congress were there for the Clinton impeachment inquiry. Here’s where they stand on impeaching Trump.
But the Republicans who carried out President Bill Clinton’s impeachment in 1998 are unanimous in urging caution and restraint as Congress embarks on yet another impeachment struggle...
Today, there are 71 current members of Congress who were there for the Bill Clinton impeachment proceedings...Here's what the 71 long-time sitting members of Congress stand on the impeachment inquiry against Trump.The hypocrisy of impeachment: How lawmakers' stances on ousting a president changed from Clinton to Trump
For dozens of members of Congress, this is déjà vu.27 current senators were in Congress during Clinton's impeachment. What would they do about Trump?
...
Below are several prominent lawmakers' comments—all of whom have served on Capitol Hill for decades now—from their time serving during Clinton's impeachment process vs. Trump's impeachment process.
There are 27 current senators who voted on Clinton's impeachment, either as members of the House or the Senate. Fourteen are Republicans who voted to impeach or convict Clinton, 12 are Democrats who voted in Clinton's favor and one is a Republican who wanted to acquit Clinton on all charges. All of these senators made statements at the time about where they stood on lying, obstruction, witness tampering or unethical behavior from the occupant of the White House. Those statements could be put to the test if they faced the same decision for Mr. Trump.posted by kirkaracha at 9:15 PM on October 21, 2019 [24 favorites]
Dear Leader: Impeachment now lynching
What's next? Comparing himself to Rosa Parks?
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:23 AM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
What's next? Comparing himself to Rosa Parks?
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:23 AM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
Dear Leader: Impeachment now lynching
Minor distinction, Don. After a lynching, the victim is dead. But after we impeach you and kick you out of office, you'll still be alive. Heck, we'll even let you keep your freedom and all your money. Unless, of course, you've done something illegal. You haven't done anything illegal, have you, Don?
posted by Faint of Butt at 5:43 AM on October 22, 2019 [13 favorites]
Minor distinction, Don. After a lynching, the victim is dead. But after we impeach you and kick you out of office, you'll still be alive. Heck, we'll even let you keep your freedom and all your money. Unless, of course, you've done something illegal. You haven't done anything illegal, have you, Don?
posted by Faint of Butt at 5:43 AM on October 22, 2019 [13 favorites]
I think it's worth pointing out that Evangelicals, as a group, aren't quite as monolithic as might be supposed.
posted by jquinby at 5:46 AM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by jquinby at 5:46 AM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
The other sacred text for conservatives is the constitution. Now Trump just called the emoluments clause 'phony'. I haven't heard any condemnation of that from the right. So the bible is bullshit and the constitution is phony.
It's a pretty important part too, it's the bit that says the president can't be paid off by the enemy. He took an oath on that document. He's violated that oath in practice and principle. That is surely impeachable.
Imagine the howling if any of the Dem candidates called the 2nd amendment phony.
Like the bible I guess, they pick and choose the parts they like.
posted by adept256 at 6:23 AM on October 22, 2019 [30 favorites]
It's a pretty important part too, it's the bit that says the president can't be paid off by the enemy. He took an oath on that document. He's violated that oath in practice and principle. That is surely impeachable.
Imagine the howling if any of the Dem candidates called the 2nd amendment phony.
Like the bible I guess, they pick and choose the parts they like.
posted by adept256 at 6:23 AM on October 22, 2019 [30 favorites]
It's what happens when you stop caring about the means and the ends are justifying whatever behavior is necessary to get them.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:27 AM on October 22, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:27 AM on October 22, 2019 [6 favorites]
Dear Leader: Impeachment now lynching
Please don't link directly to his Twitter account without an explicit warning.
posted by Etrigan at 6:40 AM on October 22, 2019 [18 favorites]
Please don't link directly to his Twitter account without an explicit warning.
posted by Etrigan at 6:40 AM on October 22, 2019 [18 favorites]
House Democrats shuffle impeachment depositions due to events honoring Cummings (Olivia Beavers, The Hill)
An official working on the inquiry said that due to the events honoring Cummings, the chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee before his death, no depositions would be held Thursday and Friday.posted by ZeusHumms at 6:45 AM on October 22, 2019 [2 favorites]
William Taylor, a career foreign service official who has served as chargé d'affaires for Ukraine since June, is expected to testify Tuesday [today, 10/22]; and Laura Cooper, a top Pentagon official, is expected to testify Wednesday.
I think it's worth pointing out that Evangelicals, as a group, aren't quite as monolithic as might be supposed.
I think it's worth pointing out that, paraphrasing both those links ungenerously, "well we were just willing to overlook the rape and general criminality because he was going to put judges on the bench who will vote how we want, it's not like we approved of him" is not a hair that anyone outside the Evangelical camp cares about splitting.
posted by PMdixon at 7:14 AM on October 22, 2019 [39 favorites]
I think it's worth pointing out that, paraphrasing both those links ungenerously, "well we were just willing to overlook the rape and general criminality because he was going to put judges on the bench who will vote how we want, it's not like we approved of him" is not a hair that anyone outside the Evangelical camp cares about splitting.
posted by PMdixon at 7:14 AM on October 22, 2019 [39 favorites]
Not to overly belabor the Christian Evangelical subplot, but as a former member of a conservative evangelical church (who watched it veer from moderate to conservative in the aftermath of 9/11), there are PLENTY of self-professed Southern evangelicals who are not apocalyptic end-timers, but whole-heartedly support Trump almost exclusively for the racism, and the oppression of women (mainly via abortion, but other ways as well). There’s a lot of lip service to religious principles, but they’re a cover for being able to act on their worst impulses with impunity, in both public and private lives. Trump exemplifies this, and they love him for it.
posted by Kelrichen at 7:26 AM on October 22, 2019 [25 favorites]
posted by Kelrichen at 7:26 AM on October 22, 2019 [25 favorites]
The first half of Trump's Lynching Tweet, where he says the GOP in the House can and should impeach a Democrat president, is one of the concerns I had about impeachment--that it would turn into just what you do when you have that level of power.
The GOP needs to step up, and proclaim that the lawlessness this president is executing is a horrible precedent, and needs to be strongly rebuked. The Founders set up a system which, admittedly, assumed good men would work together for the good of the nation, and therefore left a lot of room for interpretation. If we truly value what we did, it's time to stop those who use that ambiguity for their own good, even if it means accepting being out of power for a time.
posted by MrGuilt at 7:50 AM on October 22, 2019 [5 favorites]
The GOP needs to step up, and proclaim that the lawlessness this president is executing is a horrible precedent, and needs to be strongly rebuked. The Founders set up a system which, admittedly, assumed good men would work together for the good of the nation, and therefore left a lot of room for interpretation. If we truly value what we did, it's time to stop those who use that ambiguity for their own good, even if it means accepting being out of power for a time.
posted by MrGuilt at 7:50 AM on October 22, 2019 [5 favorites]
The first half of Trump's Lynching Tweet, where he says the GOP in the House can and should impeach a Democrat president, is one of the concerns I had about impeachment--that it would turn into just what you do when you have that level of power.
In a sane electorate the voters would punish any attempt to impeach in bad faith. We, as a country, get what we vote for.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:56 AM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
In a sane electorate the voters would punish any attempt to impeach in bad faith. We, as a country, get what we vote for.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:56 AM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
Like I hate making an us and them comparison but only one side seems willing to police itself and it’s not the side that lets sexual predators become president in exchange for judges and ending abortions.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:59 AM on October 22, 2019 [25 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:59 AM on October 22, 2019 [25 favorites]
After the lynching tweet I am sitting here on a subway train trying to calm myself down and remember I do not control any part of this shit. That said, it is a good reminder to call my Senators and Representative in Congress later to remind them how pro-impeachment I am.
(Calling Trump names won’t affect impeachment or the election but there are actions that will. Apologies for sharing my personal pep talk with myself.)
posted by Bella Donna at 8:01 AM on October 22, 2019 [17 favorites]
(Calling Trump names won’t affect impeachment or the election but there are actions that will. Apologies for sharing my personal pep talk with myself.)
posted by Bella Donna at 8:01 AM on October 22, 2019 [17 favorites]
In a sane electorate the voters would punish any attempt to impeach in bad faith
Honestly I'm not sure this is true for any realistic value of "sane" - IME most people in most domains prioritize results over process by a significant margin. I'm not saying this to argue that we therefore should abandon democracy, just that this is probably a fact that any set of institutions attempting to provide democracy needs to work around/with.
posted by PMdixon at 8:15 AM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
Honestly I'm not sure this is true for any realistic value of "sane" - IME most people in most domains prioritize results over process by a significant margin. I'm not saying this to argue that we therefore should abandon democracy, just that this is probably a fact that any set of institutions attempting to provide democracy needs to work around/with.
posted by PMdixon at 8:15 AM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
I don’t think we need to preemptively worry about this. If Future Stupid GOP House impeaches Future Mostly-Innocent Democratic President for no good reason, it still takes 2/3 in the Senate to remove, and if you’re wasting everybody’s time it will be obvious that you’re doing so.
If we do happen to get a few more impeachments for semi-crooked-but-not-Nixonian stuff...not the worst thing in the world.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 8:31 AM on October 22, 2019 [13 favorites]
If we do happen to get a few more impeachments for semi-crooked-but-not-Nixonian stuff...not the worst thing in the world.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 8:31 AM on October 22, 2019 [13 favorites]
NYT: "The top American diplomat in Ukraine gave “damning” testimony about President Trump in a meeting Tuesday morning with House impeachment investigators, according to people familiar with it."
In an extensive opening statement, Mr. Taylor laid out a detailed timeline of events during his time in the administration, according to the person familiar with his testimony. The person also described the information Mr. Taylor provided to lawmakers as damning.Diplomat who raised alarm about withholding aid to Ukraine testifies in impeachment probe (WaPo)
Mr. Taylor’s testimony was based in part on detailed notes that he took throughout his tenure, according to another person familiar with what he has told lawmakers.
William B. Taylor Jr. is the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, whose president is at the center of the impeachment inquiry. Taylor took the job on temporary assignment earlier this year after the sitting ambassador was removed, in what she told the committees was political retaliation by the Trump administration. [...] “His memory and recollection seems to be a lot better than Ambassador Sondland’s,” [Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee] said, referring to Trump donor and ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, who appeared before the committees last week.posted by katra at 10:30 AM on October 22, 2019 [21 favorites]
[...] Taylor is a potentially damaging witness for Trump, because he appears to have no political or personal incentive to protect the administration. Unlike other State Department witnesses, he has neither his government career nor his personal standing with Trump at stake. [...] Taylor is a former Army officer and Vietnam War veteran who has served in government posts in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. He is expected to return to his senior position at the U.S. Institute for Peace sometime next year.
"The top American diplomat in Ukraine gave “damning” testimony about President Trump in a meeting Tuesday morning with House impeachment investigators, according to people familiar with it."
We already have large amounts of damning information about this President and administration. I guess more won't hurt but they are just going to keep doing damnable things as long as they don't face consequences. Nothing about violating the emoluments clause on day one in office? Keep flogging Trump properties and directing business there. Nothing happens after claiming executive privilege over everything? Claim it for more things. WH Press Corp still chummy after you lie to them, vilify them and put them in danger? Ramp it up. Refuse to testify and provide documents/information. Result? Get subpoenas. Ignore subpoenas. No repercussions, so keep going with that. Kidnap more children. Etc.
posted by mikepop at 10:47 AM on October 22, 2019 [6 favorites]
We already have large amounts of damning information about this President and administration. I guess more won't hurt but they are just going to keep doing damnable things as long as they don't face consequences. Nothing about violating the emoluments clause on day one in office? Keep flogging Trump properties and directing business there. Nothing happens after claiming executive privilege over everything? Claim it for more things. WH Press Corp still chummy after you lie to them, vilify them and put them in danger? Ramp it up. Refuse to testify and provide documents/information. Result? Get subpoenas. Ignore subpoenas. No repercussions, so keep going with that. Kidnap more children. Etc.
posted by mikepop at 10:47 AM on October 22, 2019 [6 favorites]
William Taylor testifies about deep-seated push for Ukraine quid pro quo (Politico)
William Taylor prompted sighs and gasps when he read a lengthy 15-page opening statement, two of the sources said. Another person in the room said Taylor’s statement described “how pervasive the efforts were” among Trump's allies to convince Ukrainian officials to launch an investigation targeting former Vice President Joe Biden and another probe centering on a debunked conspiracy theory regarding the 2016 election.posted by katra at 10:52 AM on October 22, 2019 [10 favorites]
Taylor also described the extent to which military assistance to Ukraine and a potential White House meeting with Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart were tied to those investigations, the source added.
Not to overly belabor the Christian Evangelical subplot, but as a former member of a conservative evangelical church (who watched it veer from moderate to conservative in the aftermath of 9/11), there are PLENTY of self-professed Southern evangelicals who are not apocalyptic end-timers, but whole-heartedly support Trump almost exclusively for the racism, and the oppression of women (mainly via abortion, but other ways as well). There’s a lot of lip service to religious principles, but they’re a cover for being able to act on their worst impulses with impunity, in both public and private lives. Trump exemplifies this, and they love him for it.
There are three primary subgroups of conservatives. There are absolutely layers of crossover between them, but I classify their main aims as follows:
Fiscal conservatives (Romney types): We want power so that we can use it for our own financial benefit.
Moral conservatives (Santorum types): We want power so that we may impose our proper ways upon others, for their own good.
Authoritarian conservatives (Gingrich types): We want power because we should be the only ones with any say in who may have it and how it is used.
It is not surprising to me that the Fiscal camp is pretty much the only one with substantial Trump pushback and calls for impeachment; after all, they've already _gotten_ their tax cuts and their deregulation and are now staring at scandals and tariffs and irrationality that threaten their primary goal in future. Moral and Authoritarian still see themselves not in full control and know that there's more work to be done with this one.
posted by delfin at 10:55 AM on October 22, 2019 [18 favorites]
There are three primary subgroups of conservatives. There are absolutely layers of crossover between them, but I classify their main aims as follows:
Fiscal conservatives (Romney types): We want power so that we can use it for our own financial benefit.
Moral conservatives (Santorum types): We want power so that we may impose our proper ways upon others, for their own good.
Authoritarian conservatives (Gingrich types): We want power because we should be the only ones with any say in who may have it and how it is used.
It is not surprising to me that the Fiscal camp is pretty much the only one with substantial Trump pushback and calls for impeachment; after all, they've already _gotten_ their tax cuts and their deregulation and are now staring at scandals and tariffs and irrationality that threaten their primary goal in future. Moral and Authoritarian still see themselves not in full control and know that there's more work to be done with this one.
posted by delfin at 10:55 AM on October 22, 2019 [18 favorites]
I attended a town hall with my House rep, Jennifer Wexton, over the weekend and while I'm in a pretty blue area to begin with (the district as a whole may be purple, but not the neighborhood where the meeting was held), it was still striking how much impeachment support there was in the crowd. Sustained applause for the current proceedings, for the word "emoluments," and for the guy who used his time at the mic to demand Bill Barr's impeachment. And perhaps more importantly -- not a single comment or heckle in opposition. The only GOP-leaning speaker at the entire thing asked about whether she supports Beto O'Rourke's assault rifle confiscation plan. Enthusiasm gaps are real!
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:14 AM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:14 AM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
Guardian: "Two Democratic members of the House oversight committee, Gerry Connolly of Virginia and Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois, suggested that Gordon Sondland may have to appear again before congressional investigators to respond to Bill Taylor’s testimony."
Guardian: House Democrat describes Taylor's testimony as 'incredibly damaging' to Trump
Scott Wong (@scottwongDC) .@CongressmanRaja after hearing Bill Taylor testimony today: “Mr. Sondland is going to have some explaining to do”Guardian: "The Republican members of the House committees investigating impeachment have not been as forthcoming as their Democratic counterparts about Bill Taylor’s testimony."
October 22, 2019
Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) GOP more tight-lipped than Dems. Jordan praises the effectiveness of the GOP counsel, and Zeldin questioned whether Dems who though Taylor was damning actually sat through other depositions.Guardian: "According to CNN, Bill Taylor told the House committees investigating impeachment that Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the EU, listed a desire for Ukraine to launch investigations into Democrats as one potential reason why military aid to the country was delayed."
So far, none have suggested Taylor’s testimony is exculpatory for Trump, even when asked
October 22, 2019
Guardian: House Democrat describes Taylor's testimony as 'incredibly damaging' to Trump
Representative Ted Lieu, a Democratic member of the House foreign affairs committee, just emerged from the closed-door interview with Bill Taylor and said the acting US ambassador to Ukraine’s testimony was “incredibly damaging to the president.”posted by katra at 11:22 AM on October 22, 2019 [10 favorites]
U.S. envoy says he was told release of Ukraine aid was contingent on public declaration to investigate Bidens, 2016 election (WaPo)
Acting ambassador William B. Taylor Jr. testified behind closed doors in the House impeachment probe of Trump that he stands by his characterization that it was “crazy” to make the assistance contingent on investigations he found troubling.posted by katra at 12:06 PM on October 22, 2019 [11 favorites]
Upon arriving in Kyiv last spring he became alarmed by secondary diplomatic channels involving U.S. officials that he called “weird,” Taylor said, according to a copy of his lengthy opening statement obtained by The Washington Post.
Taylor walked lawmakers through a series of conversations he had with other U.S. diplomats who were trying to obtain what one called the “deliverable” of Ukrainian help investigating Trump’s political rivals. [...] “Amb. Sondland also told me that he now recognized that he had made a mistake by earlier telling the Ukrainian officials to whom he spoke that a White House meeting with President Zelensky was dependent on a public announcement of investigations — in fact, Amb. Sondland said, ‘everything’ was dependent on such an announcement, including security assistance,’” Taylor told House investigators.
“He said that President Trump wanted President Zelensky ‘in a public box’ by making a public statement about ordering such investigations.’ [...]
“He drew a very specific direct line from President Trump to the withholding of foreign aid and the refusal of a meeting,” between Trump and the new Ukrainian leader, [Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.)] said, “directly related to both insisting on Zelensky publicly say that he’ll have an investigation, that they will investigate.”
NPR has a round-up on the Congressional responses to Trump's "lynching" tweet, including:
While Senator Lindsay Graham was asked about Donald Trump’s tweet comparing impeachment process to
lynching and said "Yes, this is a lynching and in every sense this is un-American." (original tweet by @Sonia_Dridi)
Except the part where he's a white man in power who isn't being physically attacked by an angry, racist mob and left to die in a public place as an example and threat, but is instead being subjected to a constitutional process, outlined by those much-lauded Founding Fathers.
In short, the GOP is still split on having Grave Concerns and 100% backing Trump.
posted by filthy light thief at 12:16 PM on October 22, 2019 [20 favorites]
You are comparing a constitutional process to the PREVALENT and SYSTEMATIC brutal torture of people in THIS COUNTRY that looked like me? https://t.co/3v4oMuPC6Cand Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill. calling for Trump to delete that tweet. Even some Republicans see this as horrifically racist:
— Congressmember Bass (@RepKarenBass) October 22, 2019
We can all disagree on the process, and argue merits. But never should we use terms like “lynching” here. The painful scourge in our history has no comparison to politics, and @realDonaldTrump should retract this immediately. May God help us to return to a better way. https://t.co/URKNgxUfivHey Adam, what's your stance on impeachment? Though Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., recently called a tweet from President Donald Trump “beyond repugnant” [not this one, it was an earlier tweet -- ed.] — making him one of the few Republicans willing to publicly criticize Trump — he said Thursday he backs the president and does not support impeachment. (Chicago Sun Times, Oct 3, 2019)
— Adam Kinzinger (@RepKinzinger) October 22, 2019
While Senator Lindsay Graham was asked about Donald Trump’s tweet comparing impeachment process to
lynching and said "Yes, this is a lynching and in every sense this is un-American." (original tweet by @Sonia_Dridi)
Except the part where he's a white man in power who isn't being physically attacked by an angry, racist mob and left to die in a public place as an example and threat, but is instead being subjected to a constitutional process, outlined by those much-lauded Founding Fathers.
In short, the GOP is still split on having Grave Concerns and 100% backing Trump.
posted by filthy light thief at 12:16 PM on October 22, 2019 [20 favorites]
Trump continues to get away with saying anything that keeps the media from focusing squarely on the impeachment process.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:17 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:17 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
Ok, then there’s this:Anonymous Author of Trump Resistance Op-Ed to Publish a Tell-All Book. Publication date of November 19.
Impeachment wild card.
posted by Sublimity at 12:18 PM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
Impeachment wild card.
posted by Sublimity at 12:18 PM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
I expect that anonymous tell-all to have roughly the same impact as the author's original op-ed: little to no change and lots of hot takes.
posted by notpace at 12:34 PM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by notpace at 12:34 PM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
Opening statement of Ambassador William B. Taylor (WaPo)
Read or download the 15 page PDF.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:38 PM on October 22, 2019 [24 favorites]
Read or download the 15 page PDF.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:38 PM on October 22, 2019 [24 favorites]
"Hey Adam, what's your stance on impeachment? Though Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., recently called a tweet from President Donald Trump “beyond repugnant” [not this one, it was an earlier tweet -- ed.] — making him one of the few Republicans willing to publicly criticize Trump — he said Thursday he backs the president and does not support impeachment. "
Kinzinger represents a weird district. He's the only Republican left in the Illinois delegation from north of Peoria. His district is the collar just OUTSIDE the collar counties of Chicago, but suburban expansion has been pushing into his district for the past decade; the only reason he's still there is that Rockford is in Cheri Bustos's 17th instead of Kinzinger's 16th. Anyway, this is Kinzinger clumsily trying to appease both his suburban constituents horrified by Trump and his deep red primary voters who adore Trump, and to keep the money taps flowing (from the racist guys who are the last funders standing for GOP candidates in IL). I don't expect Kinzinger will last through 2020. Given enough cover by someone like Mitt Romney, some outside funding (from whatever not-racist Republicans are left funding things), and some favorable polls in his district about impeachment, he'd totally vote to impeach to attempt to save his job, or in an attempt to fuck Trump on his way out the door.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 12:59 PM on October 22, 2019 [5 favorites]
Kinzinger represents a weird district. He's the only Republican left in the Illinois delegation from north of Peoria. His district is the collar just OUTSIDE the collar counties of Chicago, but suburban expansion has been pushing into his district for the past decade; the only reason he's still there is that Rockford is in Cheri Bustos's 17th instead of Kinzinger's 16th. Anyway, this is Kinzinger clumsily trying to appease both his suburban constituents horrified by Trump and his deep red primary voters who adore Trump, and to keep the money taps flowing (from the racist guys who are the last funders standing for GOP candidates in IL). I don't expect Kinzinger will last through 2020. Given enough cover by someone like Mitt Romney, some outside funding (from whatever not-racist Republicans are left funding things), and some favorable polls in his district about impeachment, he'd totally vote to impeach to attempt to save his job, or in an attempt to fuck Trump on his way out the door.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 12:59 PM on October 22, 2019 [5 favorites]
Trump continues to get away with saying anything that keeps the media from focusing squarely on the impeachment process.
It would be a lot easier to keep the media focussed on impeachment if the impeachers didn't insist on hiding the whole thing. I know I've said it before, but I continue to not understand the strategic decision to keep this unclassified info behind closed doors. A PDF, some tweets, some vague "this changes everything" statements by a few House members -- vs days of dramatic live TV that would be endlessly clipped, replayed, pored over and dissected by every TV station and all of social media. I mean, I realize that Democrats are risk-averse, and are more fearful that something will go wrong that go right at these hearings, but there are substantial real costs to that risk-averse strategy, and it's hard for me to see how it could possibly produce more benefits later -- it's not like repeat hearings where all the juicy tidbits have already leaked will have any impact, and in almost all plausible scenarios, you still have the House passing it with 2xx votes and the Senate rejecting it. The small beneft in those outcomes due to this closed-door strategy just seems like far less than the immediate benefit of dramatic daily televised hearings. It's weird how careful they are to draw lessons from Clinton and Nixon (and Iran-Contra), but the biggest lesson was that these investigations all achieved the bulk of their damaging impact via televised hearings. I just don't understand squandering that for some hypothetical long-term or procedural benefits.
posted by chortly at 1:00 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
It would be a lot easier to keep the media focussed on impeachment if the impeachers didn't insist on hiding the whole thing. I know I've said it before, but I continue to not understand the strategic decision to keep this unclassified info behind closed doors. A PDF, some tweets, some vague "this changes everything" statements by a few House members -- vs days of dramatic live TV that would be endlessly clipped, replayed, pored over and dissected by every TV station and all of social media. I mean, I realize that Democrats are risk-averse, and are more fearful that something will go wrong that go right at these hearings, but there are substantial real costs to that risk-averse strategy, and it's hard for me to see how it could possibly produce more benefits later -- it's not like repeat hearings where all the juicy tidbits have already leaked will have any impact, and in almost all plausible scenarios, you still have the House passing it with 2xx votes and the Senate rejecting it. The small beneft in those outcomes due to this closed-door strategy just seems like far less than the immediate benefit of dramatic daily televised hearings. It's weird how careful they are to draw lessons from Clinton and Nixon (and Iran-Contra), but the biggest lesson was that these investigations all achieved the bulk of their damaging impact via televised hearings. I just don't understand squandering that for some hypothetical long-term or procedural benefits.
posted by chortly at 1:00 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
The impeachment trial will be televised.
posted by Sublimity at 1:08 PM on October 22, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Sublimity at 1:08 PM on October 22, 2019 [5 favorites]
This is not a criminal investigation in the legal sense, this is a political undertaking. Which is not to denigrate it -- impeachment is a serious legislative, non-judicial action, albeit one loosely modeled on judicial proceedings. There is no requirement that these hearings be treated as "legal depositions," that is just a choice Schiff and others have made -- it was not what was done for most of Watergate, Clinton, or Iran-Contra, nor did those hearings have any major issues with testimony contamination. All the coordination and lying was done behind closed doors prior to hearings, and in any case, all the essential elements of each testimony now are leaking immediately anyway.
The political effect of hearings is largely via new information dramatically disclosed. A trial is a fine model for convincing a judge, but an impeachment is a political process whose main practical goal -- especially when conviction is virtually impossible -- is swaying the public. And swaying the public is done when they see people delivering shocking new news. A later "trial" that simply reiterates this stuff, even with the same witnesses, has far less impact, and in any case, would have the same impact whether or not the previous hearings were public. Making the decision to model this so narrowly on a legal trial when we already know the judge (Senate) has no chance of conviction is the legislature unilaterally abandoning the main democratic, and Democratic, benefits of this stage of the process.
posted by chortly at 1:24 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
The political effect of hearings is largely via new information dramatically disclosed. A trial is a fine model for convincing a judge, but an impeachment is a political process whose main practical goal -- especially when conviction is virtually impossible -- is swaying the public. And swaying the public is done when they see people delivering shocking new news. A later "trial" that simply reiterates this stuff, even with the same witnesses, has far less impact, and in any case, would have the same impact whether or not the previous hearings were public. Making the decision to model this so narrowly on a legal trial when we already know the judge (Senate) has no chance of conviction is the legislature unilaterally abandoning the main democratic, and Democratic, benefits of this stage of the process.
posted by chortly at 1:24 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
That opening statement by William Taylor posted by ZeusHumms up the page here is quite a thing. I recommend as thorough a read as you have time and attention to do so. I mean...wow.
posted by mcstayinskool at 1:35 PM on October 22, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by mcstayinskool at 1:35 PM on October 22, 2019 [11 favorites]
I have shifted my stance slightly in response to the latest testimony noted above. I invite all of you to join me in calling for Congress to provide a deliverable, in this case impeachment, ASA fucking P.
Screw business as usual. When it comes to deliverables, by God, impeachment Is the kind of deliverable the American people deserve. (Also clean, lead-free water. But that’s probably asking for too much. Let’s take it one step at a time.)
posted by Bella Donna at 1:43 PM on October 22, 2019 [6 favorites]
Screw business as usual. When it comes to deliverables, by God, impeachment Is the kind of deliverable the American people deserve. (Also clean, lead-free water. But that’s probably asking for too much. Let’s take it one step at a time.)
posted by Bella Donna at 1:43 PM on October 22, 2019 [6 favorites]
It's not just Trump seeking quid quo pro deals:
Dozens of Texas House Republicans have either demanded Speaker Dennis Bonnen's resignation or dropped their support for him after audio released last week revealed that he offered a lobbying group access in exchange for dirt on members of his own party.
You reap what you sow? Trickle-down morality? Or just who the Republicans are now?
posted by srboisvert at 1:46 PM on October 22, 2019 [18 favorites]
Dozens of Texas House Republicans have either demanded Speaker Dennis Bonnen's resignation or dropped their support for him after audio released last week revealed that he offered a lobbying group access in exchange for dirt on members of his own party.
You reap what you sow? Trickle-down morality? Or just who the Republicans are now?
posted by srboisvert at 1:46 PM on October 22, 2019 [18 favorites]
You reap what you sow? Trickle-down morality? Or just who the Republicans are now?
Fascism always needs to thin the pyramid. Once they're done stripping rights/power from everyone else, the only thing left for authoritarians to do is to strip these things from each other. Either that or war.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:54 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
Fascism always needs to thin the pyramid. Once they're done stripping rights/power from everyone else, the only thing left for authoritarians to do is to strip these things from each other. Either that or war.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:54 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
Ambassador Sondland tried to explain to me that President Trump is a businessman,” Taylor said in his opening statement. “When a businessman is about to sign a check to someone who owes him something, he said, the businessman asks that person to pay up before signing the check.”
Volker had “used the same terms several days later” while discussing the matter, according to Taylor.
“I argued to both that the explanation made no sense: the Ukrainians did not ‘owe’ President Trump anything, and holding up security assistance for domestic political gain was ‘crazy,
posted by angrycat at 2:11 PM on October 22, 2019 [29 favorites]
Volker had “used the same terms several days later” while discussing the matter, according to Taylor.
“I argued to both that the explanation made no sense: the Ukrainians did not ‘owe’ President Trump anything, and holding up security assistance for domestic political gain was ‘crazy,
posted by angrycat at 2:11 PM on October 22, 2019 [29 favorites]
Josh Marshall's take: Bill Taylor Blows The Case Against Trump Wide Open (Talking Points Memo)
[Also, the PDF of the opening statement got reformatted to lessen visual distortion. It should be easier to read or use with a screen reader.]
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:13 PM on October 22, 2019 [13 favorites]
[Also, the PDF of the opening statement got reformatted to lessen visual distortion. It should be easier to read or use with a screen reader.]
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:13 PM on October 22, 2019 [13 favorites]
Jesus. This opening statement. When shit is too corrupt for even John Bolton to stomach.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 2:14 PM on October 22, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 2:14 PM on October 22, 2019 [8 favorites]
That Taylor statement reads like someone with incredible filet skills getting exceptional satisfaction from the task of proving to a bully his mastery after said bully had spent the last three weeks taunting him to do.
In this moment, and assuming his veracity, Ambassador Taylor has inextricably dumped Trump deeply into the swirling currents of impeachment and conviction.
I dread the FUD noises that will soon try to bring this man and his unbridled love of country down.
posted by Johnny Waterbed at 2:19 PM on October 22, 2019 [8 favorites]
In this moment, and assuming his veracity, Ambassador Taylor has inextricably dumped Trump deeply into the swirling currents of impeachment and conviction.
I dread the FUD noises that will soon try to bring this man and his unbridled love of country down.
posted by Johnny Waterbed at 2:19 PM on October 22, 2019 [8 favorites]
“When a businessman is about to sign a check to someone who owes him something, he said, the businessman asks that person to pay up before signing the check.”
In fewer words, albeit Latin ones -- quid pro quo.
posted by JackFlash at 2:52 PM on October 22, 2019 [28 favorites]
In fewer words, albeit Latin ones -- quid pro quo.
posted by JackFlash at 2:52 PM on October 22, 2019 [28 favorites]
But why wouldn't you write the check so as to settle all of the debts, or vice versa? It's like the way he's conducting the exchange itself points to suspicious behavior even before we get to the purpose of the transaction.
posted by rhizome at 2:58 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by rhizome at 2:58 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
5 takeaways from William Taylor’s huge opening statement (WaPo)
1. There was a quid pro quo on military aid, he believes [...]posted by katra at 3:03 PM on October 22, 2019 [10 favorites]
2. But it wasn’t the only one [...]
3. An explicit quid pro quo — explicitly relayed to Ukraine [...]
4. Sondland has explaining to do [...]
5. More cloak-and-daggerTaylor doesn’t just describe quid pro quos; he describes the kind of secrecy we’ve come to expect from the Ukraine saga.
Page 12: "According to Mr. Morrison, President Trump told Ambassador Sondland that he was not asking for a 'quid pro quo.' But President Trump did insist that President Zelenskyy go to a microphone and say he is opening investigations of Biden and 2016 election interference, and that President Zelenskyy should want to do this himself."
I'm not saying this is extortion. I'm saying if you don't pay me I will set your business on fire.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 3:04 PM on October 22, 2019 [51 favorites]
I'm not saying this is extortion. I'm saying if you don't pay me I will set your business on fire.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 3:04 PM on October 22, 2019 [51 favorites]
Allow me to add to the chorus of recommendations you spend the time and read Taylor's statement end to end.
That really should be the end of the story, right there. Trump saying Zelenskyy must "clear things up and do it in public" or they'd be at a "stalemate". And then, in typical up-is-down, sky-is-green fashion, claiming that's not quid pro quo.
posted by bcd at 3:05 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
That really should be the end of the story, right there. Trump saying Zelenskyy must "clear things up and do it in public" or they'd be at a "stalemate". And then, in typical up-is-down, sky-is-green fashion, claiming that's not quid pro quo.
posted by bcd at 3:05 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
> ... claiming that's not quid pro quo.
Well, actuallyTM, it's more like if you don't quo me, I won't quid you the quid already allocated to you by Congress. Totally different, of course.
posted by RedOrGreen at 3:27 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
Well, actuallyTM, it's more like if you don't quo me, I won't quid you the quid already allocated to you by Congress. Totally different, of course.
posted by RedOrGreen at 3:27 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
Self-Dealing in Ukraine: The Core of the Impeachment Inquiry (Philip Zelikow, Lawfare, Oct 21, 2019)
Evidence of criminal misconduct, specifically, the federal bribery statute, should influence political judgments about impeachment. After all, “Bribery” is one of the grounds for impeachment specifically enumerated in the Constitution. [...] Here, I offer a view of how a public corruption prosecutor might regard the way the case is taking shape. In addition to the role that possible criminal wrongdoing by the president could play in the ongoing impeachment inquiry, evidence about criminal misconduct might also apply, more directly, to the possible investigations of others beyond the president—including Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney. [...]posted by katra at 3:34 PM on October 22, 2019 [27 favorites]
Any public corruption prosecutor familiar with the federal bribery statute and self-dealing cases will recognize that firsthand witnesses, such as Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland, Mulvaney, and Trump himself, have now offered evidence to all the elements of the offense. The bribery law—18 U.S.C. § 201(b)—is easy to understand. The elements, as they pertain here, are as follows:
Whoever, being a public official …
corruptly
directly or indirectly demands or seeks …
anything of value
for himself or some other person
in return for being influenced in the performance of any official act …
has committed the felony. [...] Anyone joining knowingly in the commission of the above could be liable as well, probably under the conspiracy statute (18 U.S.C. § 371). That might include Giuliani, who is not a public official.
“When a businessman is about to sign a check to someone who owes him something, he said, the businessman asks that person to pay up before signing the check.”
And you know who has a long and very-well-earned reputation for fair play in business dealings, and is certainly never known for (let's say) hiring people to do something, claiming afterwards that the services received were unsatisfactory, and either refusing to pay at all or condescendingly offering to settle for pennies on the dollar?
...I don't, either.
posted by delfin at 3:35 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
And you know who has a long and very-well-earned reputation for fair play in business dealings, and is certainly never known for (let's say) hiring people to do something, claiming afterwards that the services received were unsatisfactory, and either refusing to pay at all or condescendingly offering to settle for pennies on the dollar?
...I don't, either.
posted by delfin at 3:35 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
I'm not saying this is extortion. I'm saying if you don't pay me I will set your business on fire.
Mayor Carmine De Pasto: If you want this year's homecoming parade in my town, you have to pay for it.posted by rhizome at 3:38 PM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
Dean Vernon Wormer: Carmine, I don't think it's right that you should extort money from the college.
Mayor Carmine De Pasto: Look, these parades you throw are very expensive. You using my police, my sanitation people, and my Oldsmobiles free of charge. So, if you mention extortion again, I'll have your legs broken.
That opening statement makes me think my previous "ha ha wouldn't it be funny if Bolton was the whistle-blower" comments seem less ludicrous than I meant them to be.
posted by PMdixon at 3:58 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by PMdixon at 3:58 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
Apprently the White House has dismissed the Embassador's statement as "triple hearsay" which is a fascinating piece of newspeak. I prefer the older term "corroborating evidence".
posted by Sparx at 4:06 PM on October 22, 2019 [22 favorites]
posted by Sparx at 4:06 PM on October 22, 2019 [22 favorites]
Presumably triple hearsay is a step from double secret hearsay.
No, but seriously, what makes something "triple hearsay?" Is that a real thing (he asks suspecting the answer is no)?
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:12 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
No, but seriously, what makes something "triple hearsay?" Is that a real thing (he asks suspecting the answer is no)?
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:12 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
Maybe they meant "triple heresy" in the religion of Trump? I mean, that one probably stands.
posted by maxwelton at 4:13 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by maxwelton at 4:13 PM on October 22, 2019 [3 favorites]
Triple hearsay by quadruple agents lands them on double secret probation.
At night, the ice weasels come.
posted by delfin at 4:17 PM on October 22, 2019 [22 favorites]
At night, the ice weasels come.
posted by delfin at 4:17 PM on October 22, 2019 [22 favorites]
God, I hate to even engage in their nonsense, but I'm assuming "triple hearsay" means hearsay twice removed. I.e., you heard Party 1 say something and testify thereto, that's hearsay. "Double" hearsay would be you testifying that Party 1 told you something Party 2 said to Party 1. "Triple" hearsay would be you testifying that Party 1 told you something that Party 2 told Party 1 about something Party 3 said. I think?
posted by yasaman at 4:20 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by yasaman at 4:20 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
Kierkegaard!
Edit: sorry, that was the perky elf dancing a jig quote.
posted by Sublimity at 4:20 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
Edit: sorry, that was the perky elf dancing a jig quote.
posted by Sublimity at 4:20 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
That opening statement makes me think my previous "ha ha wouldn't it be funny if Bolton was the whistle-blower" comments seem less ludicrous than I meant them to be.
I remember reading that and snorking a bit, thinking 'that would be something, but nah.' And then, from the TPM link above:
"Taylor recounted an Aug. 27 conversation he had with then-National Security Adviser John Bolton during a visit to Kyiv. Taylor said that he expressed concern about the aid being withheld to Bolton, who recommended that Taylor send a cable directly to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo."
Reading through Taylor's statement, Bolton was in a position to see all parts of this in real time.
posted by LooseFilter at 4:38 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
I remember reading that and snorking a bit, thinking 'that would be something, but nah.' And then, from the TPM link above:
"Taylor recounted an Aug. 27 conversation he had with then-National Security Adviser John Bolton during a visit to Kyiv. Taylor said that he expressed concern about the aid being withheld to Bolton, who recommended that Taylor send a cable directly to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo."
Reading through Taylor's statement, Bolton was in a position to see all parts of this in real time.
posted by LooseFilter at 4:38 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
And you know who has a long and very-well-earned reputation for fair play in business dealings, and is certainly never known for (let's say) hiring people to do something, claiming afterwards that the services received were unsatisfactory, and either refusing to pay at all or condescendingly offering to settle for pennies on the dollar?
I know. . .
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 4:47 PM on October 22, 2019
I know. . .
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 4:47 PM on October 22, 2019
Pence, bitches. nelsonlaugh.gif
posted by j_curiouser at 5:16 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by j_curiouser at 5:16 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
6 Key Revelations of Taylor’s Opening Statement to Impeachment Investigators (NYT)
1. Taylor described an explicit quid pro quo. [...] "conditioned on the investigations of Burisma and alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections." [...]posted by katra at 5:24 PM on October 22, 2019 [28 favorites]
2. The White House had two channels on Ukraine policy: official and unofficial. The unofficial one included Rudolph W. Giuliani [...] "When I first arrived in Kyiv, in June and July, the actions of both the regular and the irregular channels of foreign policy served the same goal-a strong U.S.-Ukraine partnership — but it became clear to me by August that the channels had diverged in their objectives." [...]
3. Taylor was told Ukraine had to ‘pay up’ before the president would ‘sign a check.’ [...] "I argued to both that the explanation made no sense: the Ukrainians did not “owe” President Trump anything, and holding up security assistance for domestic political gain was “crazy,” as I had said in my text message to Ambassadors Sondland and Volker on September 9."
4. Taylor said Ukrainians would die at the hands of Russian led-forces as a result of the delay in American military aid. [...] "Ambassador Volker and I could see the armed and hostile Russian-led forces on the other side of the damaged bridge across the line of contact. Over 13,000 Ukrainians had been killed in the war, one or two a week. More Ukrainians would undoubtedly die without the U.S. assistance."
5. Bolton fought the effort to hijack the policy toward Ukraine and Pompeo did not respond directly to complaints, Taylor said. [...] "Ambassador Bolton recommended that I send a first-person cable to Secretary Pompeo directly, relaying my concerns. I wrote and transmitted such a cable on August 29, describing the “folly” I saw in withholding military aid to Ukraine at a time when hostilities were still active in the east and when Russia was watching closely to gauge the level of American support for the Ukrainian government." [...]
6. Demands were made for secrecy and career officials, including Taylor, were left in the dark about key events. [...] "On July 25, President Trump and President Zelensky had the long-awaited phone conversation. Strangely, even though I was Chief of Mission and was scheduled to meet with President Zelensky along with Ambassador Volker the following day, I received no readout of the call from the White House. The Ukrainian government issued a short, cryptic summary."
It is causing me quite a bit of cognitive dissonance that Bolton appears to be one of the good guys in this story. I suppose it's just that the bar for 'good' has gotten so damn low. Is there some way he was concerned this was going to interfere with his plans to start a war with Iran?
posted by bcd at 5:44 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by bcd at 5:44 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
It is causing me quite a bit of cognitive dissonance that Bolton appears to be one of the good guys in this story
Opposition to Trump because he's bad at running an evil world empire doesn't make you a good guy.
posted by Rust Moranis at 5:50 PM on October 22, 2019 [23 favorites]
Opposition to Trump because he's bad at running an evil world empire doesn't make you a good guy.
posted by Rust Moranis at 5:50 PM on October 22, 2019 [23 favorites]
LE vs CE.
Besides, being an war hawk who believes that might makes right doesn't make you dishonest or without honour. People are complex. It's important to understand that even from a game theory point of view; your enemy may look like a simpleton who is just as psycho, but the truth may be complex enough to trip you up.
posted by Bovine Love at 5:52 PM on October 22, 2019 [22 favorites]
Besides, being an war hawk who believes that might makes right doesn't make you dishonest or without honour. People are complex. It's important to understand that even from a game theory point of view; your enemy may look like a simpleton who is just as psycho, but the truth may be complex enough to trip you up.
posted by Bovine Love at 5:52 PM on October 22, 2019 [22 favorites]
Honestly I'd rather have the scumbag-who-has-standards than the daily trumpster fire
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:19 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:19 PM on October 22, 2019 [4 favorites]
I'd rather have the scumbag-who-has-standards than the daily trumpster fire
Millions of currently-alive people in Iran, Venezuela etc beg to differ.
posted by Rust Moranis at 6:31 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
Millions of currently-alive people in Iran, Venezuela etc beg to differ.
posted by Rust Moranis at 6:31 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
Goddamn. William Taylor for president!
posted by Big Al 8000 at 6:34 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Big Al 8000 at 6:34 PM on October 22, 2019 [1 favorite]
Bolton isn’t a good person but he is constrained by the rules. He can agitate for war all he wants but without legal authorization, he won’t act and might even do the right thing when someone else isn’t following the law.
So. Yeah. I’d definitely take that over Trump’s narcissistic lawlessness.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 6:44 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
So. Yeah. I’d definitely take that over Trump’s narcissistic lawlessness.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 6:44 PM on October 22, 2019 [7 favorites]
This time next year everyone will have mustaches.
posted by xammerboy at 6:54 PM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 6:54 PM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
In the HBO special there will be multiple meetings that end with Trump telling Bolton to shave his ridiculous mustache. Bolton will laugh, but the camera will zoom in on his eyes, and they will be filled with white hot rage. It will be the story of how Democracy was saved.
posted by xammerboy at 6:57 PM on October 22, 2019 [27 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 6:57 PM on October 22, 2019 [27 favorites]
John Bolton, Lawful Evil
posted by biddeford at 7:28 PM on October 22, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by biddeford at 7:28 PM on October 22, 2019 [19 favorites]
The president and his advisers want Republicans in the Senate to stage their own hearings to counteract what’s happening in the House.
Hey, Republican Party? If you haven't noticed, Trump wants to take you all down with him.
posted by xammerboy at 7:31 PM on October 22, 2019 [16 favorites]
Hey, Republican Party? If you haven't noticed, Trump wants to take you all down with him.
posted by xammerboy at 7:31 PM on October 22, 2019 [16 favorites]
Hey, Republican Party? If you haven't noticed, Trump wants to take you all down with him.
Cracks in the firewall: Republicans' support for Trump begins to falter (Guardian)
Republicans quit trying to rein in Trump after ‘lynching’ tweet (Politico)
Why the Senate might actually remove Trump from office (Megan McArdle, WaPo Opinion)
Cracks in the firewall: Republicans' support for Trump begins to falter (Guardian)
Republicans quit trying to rein in Trump after ‘lynching’ tweet (Politico)
Why the Senate might actually remove Trump from office (Megan McArdle, WaPo Opinion)
By the time the poll numbers for removal inch up to somewhere in the range of 55 to 58 percent, it becomes clear Trump will almost certainly lose in 2020 — and worse, take the Senate down with him.posted by katra at 7:44 PM on October 22, 2019 [8 favorites]
New testimony undercuts Trump’s claim of no quid pro quo on Ukraine. How will Washington respond? (WaPo)
Republican lawmakers face a new calculus as they digest the contents of the Taylor testimony. They will have great difficulty denying that the suspension of the aid was being linked to an investigation of a political rival of the president. Will they conclude that what the president did was legitimate? Will they attempt to point in other directions? Will they argue that what Trump did wasn’t right but isn’t impeachable? There’s less room for equivocation about what happened today than there was before.An Envoy’s Damning Account of Trump’s Ukraine Pressure and Its Consequences (NYT)
Mr. Taylor’s vivid depiction illustrated the differences between the impeachment inquiry against Mr. Trump and the ones that consumed Presidents Richard M. Nixon and Bill Clinton. While the Watergate and Monica Lewinsky cover-ups involved the integrity of America’s democracy and system of justice, the Ukraine scandal also extends to matters of life and death, as well as geopolitics on a grand scale.posted by katra at 8:41 PM on October 22, 2019 [6 favorites]
Mr. Taylor’s testimony could make it harder for Republicans to brush off Mr. Trump’s actions as unimportant or distorted by partisan rivals. Defending Ukraine against Russian encroachment, much like defending the United States’ Kurdish allies against Turkey, has been a high priority for many Republicans, who complained that President Barack Obama did not stand up to Moscow aggressively enough.
Trump has a built-in firewall in Fox News. According to a PRRI poll released Monday, 98% of Republicans who watch Fox oppose removing Trump, and 71% of them “strongly” approve of Trump. That contrasts with 39% of Republicans who say they do not watch Fox regularly but strongly approve of the president.
posted by xammerboy at 8:48 PM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 8:48 PM on October 22, 2019 [9 favorites]
Finally got through Ambassador Taylors remarks. Apart from being very powerful and damning, they also give a lay person an interesting insight into the work of a senior diplomat.
I don't see how the Republicans can go on defending Trump after this. But they have broken so many norms, who knows? If they defend this, however, the US will no longer have any standing among its international partners. It will still have military might, but just look at the endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq at how far military might will get you, if push comes to shove.
posted by mumimor at 2:31 AM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
I don't see how the Republicans can go on defending Trump after this. But they have broken so many norms, who knows? If they defend this, however, the US will no longer have any standing among its international partners. It will still have military might, but just look at the endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq at how far military might will get you, if push comes to shove.
posted by mumimor at 2:31 AM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
The president and his advisers want Republicans in the Senate to stage their own hearings to counteract what’s happening in the House.
Sure. Let Kamala Harris have a bite at that apple. Please, Br'er Fox, don't fling me into that brier patch.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:31 AM on October 23, 2019 [9 favorites]
Sure. Let Kamala Harris have a bite at that apple. Please, Br'er Fox, don't fling me into that brier patch.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:31 AM on October 23, 2019 [9 favorites]
White House Aides, GOP Lawmakers Having Calls On Impeachment Strategy (Kate Riga, TPM)
In lieu of any impeachment war room, President Donald Trump has given his blessing to regular calls between White House aides and some House Republicans to hammer out a response strategy.posted by ZeusHumms at 6:29 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
so in lieu of having any plan or strategy, trump is yelling at people down the phone. sounds about right.
posted by murphy slaw at 6:57 AM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by murphy slaw at 6:57 AM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
Any Republican "response strategy" that doesn't begin and end with "delete the Twitter account" is absolutely useless.
I'll just be over here eating my popcorn and bearing witness to the collapse of the republic
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:00 AM on October 23, 2019 [17 favorites]
I'll just be over here eating my popcorn and bearing witness to the collapse of the republic
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:00 AM on October 23, 2019 [17 favorites]
Donald Trump's last defense against charges of extortion is more extortion (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos)
On Wednesday morning, Donald Trump spent most of his early “executive time” retweeting items that, notably, had appeared before the impeachment inquiry testimony of Ambassador William Taylor on Tuesday, but eventually Trump staked out a new, fingers-clutching-the-edge-of-the-cliff position in his own defense. There can be no quid pro quo, declared Trump, because neither Taylor nor other witnesses have said that the Ukrainians knew that aid was being withheld.posted by ZeusHumms at 7:15 AM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
Trump’s fallback position represents an extraordinary retreat. It would seem to acknowledge the indisputable fact that he was withholding military aid—a fact for which Trump has provided multiple, mutually exclusive excuses—and it would absorb that idea that Taylor and others knew that this aid was being withheld in order to gain the investigations that Trump sought.
We're way beyond Nixon at this point. We've got a phone transcription, intelligence official witnesses, diplomatic witnesses, years of detailed notes, and Trump's own people admitting he did it. The crime could not be more venal, nor more impactful.
Trump may get away with metaphorically shooting someone on 5th avenue, but we all saw him do it, and that's what the media should report. There's no longer any question of whether or not Trump committed a crime.
posted by xammerboy at 7:17 AM on October 23, 2019 [32 favorites]
Trump may get away with metaphorically shooting someone on 5th avenue, but we all saw him do it, and that's what the media should report. There's no longer any question of whether or not Trump committed a crime.
posted by xammerboy at 7:17 AM on October 23, 2019 [32 favorites]
The Republican establishment has a formidable bulwark in place that allows them to commit literally any crime with impunity. For fuck's sake, the last administration violated the GENEVA CONVENTION, committed CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, and came out of it smelling like roses. Trump is plowing through what the Republicans have built with the sheer force of stupidity. It's still up in the air if Trump will manage to destroy himself or not, but it is fascinating to watch.
posted by 1970s Antihero at 7:17 AM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by 1970s Antihero at 7:17 AM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
WaPo: 6 a.m.: Majority says Trump pursued personal interests, not national interests, in Ukraine
In the Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday, 59 percent say Trump was pursuing his own personal interest, while 33 percent say he was pursuing the national interest.posted by katra at 7:18 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
In the poll, 55 percent voiced support for the impeachment inquiry, the highest level recorded in Quinnipiac surveys. Forty-three percent opposed the inquiry. The poll showed that 48 percent of respondents support impeaching Trump and removing him from office, while 46 percent are opposed. [...]
In the Quinnipiac poll, Trump’s job approval rating dipped below 40 percent for the first time since the impeachment inquiry began. Thirty-eight percent say they approve of the job he is doing, while 58 percent disapprove.
“If Ukraine succeeds in breaking free of Russian influence, it is possible for Europe to be whole, free, democratic and at peace,” Mr. Taylor said in his opening statement to House investigators, which was provided to reporters after he delivered it behind closed doors. “In contrast, if Russia dominates Ukraine, Russia will again become an empire, oppressing its people and threatening its neighbors and the rest of the world.”
What happened to this country?
posted by xammerboy at 7:19 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
What happened to this country?
posted by xammerboy at 7:19 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
so wait, trump’s “argument” is “we were withholding the aid contingent on the investigations, but we didn’t tell the ukrainians that, so it’s not extortion”
dude that doesn’t make you innocent, it makes you a shitty extortionist
posted by murphy slaw at 7:19 AM on October 23, 2019 [53 favorites]
dude that doesn’t make you innocent, it makes you a shitty extortionist
posted by murphy slaw at 7:19 AM on October 23, 2019 [53 favorites]
It's still up in the air if Trump will manage to destroy himself or not, but it is fascinating to watch.
Not if he takes us down with him.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:21 AM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
Not if he takes us down with him.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:21 AM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
What happened to this country?
Rupert Murdoch.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:21 AM on October 23, 2019 [70 favorites]
Rupert Murdoch.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:21 AM on October 23, 2019 [70 favorites]
We're way beyond Nixon at this point. We've got a phone transcription, intelligence official witnesses, diplomatic witnesses, years of detailed notes, and Trump's own people admitting he did it. The crime could not be more venal, nor more impactful.
Which is why Trump is co-opting members of the House, the body that will be impeaching him, into the cover-up.
If a Democratic president is elected in 2020, he or she must ignore the inevitable urging to "look forward not backward" and not "criminalize politics" in the name of "bipartisan comity" that'll emanate from the likes of David Brooks, and instead vigorously prosecute anyone involved for conspiracy and obstruction of justice (Devin Nunes, I'm looking at you).
posted by Gelatin at 7:22 AM on October 23, 2019 [23 favorites]
Which is why Trump is co-opting members of the House, the body that will be impeaching him, into the cover-up.
If a Democratic president is elected in 2020, he or she must ignore the inevitable urging to "look forward not backward" and not "criminalize politics" in the name of "bipartisan comity" that'll emanate from the likes of David Brooks, and instead vigorously prosecute anyone involved for conspiracy and obstruction of justice (Devin Nunes, I'm looking at you).
posted by Gelatin at 7:22 AM on October 23, 2019 [23 favorites]
No Corruption! You're the Corruption! <WaPo
"Trump administration sought billions of dollars in cuts to programs aimed at fighting corruption in Ukraine and elsewhere"
posted by Harry Caul at 7:51 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
"Trump administration sought billions of dollars in cuts to programs aimed at fighting corruption in Ukraine and elsewhere"
posted by Harry Caul at 7:51 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
Rupert Murdoch.
Yes, but also Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, Alex Jones, and a host of other demagogues who discovered there was profit to be made in selling hatred, fear, and rage to Republicans in America, going back at least to the Reagan administration. Murdoch may be king of Pandemonium, but he's far from its only resident.
posted by biogeo at 7:53 AM on October 23, 2019 [24 favorites]
Yes, but also Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, Alex Jones, and a host of other demagogues who discovered there was profit to be made in selling hatred, fear, and rage to Republicans in America, going back at least to the Reagan administration. Murdoch may be king of Pandemonium, but he's far from its only resident.
posted by biogeo at 7:53 AM on October 23, 2019 [24 favorites]
so wait, trump’s “argument” is “we were withholding the aid contingent on the investigations, but we didn’t tell the ukrainians that, so it’s not extortion”
I think it’s weirder than that — I think his argument is the Ukrainians would want to do the investigation he demanded to demonstrate their commitment to ending corruption and therefore it’s not extortion.
It’s truly mind-bending how his mind works.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:55 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
I think it’s weirder than that — I think his argument is the Ukrainians would want to do the investigation he demanded to demonstrate their commitment to ending corruption and therefore it’s not extortion.
It’s truly mind-bending how his mind works.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 7:55 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
Trump’s Multiple Crises Are Testing Even Mitch McConnell’s Support (Bloomberg/Yahoo)
A recent swell of public support for impeachment has taken a toll on both Trump and Republicans, as polls have suggested McConnell’s 53-47 majority in the Senate could be in play in the 2020 elections. In a CNN poll out this week, half of Americans said the president should be impeached and removed. It was the latest of several recent surveys showing similar results. [...]posted by katra at 7:57 AM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
There’s no sign that McConnell would pull his support for Trump, but he’s leading 52 other Senate Republicans who are tired of having to explain the president’s controversies -- and eyeing next year’s Senate and House elections with rising unease. [...]
Asked if Trump is in trouble, Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri simply responded, “I don’t know.”
He dismissed questions about whether the president should stop talking and tweeting about the inquiry. “As far as I know, he has never asked me for any advice, and I don’t expect him to ask for advice on this,” Blunt said.
Pentagon official handling Ukraine and Russia appears in impeachment inquiry (Reuters)
Laura Cooper, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, is expected to face questions about Trump’s decision this year to withhold $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine approved by Congress to help deal with Russia-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country. She arrived at the U.S. Capitol, accompanied by security personnel, for her closed-door testimony. [...]posted by katra at 8:04 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
Support for impeaching Trump surged among political independents and rose by 3 percentage points overall since last week, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll this week. [...]
Also on Wednesday, three Democratic U.S. senators sent a request under a law called the Freedom of Information Act to Attorney General William Barr seeking any of his or Deputy Attorney General Jeremy Rosen’s correspondence referencing members of the Trump administration with Ukrainian, Turkish and other leaders.
They also asked for all records of interactions between Justice Department officials and the governments of Ukraine and China about Trump’s potential political opponents and any White House requests to investigate the Bidens. Trump has publicly called on China to carry out such an investigation.
In the letter, Senators Kamala Harris, Sheldon Whitehouse and Richard Blumenthal said the whistleblower complaint and recent witness testimony “raise serious concerns about the Justice Department’s involvement in politically motivated investigations, at the behest of the White House.”
mumimor: I don't see how the Republicans can go on defending Trump after this. But they have broken so many norms, who knows?
Exhibit A: While Senator Lindsay Graham was asked about Donald Trump’s tweet comparing impeachment process to lynching and said "Yes, this is a lynching and in every sense this is un-American."
Racist white men will happily support the racist white man in charge, as long as he's the target of public ire (and admiration, from the racist white right). It makes their job easier. "Hey, that's Trump, and I'm not his boss*."
As quoted by katra: “As far as I know, he has never asked me for any advice, and I don’t expect him to ask for advice on this,” Blunt said.
* Except this is shirking the duty and role of Congress to be one third of the checks-and-balances of Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches. When the Executive is unbalanced, it is the role of Congress to re-balance things. So You don't need to wait for Trump to ask for your advice, you can impeach him.
And in case you want to subject yourself to his insane ramblings, which will likely veer into impeachment: Trump Speaks About Syria Cease-Fire After Russia, Turkey Make Deal (NPR live video stream, scheduled to begin at 11 AM ET).
posted by filthy light thief at 8:23 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
Exhibit A: While Senator Lindsay Graham was asked about Donald Trump’s tweet comparing impeachment process to lynching and said "Yes, this is a lynching and in every sense this is un-American."
Racist white men will happily support the racist white man in charge, as long as he's the target of public ire (and admiration, from the racist white right). It makes their job easier. "Hey, that's Trump, and I'm not his boss*."
As quoted by katra: “As far as I know, he has never asked me for any advice, and I don’t expect him to ask for advice on this,” Blunt said.
* Except this is shirking the duty and role of Congress to be one third of the checks-and-balances of Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches. When the Executive is unbalanced, it is the role of Congress to re-balance things. So You don't need to wait for Trump to ask for your advice, you can impeach him.
And in case you want to subject yourself to his insane ramblings, which will likely veer into impeachment: Trump Speaks About Syria Cease-Fire After Russia, Turkey Make Deal (NPR live video stream, scheduled to begin at 11 AM ET).
posted by filthy light thief at 8:23 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
What Bill Taylor’s Testimony Adds to the Ukraine Story (Scott R. Anderson, Lawfare)
The person who looks the worst in Taylor’s account, however, is undoubtedly President Trump himself. In their testimony, Sondland and Volker laid blame most squarely on Giuliani for orchestrating the push for investigations, leaving some lingering ambiguity around Trump’s level of engagement. But Taylor clearly sets out the president’s direct and knowing involvement. After all, it is Trump himself who reportedly said he “want[s] [Zelensky] ‘in a public box’ by making a public statement about ordering [the investigation].” And Taylor describes in detail how Trump ultimately made the withheld security assistance contingent on such a statement, first implicitly through the OMB hold and later expressly. [...]posted by katra at 8:28 AM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
The only weak point in Taylor’s testimony is the fact that his knowledge of Trump’s statements is almost entirely second-hand and received through Sondland. To the extent that Taylor’s recollections are inconsistent with Sondland’s own prior testimony, then congressional investigators will no doubt need to follow-up—something that Rep. Will Hurd of the House Intelligence Committee has already called for. [...]
The most curious part of Taylor’s narrative, however, is Trump’s single-minded recitation of his “no quid pro quo” mantra. While the phrase has become the crux of the defense Trump and his supporters have put forward, it’s not clear why they believe that the lack of an explicit quid pro quo would be exculpatory. The most relevant context within where this concept might arise would be criminal law, where a quid pro quo is sometimes seen as an element of bribery and honest services fraud, among other offenses. Of course, under current Justice Department legal views, Trump is effectively immune from indictment for such offenses so long as he is president. And impeachment does not require a criminal violation, making the existence of a quid pro quo far from determinative of the ongoing House inquiry.
Regardless, Taylor leaves no doubts that there was, in fact, a quid pro quo proposal that Trump himself was involved in putting forward: each time Taylor quotes Trump as asserting there is no “quid pro quo,” he sets it next to a description of Trump demanding exactly that.
Laura Cooper (deputy assistant SecDef) testimony disruption per Manu Raju:
More than two dozen House conservatives rail on Schiff and the process outside the closed impeachment proceedings, and have now entered the SCIF - and they are bound to be kicked out bc they don’t serve on the three committees conducting the probe. It is being led by Matt Gaetzposted by a snickering nuthatch at 8:32 AM on October 23, 2019 [11 favorites]
New drama: Roughly two dozen House conservatives stormed the secure hearing room - known as the SCIF - to rail on the process, delaying the Cooper testimony. Connolly said that Louie Gohmert and Bradley Byrne were yelling in the room and railing on what they call a sham process.
The conservatives walked into hearing room with their electronics, Connolly said, which is prohibited in the room. Mike Conaway of Texas collected the electronics.
Laura Cooper testimony has been delayed because of the disruption; Schiff is consulting with the sergeant of arms.
WaPo: 10:10 a.m.: Conservative lawmakers attempt to enter classified area
The group walked into the restricted area en masse, and chants of “Let us in” were heard from outside the doors.posted by katra at 8:34 AM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
Within five minutes, several members of the group who do not sit on committees involved in the inquiry walked out, saying they were not allowed to enter the deposition.
The demonstration was the second attempt by non-committee Republicans to gain access in two weeks.
Cool, we've got elected officials acting as brownshirts, that's not discouraging at all.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:36 AM on October 23, 2019 [41 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:36 AM on October 23, 2019 [41 favorites]
They know that they're not allowed they just want to reinforce the false idea that this is all a Democratic Party secret soviet trial.
posted by octothorpe at 8:37 AM on October 23, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 8:37 AM on October 23, 2019 [9 favorites]
Cool, we've got elected officials acting as brownshirts, that's not discouraging at all.
Well it worked in Florida during the 2000 elections, so there's already precedent.
posted by mikelieman at 8:39 AM on October 23, 2019 [24 favorites]
Well it worked in Florida during the 2000 elections, so there's already precedent.
posted by mikelieman at 8:39 AM on October 23, 2019 [24 favorites]
but they are (were? it's unclear right now) in, and they brought cellphones and whatnot. schiff is apparently consulting with the sergeant at arms. entering the SCIF with electronics is a crime, though of course IOKIYAR
posted by lazaruslong at 8:40 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by lazaruslong at 8:40 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
It's witness tampering though, isn't it?
posted by biddeford at 8:48 AM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by biddeford at 8:48 AM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
yes, and i imagine a lot of other crimes. but seriously, knowingly violating a SCIF = jail time. this is absolutely nuts.
posted by lazaruslong at 8:49 AM on October 23, 2019 [20 favorites]
posted by lazaruslong at 8:49 AM on October 23, 2019 [20 favorites]
$20 says none of them face any charges.
posted by biogeo at 8:52 AM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by biogeo at 8:52 AM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
The desperation is palpable.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:54 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:54 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
Were they trying to record so they know what she's saying or trying to prevent her from testifying? Does she have even more explosive details or were they freaked out by yesterday so much they're just trying to stop anything from happening?
posted by Brainy at 8:54 AM on October 23, 2019
posted by Brainy at 8:54 AM on October 23, 2019
My guess is they were freaked out enough that they're going to extremes to intimidate any future participants in closed door sessions.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:55 AM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:55 AM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
I wager this reaction was whatever came of the first of the "White House w̶a̶r̶ ̶r̶o̶o̶m̶ Phone Call". And it was probably only done because they had to take SOME action or risk Trump's business exec wrath.
posted by Twain Device at 8:58 AM on October 23, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by Twain Device at 8:58 AM on October 23, 2019 [10 favorites]
WaPo: 11 a.m.: House Republicans temporarily shut down impeachment proceedings with protest
A shouting match began between Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tex.) and some Democrats in the room as House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) left to consult with the sergeant at arms, according to Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.), who witnessed the entire episode. Cooper was slated to begin testimony at 10 a.m. but was still being held in a private room off the secure area. [...]11:30 a.m.: Democrats decry Republican shutdown of testimony
Democrats are now looking at whether they will have to physically remove Republican members from the room. They may instead reschedule the deposition and have Capitol Police guard the doors to block entry.
“It’s totally inappropriate,” said Rep. Harley Rouda (D-Calif.), who watched the episode unfold. “When the facts are against you, when the law is against you … you’re left arguing process.”posted by katra at 9:01 AM on October 23, 2019 [19 favorites]
Mod note: Couple comments deleted. Sorry, better to put Syria/Turkey updates in the Syria and Turkey thread and stick to impeachment stuff in here.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:06 AM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:06 AM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
More reactions to Taylor's statement: Mike Pompeo and Jim Jordan’s Astounding Hypocrisy (Kurt Bardella, Senior adviser for the House Oversight and Reform Committee from 2009 to 2013; for The Atlantic)
When we were investigating Benghazi, we would have moved to impeach if armed with such clear evidence.posted by ZeusHumms at 9:09 AM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
Trump's lawyer, William Consovoy, telling Judge Denny Chin that if Trump were to shoot someone on fifth avenue, he could not be criminally investigated while in office. (audio)
posted by Rust Moranis at 9:15 AM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by Rust Moranis at 9:15 AM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
Following https://twitter.com/Olivia_Beavers for updates on impeachment proceedings. So far, confusion and chaos.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:16 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:16 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
“It’s totally inappropriate,” said Rep. Harley Rouda (D-Calif.), who watched the episode unfold. “When the facts are against you, when the law is against you … you’re left arguing process.”
(FYI -- That's Harley Rouda, D-Laguna Beach, and his district is CA-48, which he took from Dana Rohrabacher during the 2018 Blue Wave.)
posted by notyou at 9:18 AM on October 23, 2019 [25 favorites]
(FYI -- That's Harley Rouda, D-Laguna Beach, and his district is CA-48, which he took from Dana Rohrabacher during the 2018 Blue Wave.)
posted by notyou at 9:18 AM on October 23, 2019 [25 favorites]
Note that for Matt Gaetz, who appears to be leading the illegal disruption of witness testimony, this is not his first time. He showed up uninvited to James Comey's testimony as well despite not being on the committee receiving the testimony, the day after posting a threatening tweet directed at Comey that resulted in his being investigated for witness intimidation. He ultimately saw no charges or consequences for that incident, which evidently emboldened him to continue the practice.
Gaetz previously was arrested for speeding and drunk driving in Florida and questions were raised when his license was reinstated after a much shorter period than mandated by statute, and it seems very likely that he pulled strings to have the DUI charges dropped entirely. This mediocre man of privilege has been insulated from the normal consequences of his bad behavior his whole life and, like so many of his colleagues, now seems to believe the law doesn't apply to him. This needs to stop.
posted by biogeo at 9:18 AM on October 23, 2019 [48 favorites]
Gaetz previously was arrested for speeding and drunk driving in Florida and questions were raised when his license was reinstated after a much shorter period than mandated by statute, and it seems very likely that he pulled strings to have the DUI charges dropped entirely. This mediocre man of privilege has been insulated from the normal consequences of his bad behavior his whole life and, like so many of his colleagues, now seems to believe the law doesn't apply to him. This needs to stop.
posted by biogeo at 9:18 AM on October 23, 2019 [48 favorites]
The group walked into the restricted area en masse, and chants of “Let us in” were heard from outside the doors.
Ah, yes. Another Brooks Brothers Riot. I don't think it's going to work this time. Schiff is not easily intimidated.
posted by JackFlash at 9:20 AM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
Ah, yes. Another Brooks Brothers Riot. I don't think it's going to work this time. Schiff is not easily intimidated.
posted by JackFlash at 9:20 AM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
Can someone on the news point out that the Freedom Caucus are complaining when there's 9 Republicans supposed to be in the room.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:25 AM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:25 AM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
This wasn't just Gaetz and friends. McCarthy and Scalise (House GOP leadership) knew it was going to happen and gave it the thumbs-up.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 9:27 AM on October 23, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 9:27 AM on October 23, 2019 [11 favorites]
And yesterday, McConnell denied Trumps claim that he had told Trump his Ukrainian phone call was "perfect." Moscow Mitch calling out Trump as a liar.
"When pushed on whether Trump was lying about an exchange between the pair, the Kentucky Republican responded, "You have to ask him. I don't recall any conversations with the President about that phone call."
Poor Mitch. Seems he's getting a little wobbly at the knees.
posted by JackFlash at 9:29 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
"When pushed on whether Trump was lying about an exchange between the pair, the Kentucky Republican responded, "You have to ask him. I don't recall any conversations with the President about that phone call."
Poor Mitch. Seems he's getting a little wobbly at the knees.
posted by JackFlash at 9:29 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
I wager this reaction was whatever came of the first of the "White House w̶a̶r̶ ̶r̶o̶o̶m̶ Phone Call". And it was probably only done because they had to take SOME action or risk Trump's business exec wrath.
WaPo: 11 a.m.: House Republicans temporarily shut down impeachment proceedings with protest
And it worked. They got their falsely neutral headline from the so-called "liberal media."
posted by Gelatin at 9:33 AM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
WaPo: 11 a.m.: House Republicans temporarily shut down impeachment proceedings with protest
And it worked. They got their falsely neutral headline from the so-called "liberal media."
posted by Gelatin at 9:33 AM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
Mieke Eoyang, (tweet thread, threadreader) points out the potential national security violations that the interruption of the impeachment proceedings has created.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:41 AM on October 23, 2019 [26 favorites]
After an incident like this happens, countermeasures have to be taken to ensure the SCIF is not compromised. It is a time-consuming, technical process, which again, I will not discuss.I do wonder if the SCIF will be closed down for countermeasures, and if so, for how long.
But in "storming the SCIF" without observing the security protocols, Rep. Gaetz et al, endangered our national security & demonstrated they care more about a political stunt than protecting intelligence information.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:41 AM on October 23, 2019 [26 favorites]
Impeachment deposition delayed after Republicans storm proceedings (Politico)
The two sides were still trying to work through the standoff by mid-morning, with Republicans who do not sit on the committees leading the inquiry refusing to leave the Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the Capitol, and Democrats insisting those lawmakers had no right to be there.posted by katra at 9:48 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
According to people familiar with the matter, some GOP lawmakers brought their cell phones into the secure area — a significant violation of House rules. Another person said the room had to be fully swept for potential security breaches. [...]
Republicans knew they would be turned away from the closed-door deposition; only members who sit on the authorized committees are permitted to sit in on the sessions. [...]
In reality, more than 45 House Republicans — nearly a quarter of the House GOP conference — already have full access to the depositions through their membership on one of the three panels leading the impeachment inquiry. During the depositions, Republican lawyers are given the same amount of time to question witnesses as Democratic counsels.
So far, confusion and chaos.
Translate that to Latin and put it on the GOP's commemorative coins for this Congress.
posted by Etrigan at 9:51 AM on October 23, 2019 [10 favorites]
Translate that to Latin and put it on the GOP's commemorative coins for this Congress.
posted by Etrigan at 9:51 AM on October 23, 2019 [10 favorites]
It's quite significant that we have on record Trump repeatedly declaring to various operatives "No quid pro quo! No quid pro quo!" even as he negotiated a quid pro quo.
This tells us that Trump had direct knowledge that what he was doing was criminal. He can't claim any innocence through ignorance of the law or that he thought what he was doing was perfectly fine.
Trump was like the addled Michael Scott character shouting "I declare bankruptcy! I declare bankruptcy!" and thinking that reciting magic legal words somehow provides immunity to wrongdoing.
His "no quid pro quo" claims are as damning as a confession.
posted by JackFlash at 9:53 AM on October 23, 2019 [21 favorites]
This tells us that Trump had direct knowledge that what he was doing was criminal. He can't claim any innocence through ignorance of the law or that he thought what he was doing was perfectly fine.
Trump was like the addled Michael Scott character shouting "I declare bankruptcy! I declare bankruptcy!" and thinking that reciting magic legal words somehow provides immunity to wrongdoing.
His "no quid pro quo" claims are as damning as a confession.
posted by JackFlash at 9:53 AM on October 23, 2019 [21 favorites]
Republicans storm impeachment inquiry deposition in House Intel hearing room (Manu Raju and Jeremy Herb, CNN)
A source in the room said that as the witness, Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary Laura Cooper, was sitting down to testify, the Republicans stormed through the room's three different doors. Rep. Bradley Byrne of Alabama was yelling at House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, but the California Democrat did not engage, the source said. Other Democrats, including Rep. Val Demings of Florida, shouted back at both Byrne and Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas, who were yelling about the process.posted by ZeusHumms at 10:07 AM on October 23, 2019 [10 favorites]
"It was closest thing I've seen around here to mass civil unrest as a member of Congress," according to a source in the room.
There can be no quid pro quo, declared Trump, because neither Taylor nor other witnesses have said that the Ukrainians knew that aid was being withheld.
But Taylor absolutely did say that (from Taylor's statement, at p. 10):
8/29, Politico breaks story that defensive military aid to Ukraine is being withheld. Taylor speaks with one of his Ukrainian counterparts, who is (understandably) concerned. [Note: this directly refutes the claim, and involves Taylor's direct knowledge and the fact of internet publication, rather than hearsay]
9/1, Morrison tells Taylor that Sondland had previously told [yeah yeah, I know, multiple layers of hearsay] Yermak, at a meeting in Warsaw, that the security money wouldn't come until Zelenskyy committed to pursuing the Burisma investigation [Note: this is a bulwark against Trump's next backup argument, which will be that sure, the Ukrainians knew the aid was being withheld, but they didn't know why. (ignore that the aid and the investigation were tied together by Trump during the July 25 call)].
posted by mabelstreet at 10:08 AM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
But Taylor absolutely did say that (from Taylor's statement, at p. 10):
8/29, Politico breaks story that defensive military aid to Ukraine is being withheld. Taylor speaks with one of his Ukrainian counterparts, who is (understandably) concerned. [Note: this directly refutes the claim, and involves Taylor's direct knowledge and the fact of internet publication, rather than hearsay]
9/1, Morrison tells Taylor that Sondland had previously told [yeah yeah, I know, multiple layers of hearsay] Yermak, at a meeting in Warsaw, that the security money wouldn't come until Zelenskyy committed to pursuing the Burisma investigation [Note: this is a bulwark against Trump's next backup argument, which will be that sure, the Ukrainians knew the aid was being withheld, but they didn't know why. (ignore that the aid and the investigation were tied together by Trump during the July 25 call)].
posted by mabelstreet at 10:08 AM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
Addy Baird, Buzzfeed News (tweet)
This is a whole disaster. Republicans ordered pizza, apparently, and are just like, refusing to leave. Swalwell is outside the SCIF and says they will “not be deterred by this.” Calls it “Republican obstruction of Congress at the behest of the president.”posted by ZeusHumms at 10:09 AM on October 23, 2019 [19 favorites]
Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze by August, Undermining Trump Defense
posted by kirkaracha at 10:10 AM on October 23, 2019 [17 favorites]
To Democrats who say that President Trump’s decision to freeze a $391 million military aid package to Ukraine was intended to bully Ukraine’s leader into carrying out investigations for Mr. Trump’s political benefit, the president and his allies have had a simple response: There could not have been any quid pro quo because the Ukrainians did not know the assistance had been blocked.Ceterum autem censeo Trump delenda est
...
But in fact, word of the aid freeze had gotten to high-level Ukrainian officials by the first week in August, according to interviews and documents obtained by The New York Times.
The problem was not a bureaucratic glitch, the Ukrainians were told then. To address it, they were advised, they should reach out to Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, according to the interviews and records.
The timing of the communications about the issue, which have not previously been reported, shows that Ukraine was aware the White House was holding up the funds weeks earlier than United States and Ukrainian officials had acknowledged. And it means that the Ukrainian government was aware of the freeze during most of the period in August when Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, and two American diplomats were pressing President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to make a public commitment to the investigations being sought by Mr. Trump.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:10 AM on October 23, 2019 [17 favorites]
Also: Vice President Mike Pence’s Big Brother Is Sitting In On Congress’ Closed-Door Impeachment Depositions (Kadia Goba, Buzzfeed News)
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:12 AM on October 23, 2019 [14 favorites]
Republican Rep. Greg Pence, the vice president’s older brother, was elected to Congress last year and serves on one of the committees [House Foreign Affairs] in charge of the impeachment inquiry.Hmmmm.
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:12 AM on October 23, 2019 [14 favorites]
This is a whole disaster. Republicans ordered pizza, apparently, and are just like, refusing to leave. Swalwell is outside the SCIF and says they will “not be deterred by this.” Calls it “Republican obstruction of Congress at the behest of the president.”
Seriously, they need to be fucking arrested at this point. I realize it's a big step, but when the GOP does stuff like this with impunity, that private citizens would be literally killed attempting, that's the halfway, measured response.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 10:13 AM on October 23, 2019 [62 favorites]
Seriously, they need to be fucking arrested at this point. I realize it's a big step, but when the GOP does stuff like this with impunity, that private citizens would be literally killed attempting, that's the halfway, measured response.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 10:13 AM on October 23, 2019 [62 favorites]
AP: Ukrainian Leader Felt Trump Pressure Before Taking Office
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 10:25 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 10:25 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
I know tension is high right now, all the more reason for a little levity:
WaPo has a live update going for the delayed hearing antics and one of the posts is an interview with Michael Waltz (R-Fla.) wherein he describes how he and his colleagues entered the SCIF. The title text of the video says, "Waltz: We 'politely walked in' to closed-doors impeachment hearing. Chyron writers and their ilk keeping me sane once again.
Anyway, I haven't seen any interviews with or quotes from the minority members of the House Intelligence Committee. I wonder if Nunes is offended that his east coast doppel-doofus-ganger Matt Gaetz doesn't just trust him to leak anything he needs out of the hearing?
posted by carsonb at 10:33 AM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
WaPo has a live update going for the delayed hearing antics and one of the posts is an interview with Michael Waltz (R-Fla.) wherein he describes how he and his colleagues entered the SCIF. The title text of the video says, "Waltz: We 'politely walked in' to closed-doors impeachment hearing. Chyron writers and their ilk keeping me sane once again.
Anyway, I haven't seen any interviews with or quotes from the minority members of the House Intelligence Committee. I wonder if Nunes is offended that his east coast doppel-doofus-ganger Matt Gaetz doesn't just trust him to leak anything he needs out of the hearing?
posted by carsonb at 10:33 AM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
We 'politely broke the law.'
posted by carsonb at 10:34 AM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by carsonb at 10:34 AM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
Why Republicans are holding up the impeachment inquiry (Amber Phillips, WaPo)
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:39 AM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:39 AM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
I wonder if Nunes is offended that his east coast doppel-doofus-ganger Matt Gaetz doesn't just trust him to leak anything he needs out of the hearing?
Nunes knows the deal. It's not about leaking, because they know that leaking won't help them (Trump) any. It's about delaying, and obstructing, and holding it up (in multiple senses).
posted by Etrigan at 10:41 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
Nunes knows the deal. It's not about leaking, because they know that leaking won't help them (Trump) any. It's about delaying, and obstructing, and holding it up (in multiple senses).
posted by Etrigan at 10:41 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
Trump and Mulvaney’s claim that corruption concerns held up Ukraine aid (WaPo)
There’s simply nothing that shows the White House conducted a review of corruption in Ukraine while it withheld the $250 million in aid through the Defense Department or the $141 million in aid through the State Department. How was the review done? What did it find? How was it different from the Pentagon’s legally mandated review? Mulvaney’s bare-bones description on Fox News cited “information from our folks” and Trump’s conversation with Zelensky, in which corruption was not discussed but the Bidens and CrowdStrike were.Republican protest delays impeachment testimony from Pentagon’s Ukraine expert (WaPo)
The most recent detailed accounts from U.S. government officials say Ukraine is making progress in stemming corruption, including a certification from a top Defense Department official in May and a report from USAID covering 2018.
They show that Trump and Mulvaney’s stated rationale for withholding the $250 million in security aid from Ukraine flies against the facts. The White House isn’t rebutting the Defense Department’s finding that Ukraine made sufficient progress on corruption to merit the security funds. It hasn’t offered a counterargument to the U.S. agencies and officials detailing Ukraine’s progress on corruption. As far as we can tell, Trump’s concern is limited to Joe Biden and the DNC server.
So, without any evidence in support, and much evidence to the contrary, we give Trump and Mulvaney’s claim Four Pinocchios.
Cooper will likely have firsthand knowledge of an assessment described by Taylor and conducted by the Pentagon that gauged the effectiveness of U.S. aid to Ukraine after it was put on hold. The effort led to a recommendation that the aid be reinstated.posted by katra at 10:42 AM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
Cooper is also expected to detail interagency meetings in which senior officials discussed the need for aid and the best ways to convince Trump to resume it. The White House released the funds in September under bipartisan pressure from lawmakers.
The many dishonest and bad defenses of Trump on Ukraine (Aaron Blake, WaPo)
Moving the goal posts, obscuring the truth, and outright lies, including former acting AG Matthew Whitaker's assertion last night that "Abuse of power is not a crime" (TPM).
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:44 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
Moving the goal posts, obscuring the truth, and outright lies, including former acting AG Matthew Whitaker's assertion last night that "Abuse of power is not a crime" (TPM).
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:44 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
Anyone who decides that Matt Gaetz and Louie Gohmert are the right men to lead them to the House Cafeteria, much less to disrupt a legal deposition process, should be subject to immediate recall proceedings.
posted by delfin at 10:48 AM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by delfin at 10:48 AM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
Why Republicans are holding up the impeachment inquiry (Amber Phillips, WaPo)
The fourth estate is doing such a poor job of educating the public on the nature of the proceedings that it's a relief to finally read an article like this. The media needs to be sorting out the facts from the bullshit and explaining both how the facts affect the situation at hand and how the bullshit is bullshit. This "we report, you decide" nutfuckery the media is engaging itself in is so lazy and stupid.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 10:52 AM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
The fourth estate is doing such a poor job of educating the public on the nature of the proceedings that it's a relief to finally read an article like this. The media needs to be sorting out the facts from the bullshit and explaining both how the facts affect the situation at hand and how the bullshit is bullshit. This "we report, you decide" nutfuckery the media is engaging itself in is so lazy and stupid.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 10:52 AM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
My thoughts exactly about a delay tactic before the two days to honor Elijah Cummings.
However I think someone is scheduled for a hearing on Saturday, which is kind of unusual. I saw a news report, probably in the NYT or the WaPo, but can't in find it now.
posted by Sublimity at 10:59 AM on October 23, 2019
However I think someone is scheduled for a hearing on Saturday, which is kind of unusual. I saw a news report, probably in the NYT or the WaPo, but can't in find it now.
posted by Sublimity at 10:59 AM on October 23, 2019
I'm sure this was the plan. Maximize the amount of time without new revelations from the inquiry in hopes of catching a break. The sort of plan that a stupid man would consider brilliant.
Only a stupid man would consider it brilliant, because creating an excuse for the Democrats to slow the process down only hurts Trump & Co. The more time that passes before a hypothetical Senate trial, the worse Trump's odds are. If the Democrats were somehow forced to move forward today, Trump would almost undoubtedly skate free—he hasn't been weakened enough in the Senate yet. The longer the process drags on, and the more dirty laundry is hauled out, item by item, into the public view, the worse his odds are, because public support has been steadily eroded.
posted by Kadin2048 at 11:00 AM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
Only a stupid man would consider it brilliant, because creating an excuse for the Democrats to slow the process down only hurts Trump & Co. The more time that passes before a hypothetical Senate trial, the worse Trump's odds are. If the Democrats were somehow forced to move forward today, Trump would almost undoubtedly skate free—he hasn't been weakened enough in the Senate yet. The longer the process drags on, and the more dirty laundry is hauled out, item by item, into the public view, the worse his odds are, because public support has been steadily eroded.
posted by Kadin2048 at 11:00 AM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
The interruption timing seems to be more about keeping Bill Taylor's deposition from dominating the news.
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:01 AM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:01 AM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
Trump and Mulvaney’s claim that corruption concerns held up Ukraine aid
Trump administration sought billions of dollars in cuts to programs aimed at fighting corruption in Ukraine and elsewhere
posted by kirkaracha at 11:02 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
Trump administration sought billions of dollars in cuts to programs aimed at fighting corruption in Ukraine and elsewhere
The Trump administration has sought repeatedly to cut foreign aid programs tasked with combating corruption in Ukraine and elsewhere overseas, White House budget documents show, despite recent claims from President Trump and his administration that they have been singularly concerned with fighting corruption in Ukraine.Ceterum autem censeo Trump delenda est
posted by kirkaracha at 11:02 AM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman had their first hearing before a judge in their case and they are invoking executive privilege! These two cartoon character villains are directly tying themselves around the neck of Donald Trump. This should be fun.
posted by JackFlash at 11:07 AM on October 23, 2019 [38 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 11:07 AM on October 23, 2019 [38 favorites]
taking testimony from cooper would not be an inappropriate way to honor rep cummings
posted by 20 year lurk at 11:10 AM on October 23, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by 20 year lurk at 11:10 AM on October 23, 2019 [17 favorites]
taking testimony from cooper would not be an inappropriate way to honor rep cummings
Cummings was literally signing subpoenas on his deathbed. He would want that testimony taken.
posted by Faint of Butt at 11:16 AM on October 23, 2019 [34 favorites]
Cummings was literally signing subpoenas on his deathbed. He would want that testimony taken.
posted by Faint of Butt at 11:16 AM on October 23, 2019 [34 favorites]
I sat in on something in Judge Chin's chambers once. He scared the shit out of me. I know I shouldn't feel sorry for Nazis but I just heard the lawyer dyiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing inside during that argument. Like, that lawyer is going home and getting blotto and imagining through tears of shame and regret an alternate life where he worked on a salmon cannery boat, bull semen collector, any other fucking thing but for where his life has led him to that point
posted by angrycat at 11:17 AM on October 23, 2019 [30 favorites]
posted by angrycat at 11:17 AM on October 23, 2019 [30 favorites]
Congressman Cummings worked to thwart this administration 'til the end, signing subpoenas to ICE and USCIS in his final hours. Announce that thanks to the Republicans' law-breaking, the public celebration of Cummings' life will be held on his birthday in January while the House (his House) takes care of business.
posted by Iris Gambol at 11:19 AM on October 23, 2019 [25 favorites]
posted by Iris Gambol at 11:19 AM on October 23, 2019 [25 favorites]
Addy Baird (@addysue)
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:26 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
Gaetz, Meadows, Gohmert, and several other freedom caucus members just left the SCIF. Gaetz said several Republicans are still inside. And then — hoo boy do I wish I’d gotten a picture of this — Cicilline [D-RI 1st] got into the elevator with them to go up to votes. What a sight.Said votes to include one on the "SHIELD Act, which aims to protect US elections from foreign interference".
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:26 AM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
The two sides were still trying to work through the standoff by mid-morning, with Republicans who do not sit on the committees leading the inquiry refusing to leave the Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the Capitol, and Democrats insisting those lawmakers had no right to be there.
[...]
Republicans knew they would be turned away from the closed-door deposition; only members who sit on the authorized committees are permitted to sit in on the sessions. [...]
So the Republicans actually, as a matter of objective fact, really and truly had no right to be there, but this writer couldn't resist watering down that fact -- in favor of the Republicans, natch -- by framing it in the tired, lazy, cowardly "he said, she said" format.
posted by Gelatin at 11:27 AM on October 23, 2019 [35 favorites]
Did they at least confiscate the 'electronic devices' that were in the room?
posted by MtDewd at 11:30 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by MtDewd at 11:30 AM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
There is no way of knowing whether the Brooks Brothers Riot was cover for installing a listening device in the SCIF. The room will have to be swept as a result of Republican law breaking by entering before removing their electronics.
posted by JackFlash at 11:31 AM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 11:31 AM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
I thought I had lost my ability to be amazed at what's happening in DC, but this... A group of congresspeople committing blatant felonies and threatening national security to "protest" a hearing of a BIPARTISAN committee?
My partner is telling me to step away from the internet before I lose my sanity completely.
posted by Gaz Errant at 11:34 AM on October 23, 2019 [18 favorites]
My partner is telling me to step away from the internet before I lose my sanity completely.
posted by Gaz Errant at 11:34 AM on October 23, 2019 [18 favorites]
Nevertheless they persisted. The Sargeant at Arms should be directed to arrest them.
posted by PhineasGage at 11:40 AM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 11:40 AM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
Yeah, where is Paul Irving in this mess?
posted by Iris Gambol at 11:43 AM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Iris Gambol at 11:43 AM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
If I remember correctly, the House Democrats are going to be away Thursday and Friday for memorials to Cummings
A suitable memorial to Cummings would be for members of Congress to work to hold Trump and his henchpersons accountable.
posted by Gelatin at 11:50 AM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
A suitable memorial to Cummings would be for members of Congress to work to hold Trump and his henchpersons accountable.
posted by Gelatin at 11:50 AM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
Why aren't they being arrested? Did they flash their privilege cards? Seriously, why not?
They fucking ordered pizza.
posted by adept256 at 11:53 AM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
They fucking ordered pizza.
posted by adept256 at 11:53 AM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
Could Executive Privilege Protect Trump In The Impeachment Inquiry? (Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux, 538)
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:55 AM on October 23, 2019
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:55 AM on October 23, 2019
Why aren't they being arrested? Did they flash their privilege cards? Seriously, why not?
WaPo's Rachael Bade tweeted about 20 minutes ago that the House Sergeant At Arms was called into the room. No updates since...
posted by Roommate at 11:56 AM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
WaPo's Rachael Bade tweeted about 20 minutes ago that the House Sergeant At Arms was called into the room. No updates since...
posted by Roommate at 11:56 AM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
Nunes protégé fed Ukraine info to Trump (Politico)
A protégé of Republican Rep. Devin Nunes was among those passing negative information about Ukraine to President Donald Trump earlier this year, fueling the president’s belief that Ukraine was brimming with corruption and interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Democrats.posted by katra at 12:06 PM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
Kashyap Patel, a longtime Nunes staffer who joined the White House in February, was so involved in the issue that at one point Trump thought he was in charge of Ukraine policy for the National Security Council, according to congressional testimony by Fiona Hill, the former senior director for European and Russian Affairs whose portfolio included Ukraine. [...]
Patel’s name has been brought up in several recent depositions, according to another person with direct knowledge of the interviews, in connection with the shadow foreign policy campaign Trump allegedly directed in an effort to extract political favors from the newly elected Zelensky.
[...] Democrats have been especially interested in Patel’s role in the Ukraine scandal given his intensive work as Nunes’ top staffer on the House Intelligence Committee to discredit the FBI and DOJ officials investigating Russia’s election interference.
Per Daily Beast reporter Sam Brodey, the SCIF has been cleared of intruders and it is still possible to hold the deposition today.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 12:18 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 12:18 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
@AndrewDeiderio, Politico: McCarthy just now appeared to excuse GOP members bringing cell phones into the secure area of the SCIF, telling me:
“These are individuals who have never been in Intel Committee before or anywhere else. So it’s nothing serious from that matter.”
Direct quote.
Hey, they have no idea what they're doing, no respect for rules backed by actual fucking laws, and no justification for being here at all, so it's fine.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 12:19 PM on October 23, 2019 [34 favorites]
“These are individuals who have never been in Intel Committee before or anywhere else. So it’s nothing serious from that matter.”
Direct quote.
Hey, they have no idea what they're doing, no respect for rules backed by actual fucking laws, and no justification for being here at all, so it's fine.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 12:19 PM on October 23, 2019 [34 favorites]
Guardian: Cooper testimony appears to be moving forward
Melanie Zanona (@MZanona) Democratic Rep. @davidcicilline tells reporters that he believes the deposition will start soon.posted by katra at 12:20 PM on October 23, 2019 [8 favorites]
He said the Republicans who weren’t supposed to be there are now gone, the Sergeant at Arms just did another sweep and “everyone’s sort of assembling.”
October 23, 2019
That surely wasn't enough time to do a full scan of the SCIF. It's ridiculous to think that one of these assholes might have planted a listening device in the room, but then up until this morning it was utterly ridiculous to think a group of duly elected Republican legislators would storm a SCIF, with their electronic devices, refuse to leave, sit down and order pizza, and then walk away with no repercussions.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 12:26 PM on October 23, 2019 [52 favorites]
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 12:26 PM on October 23, 2019 [52 favorites]
box (in this thread, on October 8, 2019): Right-wing media has been going with the 'trying to overturn the 2016 election' angle for a long time now.
Republicans Disrupt House Impeachment Inquiry, Delaying Testimony From Pentagon Aide (NPR)
Oh, and emphasis mine -- from right-wing media talking point to official Republican talking point. I get that this is the new spin on the fact that Trump wanted dirt on Biden from a foreign government again, but this time as POTUS, but I can't help but think "wait, so you're saying the Russians did unduly influence the 2016 election, and you're saying he is an illegitimate president? Great! Proceed with the impeachment ASAP!" Because it sounds like you're saying that someone has proof ofUkraine Russian election tampering, which would de-legitimize Trump's presidency.
scaryblackdeath: “These are individuals who have never been in Intel Committee before or anywhere else. So it’s nothing serious from that matter.” Direct quote.
Thanks! This is my defense when doing anything for the first time. "Sorry, I've never been here before, I didn't think there were reasons the doors were locked and there was a fence back there."
posted by filthy light thief at 12:26 PM on October 23, 2019 [28 favorites]
Republicans Disrupt House Impeachment Inquiry, Delaying Testimony From Pentagon Aide (NPR)
Republican members of Congress disrupted the closed-door proceedings of the House impeachment inquiry, preventing a Pentagon official from giving her testimony.And to prevent Republicans from turning the whole show into yet another partisan circus, where the GOP pushes their twisted take on reality, trying to spin the facts, which will be reported with equal coverage as actual questions from Democrats, "for fairness."
Arguing that the inquiry's interviews should not be held behind closed doors, GOP lawmakers entered the secure area in the Capitol Wednesday where witnesses are typically questioned.
"Behind those doors, they intend to overturn the results of an American presidential election" said Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Republican ally of the president's. "We're going to try to go in there ... on behalf of the millions of Americans that we represent that want to see this Congress working for them, and not obsessed with attacking a president who we believe has not done anything to deserve impeachment."
Democratic lawmakers have argued that the initial interviews of the investigation must be done in private to prevent witnesses from coordinating testimony.
Oh, and emphasis mine -- from right-wing media talking point to official Republican talking point. I get that this is the new spin on the fact that Trump wanted dirt on Biden from a foreign government again, but this time as POTUS, but I can't help but think "wait, so you're saying the Russians did unduly influence the 2016 election, and you're saying he is an illegitimate president? Great! Proceed with the impeachment ASAP!" Because it sounds like you're saying that someone has proof of
scaryblackdeath: “These are individuals who have never been in Intel Committee before or anywhere else. So it’s nothing serious from that matter.” Direct quote.
Thanks! This is my defense when doing anything for the first time. "Sorry, I've never been here before, I didn't think there were reasons the doors were locked and there was a fence back there."
posted by filthy light thief at 12:26 PM on October 23, 2019 [28 favorites]
Guardian: Trump reportedly supported Republicans' impeachment protest
posted by katra at 12:28 PM on October 23, 2019 [19 favorites]
Bloomberg News reports:CRS Report for Congress - Obstruction of Congress: A Brief Overview of Federal Law Relating to Interference with Congressional Activities (2010)
"Trump had advance knowledge and supported a protest by Republicans who told him they planned to barge into a secure hearing room on Capitol Hill where Democrats are holding impeachment testimonies, according to four people familiar with the matter.
Trump on Tuesday met with about 30 House Republicans at the White House to talk about the situation in Syria and the impeachment inquiry. During a nearly two-hour meeting, which focused mostly on the impeachment inquiry, lawmakers shared their plans to storm into the secure room, the people said. Trump supported the action, saying he wanted the transcripts released because they will exonerate him, the people said."
posted by katra at 12:28 PM on October 23, 2019 [19 favorites]
Trump supported the action, saying he wanted the transcripts released because they will exonerate him, the people said.
There's always something out there that will exonerate him.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:30 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
There's always something out there that will exonerate him.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:30 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
"Behind those doors, they intend to overturn the results of an American presidential election" said Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Republican ally of the president's. "We're going to try to go in there ... on behalf of the millions of Americans that we represent that want to see this Congress working for them, and not obsessed with attacking a president who we believe has not done anything to deserve impeachment."
How come the media never runs for the fainting couches lamenting "partisan polarization" after Republicans act out like so?
posted by Gelatin at 12:30 PM on October 23, 2019 [24 favorites]
How come the media never runs for the fainting couches lamenting "partisan polarization" after Republicans act out like so?
posted by Gelatin at 12:30 PM on October 23, 2019 [24 favorites]
Trump had advance knowledge and supported a protest by Republicans who told him they planned to barge into a secure hearing room on Capitol Hill where Democrats are holding impeachment testimonies, according to four people familiar with the matter.
That's using a lot of words to say "conspiracy to obstruct justice."
posted by Gelatin at 12:34 PM on October 23, 2019 [64 favorites]
That's using a lot of words to say "conspiracy to obstruct justice."
posted by Gelatin at 12:34 PM on October 23, 2019 [64 favorites]
I keep thinking about that time Rep. Pramila Jayapal and others got arrested at a protest against family separations on Capitol Hill. Now I realize their main mistake was in not holding their protest in a SCIF and taking some selfies.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 12:44 PM on October 23, 2019 [45 favorites]
posted by scaryblackdeath at 12:44 PM on October 23, 2019 [45 favorites]
filthy light thief: “"Behind those doors, they intend to overturn the results of an American presidential election" said Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Republican ally of the president's. "We're going to try to go in there ... on behalf of the millions of Americans that we represent that want to see this Congress working for them, and not obsessed with attacking a president who we believe has not done anything to deserve impeachment."”If the United States of America is to continue with the Constitution as the law, Gaetz must be expelled from Congress. Today. Every one of these people must stand trial or the law will mean nothing.
posted by ob1quixote at 12:55 PM on October 23, 2019 [33 favorites]
Graham tells Hannity he'll introduce a resolution condemning "unconstitutional" impeachment inquiry (Igor Derysh, Salon)
And calling for a dismissal without a trial.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:59 PM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
And calling for a dismissal without a trial.
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:59 PM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
Now I realize their main mistake was in not holding their protest in a SCIF and taking some selfies.
I bet you can come up with at least three significant other differences between Pramila Jayapal and Matt Gaetz.
posted by Etrigan at 1:00 PM on October 23, 2019 [28 favorites]
I bet you can come up with at least three significant other differences between Pramila Jayapal and Matt Gaetz.
posted by Etrigan at 1:00 PM on October 23, 2019 [28 favorites]
As support for an impeachment inquiry continues to tick above 50%, I'm sure Lisa Murkowski, Cory Gardner and Susan Collins just love Graham putting them in a position to vote on this.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:16 PM on October 23, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:16 PM on October 23, 2019 [9 favorites]
As ludicrous as this SCIF stunt was, I think it is actually somewhat revealing. Specifically, this is not the kind of thing you do when you think you're winning. This -- like the Brooks Brothers riot -- is the kind of thing you do when you think you're at risk of losing and need something dramatic to shift the odds. Perhaps Bill Taylor's testimony yesterday finally rattled something loose?
posted by mhum at 1:19 PM on October 23, 2019 [32 favorites]
posted by mhum at 1:19 PM on October 23, 2019 [32 favorites]
If this is the best response they can muster, these jokers are in serious trouble and they must know it. I'm sure crashing these hearings plays really well with the extremist base, but we're deep into "this is actually good news for John McCain" territory and heading deeper the more disruptive pageantry they engage in.
posted by feloniousmonk at 1:21 PM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by feloniousmonk at 1:21 PM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
For those keeping track of the shifting goalposts, 6 defenses of Trump and Ukraine that have fallen apart — or are just plain bad (WaPo):
1. Quid pro quos happen all the timeposted by peeedro at 1:25 PM on October 23, 2019 [14 favorites]
2. They didn’t know Burisma was about the Bidens
3. The whistleblower has been proved wrong
4. Trump isn’t getting due process in House inquiry
5. An abuse of power is not a crime
6. Ukraine didn’t know about the frozen military aid
Why aren't they being arrested? Did they flash their privilege cards? Seriously, why not?
I think it would be hilariously ironic if the Dems subpoenaed them to testify in that very same room in front of the very same committee regarding their plans and coordination with the president to obstruct the investigation.
You want to be part of the process? Well now you can be part of the process!
posted by srboisvert at 1:26 PM on October 23, 2019 [75 favorites]
I think it would be hilariously ironic if the Dems subpoenaed them to testify in that very same room in front of the very same committee regarding their plans and coordination with the president to obstruct the investigation.
You want to be part of the process? Well now you can be part of the process!
posted by srboisvert at 1:26 PM on October 23, 2019 [75 favorites]
I think most people understand that the rules are for the little people, but there's another level of anger that comes from seeing something like this done in large part because the perpetrators know they'll get away with it. They want to undermine the rules, and to make their political enemies feel powerless. Now the "deep state" is their enemy, and, in addition to whatever help this provides to Trump, it's a big "fuck you" to them.
Here's the thing, though. That line about arguing with people who buy ink by the barrel could probably be modernized by saying don't pick fights with intelligence agencies that buy cloud storage by the petabyte. Those rules they're making a big show of ignoring might be the only thing keeping the next Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden from releasing information that could damage not just Trump and his henchmen, but also rank-and-file Republicans. Obviously some cleared contractor isn't going to be able to avoid conviction under the Espionage Act by saying that Matt Gaetz got away with it, but it only takes one who doesn't give a fuck anymore and just lost their last excuse not to do something they already wanted to do.
brb, registering gaetzleaks.org...
posted by tonycpsu at 1:26 PM on October 23, 2019 [14 favorites]
Here's the thing, though. That line about arguing with people who buy ink by the barrel could probably be modernized by saying don't pick fights with intelligence agencies that buy cloud storage by the petabyte. Those rules they're making a big show of ignoring might be the only thing keeping the next Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden from releasing information that could damage not just Trump and his henchmen, but also rank-and-file Republicans. Obviously some cleared contractor isn't going to be able to avoid conviction under the Espionage Act by saying that Matt Gaetz got away with it, but it only takes one who doesn't give a fuck anymore and just lost their last excuse not to do something they already wanted to do.
brb, registering gaetzleaks.org...
posted by tonycpsu at 1:26 PM on October 23, 2019 [14 favorites]
What worries me is that they keep pushing the boundaries and keep meeting no resistance or pushback.
Will there even be a motion to censure Gaetz and his merry band of criminals? Much less an effort to expel them? Of course not.
Which means they'll push harder next time.
This is how the heat turns up under the frog. There will never be a firm moment where we can say "this was when we became a dictatorship", instead we'll see a steady pushing with each stage becoming normalized so the next stage doesn't seem quite so awful.
I don't think we're seeing the Republicans in disarray or retreat. The Brooks Brothers Riots worked in 2000, they won. And they seem to be winning this time too.
posted by sotonohito at 1:27 PM on October 23, 2019 [36 favorites]
Will there even be a motion to censure Gaetz and his merry band of criminals? Much less an effort to expel them? Of course not.
Which means they'll push harder next time.
This is how the heat turns up under the frog. There will never be a firm moment where we can say "this was when we became a dictatorship", instead we'll see a steady pushing with each stage becoming normalized so the next stage doesn't seem quite so awful.
I don't think we're seeing the Republicans in disarray or retreat. The Brooks Brothers Riots worked in 2000, they won. And they seem to be winning this time too.
posted by sotonohito at 1:27 PM on October 23, 2019 [36 favorites]
Graham tells Hannity he'll introduce a resolution condemning "unconstitutional" impeachment inquiry
What's notable isn't Graham debasing himself -- nothing new there -- but the overt revelation that conservatives don't actually care about the Constitution (Article I, Section 2, Clause 5: "The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment"), but rather about obedience, and that means accepting that black is white, up is down, and that an unambiguous enumerated power is unconstitutional.
After this episode, any journalist or legislator who presumes Graham acts in good faith is clearly too naive or compromised to do their jobs.
posted by Gelatin at 1:31 PM on October 23, 2019 [25 favorites]
What's notable isn't Graham debasing himself -- nothing new there -- but the overt revelation that conservatives don't actually care about the Constitution (Article I, Section 2, Clause 5: "The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment"), but rather about obedience, and that means accepting that black is white, up is down, and that an unambiguous enumerated power is unconstitutional.
After this episode, any journalist or legislator who presumes Graham acts in good faith is clearly too naive or compromised to do their jobs.
posted by Gelatin at 1:31 PM on October 23, 2019 [25 favorites]
This outrage strategy worked fine for the Kavanaugh hearings. Graham et al. are angling for the same effect here.
posted by Chef Flamboyardee at 1:34 PM on October 23, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by Chef Flamboyardee at 1:34 PM on October 23, 2019 [11 favorites]
We started from the expectation that if we even got to an impeachment inquiry it would go almost nowhere in the House with tepid backing of Dem leadership, and absolutely wouldn't go anywhere in the Senate, to insanely good numbers showing public support for impeachment and removal, desperate Republican panicking, Senate numbers looking worse for Republicans and stories about Trump fatigue. We haven't won yet, but I certainly don't think they're winning.
posted by jason_steakums at 1:42 PM on October 23, 2019 [46 favorites]
posted by jason_steakums at 1:42 PM on October 23, 2019 [46 favorites]
Also, it's been one month since impeachment inquiries formally began.
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:46 PM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 1:46 PM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
Impeachment is pretty much a Kobayashi Maru. There's no plausible way of winning to the point where it's not about winning, it's about seeing how people react to the scenario. You know, for all the good that will do us. No matter the results of who votes where, Team Red's supporters will come out to support their team.
It's not about what's right anymore, it's about who's right.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:48 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
It's not about what's right anymore, it's about who's right.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:48 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
@joshtpm: This today was mainly antics. But a taste of what Trump has in store as he swirls the bowl.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:50 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by tonycpsu at 1:50 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
Please somebody just enforce the rule of law for the love of God
posted by angrycat at 1:53 PM on October 23, 2019 [59 favorites]
posted by angrycat at 1:53 PM on October 23, 2019 [59 favorites]
This outrage strategy worked fine for the Kavanaugh hearings. Graham et al. are angling for the same effect here.
this dynamic seems to work sort of like acquiring tolerance to various drugs. the first time it happens, you get fuuuuucked up. but over time, as they keep flooding you with this bullshit, you -- all of us -- get used to it. it no longer knocks us on our ass. we can still function. which means we can fight back.
they've been mainlining us with really strong bullshit for three years now. it just doesn't work so well anymore. they're slowly turning us all into keith richards, who, improbably but perfectly for this timeline, turns out to be the hero we need.
posted by schadenfrau at 1:54 PM on October 23, 2019 [28 favorites]
this dynamic seems to work sort of like acquiring tolerance to various drugs. the first time it happens, you get fuuuuucked up. but over time, as they keep flooding you with this bullshit, you -- all of us -- get used to it. it no longer knocks us on our ass. we can still function. which means we can fight back.
they've been mainlining us with really strong bullshit for three years now. it just doesn't work so well anymore. they're slowly turning us all into keith richards, who, improbably but perfectly for this timeline, turns out to be the hero we need.
posted by schadenfrau at 1:54 PM on October 23, 2019 [28 favorites]
The members who entered the closed committee room without permission will get reported to the Ethics Committee, which will propose appropriate punishment to the House. This can be censure, removal of committee assignments, or expulsion. Expulsion takes 2/3 so don’t expect that. It’s on page 16 of the copy of the House Rules that I have, at the end of Rule X, in (3)(B) thru (5), but I can’t link or cite it effectively.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 2:08 PM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by Huffy Puffy at 2:08 PM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
A technical thought of the SCIF story. Disclaimer first—it has literally been a decades since I was last involved in such things.
Based on that ancient experience, I'd be shocked if they were physically able to tweet from inside the SCIF. Surely step one of building such a facility is to enclose the whole thing in a Faraday cage. That was SOP even back in the 80s. We had warehouse-sized places that were built that way - no RF signal in or out, entry via an airlock style arrangement, etc.
That doesn't mean there aren't security problems with them taking their, likely-compromised, phones in there, but I wouldn't expect them to be able to get any route to the public internet while inside. The claim that it was their staffers tweeting from outside might be true.
posted by bcd at 2:49 PM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
Based on that ancient experience, I'd be shocked if they were physically able to tweet from inside the SCIF. Surely step one of building such a facility is to enclose the whole thing in a Faraday cage. That was SOP even back in the 80s. We had warehouse-sized places that were built that way - no RF signal in or out, entry via an airlock style arrangement, etc.
That doesn't mean there aren't security problems with them taking their, likely-compromised, phones in there, but I wouldn't expect them to be able to get any route to the public internet while inside. The claim that it was their staffers tweeting from outside might be true.
posted by bcd at 2:49 PM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
Senate Republicans duck for cover after explosive Taylor testimony (Politico)
Senate Republicans are largely dodging questions about the substance of William Taylor’s testimony, which rocked the GOP argument that President Donald Trump did not engage in a quid pro quo with the Ukrainian government. [...]posted by katra at 2:50 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
There does not appear to be a coordinated strategy between the White House and Senate Republicans, leaving many in the party to choose their own way. The White House has not delivered a top-down message to all senators and their offices, according to Republican senators and aides.
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican, bashed House Democrats for not making public Taylor’s testimony. But Thune also conceded that the first round of details could be damaging after Taylor testified that Trump refused to release military aid or hold a White House meeting with the Ukrainian president unless he probed Trump’s political opponents.
“The picture coming out of it based on the reporting we’ve seen is, yeah, I would say it’s not a good one,” Thune told reporters.
- Trump had advance knowledge and supported a protest by Republicans who told him they planned to barge into a secure hearing room on Capitol Hill where Democrats are holding impeachment testimonies, according to four people familiar with the matter.
-- That's using a lot of words to say "conspiracy to obstruct justice."
Buzzfeed's Addy Baird quotes Rep. Swalwell as saying that the protestors were there at Trump's behest. If Trump planned and directed the group to break the law (and their oaths of office), can it be argued they're covered by Trump's standard, a president cannot be guilty of obstruction of justice,* excuse? (He'd have to admit he sent them off to do his bidding, though.) (Nowadays, how can anyone reasonably believe just following orders works, in any situation?)
[*Way back (Axios, December 4, 2017), Trump's private attorney John Dowd claimed that the "President cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer under [the Constitution's Article II] and has every right to express his view of any case.” What's more, "Dowd says he drafted this weekend's Trump tweet that many thought strengthened the case for obstruction: The tweet suggested Trump knew Flynn had lied to the FBI when he was fired, raising new questions about the later firing of FBI Director James Comey." Dowd resigned as Trump's legal counsel March 22, 2018; as of October 2, 2019 Dowd represents Giuliani.]
posted by Iris Gambol at 2:58 PM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
-- That's using a lot of words to say "conspiracy to obstruct justice."
Buzzfeed's Addy Baird quotes Rep. Swalwell as saying that the protestors were there at Trump's behest. If Trump planned and directed the group to break the law (and their oaths of office), can it be argued they're covered by Trump's standard, a president cannot be guilty of obstruction of justice,* excuse? (He'd have to admit he sent them off to do his bidding, though.) (Nowadays, how can anyone reasonably believe just following orders works, in any situation?)
[*Way back (Axios, December 4, 2017), Trump's private attorney John Dowd claimed that the "President cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer under [the Constitution's Article II] and has every right to express his view of any case.” What's more, "Dowd says he drafted this weekend's Trump tweet that many thought strengthened the case for obstruction: The tweet suggested Trump knew Flynn had lied to the FBI when he was fired, raising new questions about the later firing of FBI Director James Comey." Dowd resigned as Trump's legal counsel March 22, 2018; as of October 2, 2019 Dowd represents Giuliani.]
posted by Iris Gambol at 2:58 PM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
> Based on that ancient experience, I'd be shocked if they were physically able to tweet from inside the SCIF. Surely step one of building such a facility is to enclose the whole thing in a Faraday cage.
Nope, not necessarily. I was curious today, so I went digging for the actual technical requirements for a SCIF. I found this incredibly engaging 174 page PDF from the DNI. Page 9 is where the requirements for the walls of the facility are laid out, and they mainly focus on acoustic protection. There is a brief section about RF shielding on page 11, where it states that protection "shall be installed at the direction of the [TEMPEST technical authority] when a SCIF utilizes electronic processing" of protected information.
There don't seem to be any blanket requirements, or concerns about telecom in general. I don't know what the specific layout of the Capitol SCIFs are, but it's not a given that they're Faraday cages.
(And I'd honestly be kinda surprised if they were.)
posted by jammer at 3:05 PM on October 23, 2019 [8 favorites]
Nope, not necessarily. I was curious today, so I went digging for the actual technical requirements for a SCIF. I found this incredibly engaging 174 page PDF from the DNI. Page 9 is where the requirements for the walls of the facility are laid out, and they mainly focus on acoustic protection. There is a brief section about RF shielding on page 11, where it states that protection "shall be installed at the direction of the [TEMPEST technical authority] when a SCIF utilizes electronic processing" of protected information.
There don't seem to be any blanket requirements, or concerns about telecom in general. I don't know what the specific layout of the Capitol SCIFs are, but it's not a given that they're Faraday cages.
(And I'd honestly be kinda surprised if they were.)
posted by jammer at 3:05 PM on October 23, 2019 [8 favorites]
mhum: As ludicrous as this SCIF stunt was, I think it is actually somewhat revealing. Specifically, this is not the kind of thing you do when you think you're winning.
Gelatin: What's notable isn't Graham debasing himself -- nothing new there -- but the overt revelation that conservatives don't actually care about the Constitution
tonycpsu: @joshtpm: This today was mainly antics. But a taste of what Trump has in store as he swirls the bowl.
Optics. This was all about optics. For right-wing news coverage and bloggers, for their rabid base, for conservative conspiracy theorists.
"Antics" is too soft and too kind a word. This isn't a bunch of rowdy kids goofing off. And this isn't "swirling the bowl," it's muddying the waters, spreading uncertainty and doubt, if not also fear (for those who are thinking of coming forward to testify against Trump and co.).
posted by filthy light thief at 3:05 PM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
Gelatin: What's notable isn't Graham debasing himself -- nothing new there -- but the overt revelation that conservatives don't actually care about the Constitution
tonycpsu: @joshtpm: This today was mainly antics. But a taste of what Trump has in store as he swirls the bowl.
Optics. This was all about optics. For right-wing news coverage and bloggers, for their rabid base, for conservative conspiracy theorists.
"Antics" is too soft and too kind a word. This isn't a bunch of rowdy kids goofing off. And this isn't "swirling the bowl," it's muddying the waters, spreading uncertainty and doubt, if not also fear (for those who are thinking of coming forward to testify against Trump and co.).
posted by filthy light thief at 3:05 PM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
(To not abuse edit: a discussion I had today with a colleague who did infosec work with the DOD and spent a lot of time in SCIFs confirms that they're not by definition RF-secure. Which is part of why bringing phones in is a no-no, beyond their possible use as recording devices.)
posted by jammer at 3:07 PM on October 23, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by jammer at 3:07 PM on October 23, 2019 [8 favorites]
> secure hearing room on Capitol Hill where Democrats are holding impeachment testimonies
Can somebody clarify? There are republicans from the appropriate committees in the room for these hearings right? Along with their own lawyers?
So the group of interrupting republicans today went in to "open up the proceedings" where there were a number of republicans already participating?
posted by cschneid at 3:09 PM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
Can somebody clarify? There are republicans from the appropriate committees in the room for these hearings right? Along with their own lawyers?
So the group of interrupting republicans today went in to "open up the proceedings" where there were a number of republicans already participating?
posted by cschneid at 3:09 PM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
... And part of the optics, these Republicans "who didn't know better" were not arrested or fined. As scaryblackdeath noted upthread: Rep. Pramila Jayapal and others got arrested at a protest against family separations on Capitol Hill.
Nearly 600 protesters at Women's March were arrested on Capitol Hill back in June 2018 (ABC News).
posted by filthy light thief at 3:10 PM on October 23, 2019 [24 favorites]
Nearly 600 protesters at Women's March were arrested on Capitol Hill back in June 2018 (ABC News).
US Capitol Police arrested 575 people at the protest in the Senate building and charged them a $50 citation for unlawfully demonstrating. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash, and actress Susan Sarandon both tweeted they were arrested.So the optics also show that the GOP actors, by not being arrested, were on the right side of the law (or the law enforcers are on the right side of the political spectrum).
posted by filthy light thief at 3:10 PM on October 23, 2019 [24 favorites]
Many Who Stormed Deposition Are Allowed to Participate
BuzzFeed News reports that 12 of the Republicans who “barged into a secure area on Capitol Hill, interrupting a private impeachment deposition and occupying the space for a few hours” to protest the transparency of the proceedings are actually members of the Overs@emptywheel, 12:27 PM - 23 Oct 2019:posted by kirkaracha at 3:11 PM on October 23, 2019 [20 favorites]Updated list of the 41 people Gaetz said were part of Brooks Brothers The Farce. Those marked with an asterisk--12 of them--can actually participate in the hearings they claim aren't transparent enough.Ceterum autem censeo Trump delenda est
> So the group of interrupting republicans today went in to "open up the proceedings" where there were a number of republicans already participating?
Yep. I actually did the homework today. Here's a list of the Republicans on the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight Committees:
Devin Nunes. Mike Conaway. Michael Turner. Brad Wenstrup. Chris Steward. Rick Crawford. Elise Stefanik. Will Hurd. John Ratcliffe. Michael McCaul. Christopher Smith. Steve Chabot. Joe Wilson. Scott Perry. Ted Yoho. Adam Kinzinger. Lee Zeldin. Jim Sensenbrenner. Ann Wagner. Brian Mast. Francis Rooney. Brian Fitzpatrick. John Curtis. Ken Buck. Ron Wright. Guy Reschenthaler. Tim Burchett. Greg Pence. Steve Watkins. Mike Guest. Paul Gosar. Virginia Foxx. Thomas Massie. Mark Meadows. Jody Hice. Glenn Grothman. James Cromer. Michael Cloud. Bob Gibbs. Ralph Norman. Clay Higgins. Chip Roy. Carol Miller. Mark Green. Kelly Armstrong. W Steube.
46 of them, all chosen by their party to be on these committees, with every right and opportunity to participate in the hearing. 46 reasons why every Republican screeching things about "secret Stalinist hearings" is completely, totally, irrevocably full of shit.
posted by jammer at 3:13 PM on October 23, 2019 [40 favorites]
Yep. I actually did the homework today. Here's a list of the Republicans on the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight Committees:
Devin Nunes. Mike Conaway. Michael Turner. Brad Wenstrup. Chris Steward. Rick Crawford. Elise Stefanik. Will Hurd. John Ratcliffe. Michael McCaul. Christopher Smith. Steve Chabot. Joe Wilson. Scott Perry. Ted Yoho. Adam Kinzinger. Lee Zeldin. Jim Sensenbrenner. Ann Wagner. Brian Mast. Francis Rooney. Brian Fitzpatrick. John Curtis. Ken Buck. Ron Wright. Guy Reschenthaler. Tim Burchett. Greg Pence. Steve Watkins. Mike Guest. Paul Gosar. Virginia Foxx. Thomas Massie. Mark Meadows. Jody Hice. Glenn Grothman. James Cromer. Michael Cloud. Bob Gibbs. Ralph Norman. Clay Higgins. Chip Roy. Carol Miller. Mark Green. Kelly Armstrong. W Steube.
46 of them, all chosen by their party to be on these committees, with every right and opportunity to participate in the hearing. 46 reasons why every Republican screeching things about "secret Stalinist hearings" is completely, totally, irrevocably full of shit.
posted by jammer at 3:13 PM on October 23, 2019 [40 favorites]
The members who entered the closed committee room without permission will get reported to the Ethics Committee, which will propose appropriate punishment to the House.
As in, this is what is supposed to happen, or as in, someone in charge actually did this?
posted by mabelstreet at 3:13 PM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
As in, this is what is supposed to happen, or as in, someone in charge actually did this?
posted by mabelstreet at 3:13 PM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
There don't seem to be any blanket requirements, or concerns about telecom in general. I don't know what the specific layout of the Capitol SCIFs are, but it's not a given that they're Faraday cages.
That is interesting. TEMPEST was the relevant authority even in the 80s.
There's also a "To the maximum extent practicable, TEMPEST mitigation requirements shall be incorporated into the SCIF design" on page 8. I suppose it comes down to the "when a SCIF utilizes electronic processing".
Mostly a derail at this point though, as this was clearly both illegal and detrimental to signals security in any case.
posted by bcd at 3:20 PM on October 23, 2019
That is interesting. TEMPEST was the relevant authority even in the 80s.
There's also a "To the maximum extent practicable, TEMPEST mitigation requirements shall be incorporated into the SCIF design" on page 8. I suppose it comes down to the "when a SCIF utilizes electronic processing".
Mostly a derail at this point though, as this was clearly both illegal and detrimental to signals security in any case.
posted by bcd at 3:20 PM on October 23, 2019
U.S. judge says he will order State Dept. to begin releasing Ukraine records in 30 days (WaPo)
The decision, by U.S. District Judge Christopher R. “Casey” Cooper of Washington, D.C., came in a public records lawsuit filed Oct. 1 by a government watchdog group, American Oversight.posted by katra at 3:50 PM on October 23, 2019 [11 favorites]
The group in May asked the State Department for records related to alleged efforts by Trump and his administration to pressure Ukraine to investigate a political opponent, former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
Using the Freedom of Information Act, the group sought communications, such as those between Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani. It also sought records and communications since March 2018 related to the recall of U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch. [...]
Cooper cited the critical importance of the documents and ordered the State Department to fast-track the release by working with American Oversight to search and process requested, nonexempt records.
Mostly a derail at this point though
The simple answer is "They left the door open, providing an EM hole large enough for Mr. Faraday himself to walk through"
posted by achrise at 4:11 PM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
The simple answer is "They left the door open, providing an EM hole large enough for Mr. Faraday himself to walk through"
posted by achrise at 4:11 PM on October 23, 2019 [7 favorites]
Not a rhetorical question, nor trolling: What law was broken? I see lots of calls to arrest (which would be a wet dream of theirs), but not so much what actual law was broken.
posted by Bovine Love at 5:32 PM on October 23, 2019
posted by Bovine Love at 5:32 PM on October 23, 2019
I hope they broke a federal law and lose voting rights in their states.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 5:37 PM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 5:37 PM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
Just Security says:
posted by peeedro at 5:45 PM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
As an initial matter, while there are criminal statutes that would otherwise come into play here, it is not useful to discuss them here because, under the Speech or Debate Clause of the U.S. Constitution, a member of Congress cannot be criminally prosecuted for an action he or she takes as part of the individual’s legislative work.It goes on to say that the members can be censured by the House for breaking a House Rule as the Parliamentarian has already determined that this action was a violation of the rules governing depositions. Additionally, the Office of Congressional Ethics should investigate the matter. So it's more about violating the Calvinball-esque House Rules than about breaking the law.
posted by peeedro at 5:45 PM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
A member of Congress cannot be criminally prosecuted for an action he or she takes as part of the individual’s legislative work.
I'm sorry, what? Breaking into these chambers and disrupting the proceedings of a closed impeachment inquiry investigation for partisan political purposes is all part of a day's work for Republican congressmen? I had no idea that was in the job description.
posted by xammerboy at 5:56 PM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
I'm sorry, what? Breaking into these chambers and disrupting the proceedings of a closed impeachment inquiry investigation for partisan political purposes is all part of a day's work for Republican congressmen? I had no idea that was in the job description.
posted by xammerboy at 5:56 PM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
Crime a day
There is a lot of exceptions for congress. In the big picture, that is probably a good idea. This little grandstanding will not help their cause.
posted by Bovine Love at 6:00 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
There is a lot of exceptions for congress. In the big picture, that is probably a good idea. This little grandstanding will not help their cause.
posted by Bovine Love at 6:00 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
Ordering pizzas is the most constructive action Matt Gaetz has ever taken while a member of Congress.
Or any other time.
posted by delfin at 6:02 PM on October 23, 2019 [8 favorites]
Or any other time.
posted by delfin at 6:02 PM on October 23, 2019 [8 favorites]
How is it possible for people not allowed to be in a super secure area to gain access to a super secure area with basically spy equipment ( cellphones ). That’s not a secure area.
I’ve been in secure data centers and bank vaults and there was like four layers of security with man traps and retina scans and cops with guns to make it really really hard for anyone who wasn’t supposed to be in there to gain access, let alone waltz in with a cellphone.
Is there some gentleman’s agreement that people won’t walk in with cameras and recording devices?
posted by jasondigitized at 6:03 PM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
I’ve been in secure data centers and bank vaults and there was like four layers of security with man traps and retina scans and cops with guns to make it really really hard for anyone who wasn’t supposed to be in there to gain access, let alone waltz in with a cellphone.
Is there some gentleman’s agreement that people won’t walk in with cameras and recording devices?
posted by jasondigitized at 6:03 PM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
From Article I section 6: “They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.”
So, maybe.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 6:05 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
So, maybe.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 6:05 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
“....except...Felony...” is doing work there, no?
posted by lazaruslong at 6:10 PM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by lazaruslong at 6:10 PM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
I’m tired and “doing work” is the wrong expression. What I mean to say is, I am under the impression that what they did is a felony.
posted by lazaruslong at 6:12 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by lazaruslong at 6:12 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
If I had done what they did, it would be a felony. This seems pretty cut and dried.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 6:14 PM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 6:14 PM on October 23, 2019 [5 favorites]
Impeachment Just Became Inevitable (David A. Graham, Atlantic)
The testimony of William Taylor confirmed that what seemed improbable just a few weeks ago is now all but certain.
The testimony of William Taylor confirmed that what seemed improbable just a few weeks ago is now all but certain.
With a few exceptions, elected GOP officials have found it very hard to defend Trump’s behavior substantively. Instead, they have complained about the process, saying that Democrats are too secretive, or attacking Representative Adam Schiff, the most prominent Democrat leading the inquiry. A Daily Caller canvass found that only seven of the 53 Republican senators were willing to rule out voting to remove Trump from office.posted by katra at 6:16 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
That caginess might be wise. Neither side knows how much more worse the Ukraine story will get with more testimony, or whether evidence of Trump improperly pressuring other countries might emerge. As the past month demonstrates, a lot can change in a few short weeks. One month ago, it wasn’t clear there’d even be an impeachment inquiry. Today, impeachment itself is a near-certainty.
Sounds a lot like breach of the peace, as well. These folks really need a taste of “you might beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride”.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 6:18 PM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 6:18 PM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
Yep, much felonious. Tired too, I was seeing the Treason doing the work. At the very least, breaking into a closed Congressional hearing to subvert the governance of the nation, at the behest of and for the benefit of a fully-compromised foreign asset, with the intent of recon and broadcasting out what is occurring in a secure environment ... this is Treason.
posted by riverlife at 6:20 PM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by riverlife at 6:20 PM on October 23, 2019 [3 favorites]
this is Treason
At the risk of sounding like Inigo Montoya, people keep using that word. Treason in the US has a specific definition:
In Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution, treason is specifically limited to levying war against the US, or adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. Conviction requires two witnesses or a confession in open court.
Just being an asshole is not treason.
posted by SPrintF at 6:31 PM on October 23, 2019 [17 favorites]
At the risk of sounding like Inigo Montoya, people keep using that word. Treason in the US has a specific definition:
In Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution, treason is specifically limited to levying war against the US, or adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. Conviction requires two witnesses or a confession in open court.
Just being an asshole is not treason.
posted by SPrintF at 6:31 PM on October 23, 2019 [17 favorites]
I'm of the understanding that all of this, every bit of it--including but not limited to today's actions--is directly adhering to Putin, to giving him aid and comfort. So treason.
/pedant
posted by riverlife at 6:35 PM on October 23, 2019 [14 favorites]
/pedant
posted by riverlife at 6:35 PM on October 23, 2019 [14 favorites]
Arguing that the inquiry's interviews should not be held behind closed doors, GOP lawmakers entered the secure area in the Capitol Wednesday where witnesses are typically questioned.
No doubt those lawmakers appreciate the irony of their demands for open testimony at the very same time that Trump's Attorney General is refusing a congressional subpoena to release the grand jury testimony from the Mueller investigation.
posted by JackFlash at 6:53 PM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
No doubt those lawmakers appreciate the irony of their demands for open testimony at the very same time that Trump's Attorney General is refusing a congressional subpoena to release the grand jury testimony from the Mueller investigation.
posted by JackFlash at 6:53 PM on October 23, 2019 [13 favorites]
[re: arrest] There is a lot of exceptions for congress...
Well, I'd think (just like me, my colleagues, friends, or anyone accidentally or purposefully bringing a cell into a SCIF) at a minimum:
- phone confiscated
- phone examined by IT forensics for unauthorized information
- phone wiped (like *wiped for real*)
- Lengthy interrogation by the Facility Security Officer, and often the FBI
- strip search for documents, drives, etc
- A determination if there were any information leaks
- physical access restricted or revoked
- potentially security clearance revoked
- yeah, there's a permanent record, and this stuff gets written down.
^^^ that shit happens all. the. time. I saw a guy take one step through a gate. One. Then his cell rang. Oops. Not even intentional. Never even came out of his pocket. All that shit went down.
And maybe:
- Felony charges (as mentioned above).
- Lifetime ban on working again for the federal government.
- Prison.
What *will* happen: jack.shit.
posted by j_curiouser at 7:04 PM on October 23, 2019 [23 favorites]
Well, I'd think (just like me, my colleagues, friends, or anyone accidentally or purposefully bringing a cell into a SCIF) at a minimum:
- phone confiscated
- phone examined by IT forensics for unauthorized information
- phone wiped (like *wiped for real*)
- Lengthy interrogation by the Facility Security Officer, and often the FBI
- strip search for documents, drives, etc
- A determination if there were any information leaks
- physical access restricted or revoked
- potentially security clearance revoked
- yeah, there's a permanent record, and this stuff gets written down.
^^^ that shit happens all. the. time. I saw a guy take one step through a gate. One. Then his cell rang. Oops. Not even intentional. Never even came out of his pocket. All that shit went down.
And maybe:
- Felony charges (as mentioned above).
- Lifetime ban on working again for the federal government.
- Prison.
What *will* happen: jack.shit.
posted by j_curiouser at 7:04 PM on October 23, 2019 [23 favorites]
Can we just declare that there is a cyberwar against the US and its democratic institutions and get on with the treason?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:11 PM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:11 PM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
There's about 500 years of US and UK history behind the idea that members of the legislature shouldn't be arrested for doing stuff inside their own building, particularly if it is non-violent. Fights over space, locked doors, committee hearings, and all the rest are pretty common, and almost never involve legal remedies, just more application of majority-made rules. A recent notable example was 2016, when the Democrats staged their sit-in over the gun vote, in violation of numerous House rules and amidst some Republican calls that they be arrested both for violating House rules and for the security threat of their presence after hours. We also recently had Issa (R) barging into a Benghazi hearing and Democratic committee members leaking closed-door transcripts from those hearings, both in violation of House rules supposedly enacted to protect national security. For better or worse, fights over doors and spaces in Congress are relatively common even in recent US history. And arresting members of the legislature for behavior inside the legislature has exclusively bad precedents, both in the US and worldwide.
posted by chortly at 7:23 PM on October 23, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by chortly at 7:23 PM on October 23, 2019 [19 favorites]
Forget the election, let’s just have bare knuckle fisticuffs party against party under the capital dome on live tv. Winner takes all.
posted by njohnson23 at 7:59 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by njohnson23 at 7:59 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
I think that if the fighters are untrained, the dirtiest and most ruthless bastards are likely to win the fisticuffs. Might not be Team Blue.
posted by lostburner at 8:08 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by lostburner at 8:08 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
Nancy Pelosi would kick all of their asses. I wish this wasn't a derail.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:11 PM on October 23, 2019
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:11 PM on October 23, 2019
This stunt is theater designed to send the message to Trump supporters that they should lawlessly revolt against Trump's impeachment.
posted by xammerboy at 8:13 PM on October 23, 2019 [40 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 8:13 PM on October 23, 2019 [40 favorites]
Forget the election, let’s just have bare knuckle fisticuffs party against party under the capital dome on live tv. Winner takes all.
I like to remind people that the Constitution is very poorly written in part because the Framers expected the out-of-band mechanisms to enforce the rules. For example, Chuck Schumer would have shot and killed Mitch McConnell in a duel when McConnell tried to steal Merrick Garland's Supreme Court seat.
That's the reason referral to the ethics committee and holding them accountable to the fullest extent of the House rules is so important.
posted by mikelieman at 8:21 PM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
I like to remind people that the Constitution is very poorly written in part because the Framers expected the out-of-band mechanisms to enforce the rules. For example, Chuck Schumer would have shot and killed Mitch McConnell in a duel when McConnell tried to steal Merrick Garland's Supreme Court seat.
That's the reason referral to the ethics committee and holding them accountable to the fullest extent of the House rules is so important.
posted by mikelieman at 8:21 PM on October 23, 2019 [16 favorites]
I was kinda hoping today's showboating fell under 18 U.S.C. § 1505, Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees:
... Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—
Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
[Wayback Machine, again: Does an FBI Investigation Qualify Under the Obstruction of Justice Statutes? A Closer Look (Lawfare blog, June 2, 2017)]
posted by Iris Gambol at 8:46 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
... Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—
Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
[Wayback Machine, again: Does an FBI Investigation Qualify Under the Obstruction of Justice Statutes? A Closer Look (Lawfare blog, June 2, 2017)]
posted by Iris Gambol at 8:46 PM on October 23, 2019 [1 favorite]
This stunt is theater designed to send the message to Trump supporters that they should lawlessly revolt against Trump's impeachment.
Okay, so maybe this will seem silly, but my son has had me watching a lot of professional wrestling lately, and I see this as pure theater. They know that they're heels and in a desperate bid to be seen as faces, Gaetz and his crew put themselves in an obviously outrageous situation that should have guaranteed their arrest. That, by wrestling narratives, would have turned them into underdogs- the guys taking the heat for standing up like heros for the thing that they believe in. Doesn't matter if they were wrong, all that matters is that that they made the big, hopeless gesture. So not giving them a pay-off (getting arrested) robs them of the storyline they wanted, and heels they remain.
I'm gonna watch the Republicans through this wrestling-tinted lens for the time being, because it's the only way I can make sense of this circus.
posted by biddeford at 8:55 PM on October 23, 2019 [49 favorites]
Okay, so maybe this will seem silly, but my son has had me watching a lot of professional wrestling lately, and I see this as pure theater. They know that they're heels and in a desperate bid to be seen as faces, Gaetz and his crew put themselves in an obviously outrageous situation that should have guaranteed their arrest. That, by wrestling narratives, would have turned them into underdogs- the guys taking the heat for standing up like heros for the thing that they believe in. Doesn't matter if they were wrong, all that matters is that that they made the big, hopeless gesture. So not giving them a pay-off (getting arrested) robs them of the storyline they wanted, and heels they remain.
I'm gonna watch the Republicans through this wrestling-tinted lens for the time being, because it's the only way I can make sense of this circus.
posted by biddeford at 8:55 PM on October 23, 2019 [49 favorites]
An overlooked Bill Taylor revelation hints at worse to come from Trump (Greg Sargent, WaPo Opinion)
The testimony from Taylor, the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, also contains a key revelation about Attorney General William P. Barr — one that provides an occasion to revisit his role in this scandal, and hints at how Barr will likely continue perverting the U.S. government machinery to help Trump get away with it. [...]posted by katra at 9:01 PM on October 23, 2019 [11 favorites]
Barr wants his review into the origins of the FBI investigation (which became the special counsel probe) to be seen as legitimate and apolitical. But inconvenient facts keep tying it directly to Trump’s corrupt efforts to pressure Ukraine to validate 2016 conspiracy theories, casting serious doubt on its legitimacy, and making it look like an effort to carry out Trump’s corrupt political demands.
Now that has happened again. If Taylor is right, Sondland — who has been taking direction from Trump — seriously discussed the prospect of Barr actively validating Ukraine’s “investigation” by making a joint statement about it with Ukraine. This happened, we now know, at a time when the military aid was being withheld to make that investigation happen. [...] “There’s a reason why the Justice Department has been so nervous and jumpy about Ukraine, and why they’ve distanced from this every time they have the chance,” former Justice Department spokesman Matthew Miller told me. “I feel like there’s more yet to come out.” [...]
Trump’s propaganda has been about distracting from the steady drumbeat of actual revelations by casting doubt on process — the whistleblower is discredited, impeachment is a coup, etc. Just as Barr employed base dishonesty to misrepresent the special counsel’s findings, so one can easily see Barr releasing the findings of his review right when impeachment hits a climax, to spread around further fog and confusion.
Can we just declare that there is a cyberwar against the US and its democratic institutions and get on with the treason?
My stance is that we already had the cyberwar, in 2016, which we lost, and now we're occupied by Russia, China, and an assemblage of computer programmers.
posted by rhizome at 9:02 PM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
My stance is that we already had the cyberwar, in 2016, which we lost, and now we're occupied by Russia, China, and an assemblage of computer programmers.
posted by rhizome at 9:02 PM on October 23, 2019 [12 favorites]
I'm gonna watch the Republicans through this wrestling-tinted lens for the time being, because it's the only way I can make sense of this circus.
I think this is a good model. After all, Trump had one of his first formative showbiz experiences as a minor character on the WWF. Two things to keep in mind though:
1) Trump is maybe the first and only pro wrestling performer ever to believe the kayfabe.
2) The Republicans don't necessarily need to perform a successful face turn, some people are perfectly happy rooting for the heel.
posted by contraption at 9:24 PM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
I think this is a good model. After all, Trump had one of his first formative showbiz experiences as a minor character on the WWF. Two things to keep in mind though:
1) Trump is maybe the first and only pro wrestling performer ever to believe the kayfabe.
2) The Republicans don't necessarily need to perform a successful face turn, some people are perfectly happy rooting for the heel.
posted by contraption at 9:24 PM on October 23, 2019 [15 favorites]
House Democrats look to take impeachment probe public as soon as mid-November (Rachael Bade and Karoun Demirjian, WaPo)
[...] Democrats have to iron out questions of process that could compromise their ability to present a united front and avoid any air of the turf disputes that dogged the House’s Russia-focused investigation earlier this year. Typically, lawmakers are entitled to five minutes each to question a witness — but there are about 100 lawmakers among the three panels running the impeachment probe, far too many to accommodate in a single hearing. Democrats are also acutely concerned about creating a situation in which GOP members who joined Wednesday’s protest could hijack an all-important public hearing, muddying their case.posted by ZeusHumms at 9:36 PM on October 23, 2019 [10 favorites]
That means leaders will all but assuredly have to take the rare step of persuading lawmakers to sideline their egos and defer management of the hearing to skilled staff lawyers, and potentially the members with prosecutorial or relevant administrative experience. That format would largely mirror the regular process for closed-door hearings, where lawyers chiefly run the questioning but members of both parties are allowed to hop in with queries of their own.
Tom Daschle and Trent Lott: The Senate can hold a fair impeachment trial. We did it in 1999. (WaPo OpEd)
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:38 PM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:38 PM on October 23, 2019 [2 favorites]
biddeford: So not giving them a pay-off (getting arrested) robs them of the storyline they wanted, and heels they remain.
House Republicans Reportedly Asked to Be Arrested After Entering Secure Impeachment Hearing (Joe DePaolo, Mediaite)
House Republicans Reportedly Asked to Be Arrested After Entering Secure Impeachment Hearing (Joe DePaolo, Mediaite)
According to Chad Pergram of Fox News, the Republicans who entered the Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) Wednesday asked to be arrested. According to Pergram, those Republicans were hoping to use the visual of being taken away to paint Democrats as abusing the process.posted by ZeusHumms at 9:44 PM on October 23, 2019 [38 favorites]
@ChadPergram:6) Fox is told there was never any chance mbrs who barged into SCIF would be arrested by USCP wBut some mbrs members asked to be arrested. They wanted the optic of being frog marched out of the SCIF in front of TV cameras. That would help w/GOP narrative of Dem process abuse
Team Trump Is Withholding Bill Taylor's Detailed Ukraine Notes From Congress (Greg Walters, Vice News)
The suppression of Taylor’s notes raises yet more questions about the lengths to which top Trump administration officials have gone to shield the president from a detailed look at his own behavior.posted by ZeusHumms at 10:00 PM on October 23, 2019 [6 favorites]
Taylor’s detailed records, which informed his damning account of the Trump administration’s backdoor pressure campaign on Ukraine, were turned over to the State Department and were not handed over to Congressional impeachment investigators, a person familiar with the situation told VICE News on Wednesday. [...]
But the State Department has shown no sign of being willing to turn over those documents, or any others subpoenaed by House Democrats in late September — and legal experts say that any courtroom challenge could easily take so long that it would outlast the impeachment investigation, if not the entire Trump presidency.
There could not have been any quid pro quo because the Ukrainians did not know the assistance had been blocked.
This stuck out to me because the most likely people to have proof of this is President Zelensky and the Ukranian government. By using this excuse, Trump is putting himself in a position to be blackmailed by the guys he is extorting. And I'm no expert, but I think you're not supposed to do that?
(Not that Ukraine is going to turn the tables on Trump. That's way risky and there's no need since Trump's excuses have very short half-lives anyway.)
posted by ryanrs at 10:15 PM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
This stuck out to me because the most likely people to have proof of this is President Zelensky and the Ukranian government. By using this excuse, Trump is putting himself in a position to be blackmailed by the guys he is extorting. And I'm no expert, but I think you're not supposed to do that?
(Not that Ukraine is going to turn the tables on Trump. That's way risky and there's no need since Trump's excuses have very short half-lives anyway.)
posted by ryanrs at 10:15 PM on October 23, 2019 [4 favorites]
There's about 500 years of US and UK history behind the idea that members of the legislature shouldn't be arrested for doing stuff inside their own building
According to a twitter roundup at Balloon Juice, the "Moron Tabernacle Choir" wanted to be arrested, so they'd have the optics of being dragged away from the hearing.
Instead, the Democrats waited for them to leave for a scheduled floor vote, which they did, and proceeded.
So while they made a stink and a splash, they didn't accomplish anything. They didn't prevent the hearing or the deposition. And while, sure, they're playing to Trump and his base, the fact that they're doing so, instead of convincing loyal Americans that impeachment is wrong, signals how much trouble their party is really in. Trump can't win with just his base, as we saw in 2018, and he's losing independents and swing voters fast. And it's the prospect of losing elections on which Republican Senators' decision to remove Trump will hinge.
posted by Gelatin at 3:06 AM on October 24, 2019 [28 favorites]
According to a twitter roundup at Balloon Juice, the "Moron Tabernacle Choir" wanted to be arrested, so they'd have the optics of being dragged away from the hearing.
Instead, the Democrats waited for them to leave for a scheduled floor vote, which they did, and proceeded.
So while they made a stink and a splash, they didn't accomplish anything. They didn't prevent the hearing or the deposition. And while, sure, they're playing to Trump and his base, the fact that they're doing so, instead of convincing loyal Americans that impeachment is wrong, signals how much trouble their party is really in. Trump can't win with just his base, as we saw in 2018, and he's losing independents and swing voters fast. And it's the prospect of losing elections on which Republican Senators' decision to remove Trump will hinge.
posted by Gelatin at 3:06 AM on October 24, 2019 [28 favorites]
Just being an asshole is not treason.
I would be delighted if there were a formal parliamentary-style process for declaring someone an asshole. I'd like to see the declarations on record.
posted by srboisvert at 4:48 AM on October 24, 2019 [28 favorites]
I would be delighted if there were a formal parliamentary-style process for declaring someone an asshole. I'd like to see the declarations on record.
posted by srboisvert at 4:48 AM on October 24, 2019 [28 favorites]
They wanted the optic of being frog marched out of the SCIF in front of TV cameras. That would help w/GOP narrative of Dem process abuse
Whereas in other circles, this might help with the Dem narrative of "Fuck you criminals, we've got a job to do and a Constitution to uphold"? I'm just too reality-addled to know any more.
posted by Rykey at 5:14 AM on October 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
Whereas in other circles, this might help with the Dem narrative of "Fuck you criminals, we've got a job to do and a Constitution to uphold"? I'm just too reality-addled to know any more.
posted by Rykey at 5:14 AM on October 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
For what it’s worth, I think it was the right call. Not frog-marching them out, having them just file out meekly as they headed to a previous engagement, made the Republicans look weak and dumb. And just try to imagine the hand-wringing we’d be seeing today in the “liberal” papers about Democratic overreach, instead of the headlines about how all the Rs have to complain about is technicalities because the president sure as shit looks guilty.
posted by saturday_morning at 5:34 AM on October 24, 2019 [36 favorites]
posted by saturday_morning at 5:34 AM on October 24, 2019 [36 favorites]
Because it wasn't a question of frog marching and meekly doing nothing; it was a choice between frog marching and waiting these fools out until they interrupted their Big Brave Important Protest to...get back to work, and then they got to work themselves.
posted by Gelatin at 5:43 AM on October 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Gelatin at 5:43 AM on October 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
Yeah, I am glad they used the cry it out method.
posted by terrapin at 5:58 AM on October 24, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by terrapin at 5:58 AM on October 24, 2019 [15 favorites]
What's the statute of limitations on this particular crime? We can always charge them later, right?
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:02 AM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:02 AM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
Censure them, put a note in their records to block them from ever holding a security clearance, move on.
posted by cmfletcher at 6:07 AM on October 24, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by cmfletcher at 6:07 AM on October 24, 2019 [11 favorites]
It’s almost as if House Democrats’ continued timidity in letting the White House flaunt subpoenas and lie under oath without consequences is emboldening Republicans to act more and more like an authoritarian mob!
posted by zombieflanders at 6:10 AM on October 24, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by zombieflanders at 6:10 AM on October 24, 2019 [12 favorites]
Donald Trump Jr. And MAGA Twitter Are Pressuring Sen. Lindsey Graham To Defend Trump From Impeachment (Ryan C. Brooks, Buzzfeed News)
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:13 AM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:13 AM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
For what it’s worth, I think it was the right call. Not frog-marching them out, having them just file out meekly as they headed to a previous engagement, made the Republicans look weak and dumb.
I think they did the right thing, too - no matter how much bawling and braying from some quarters about how the Dummycrats are in Disarray again, and that they're the party of weakness and "timidity" and something something bully pulpit. There are all too many people ostensibly on "our" side who also long for a strong, authoritarian Daddy to take charge, only they want a benevolent, liberal-to-socialist Daddy who is on their side.
Given the nature of the Democratic party and coalition, that's not going to happen. What did happen, as I see it, was that the Democrats let the Republicans "cry it out" (thanks Terrapin!) and the R's in fact dug themselves a bigger hole. One, by making idiots of themselves, and two, by looking increasingly desperate to stop impeachment proceedings, in the face of damning evidence which just keeps growing.
posted by Rosie M. Banks at 6:21 AM on October 24, 2019 [13 favorites]
I think they did the right thing, too - no matter how much bawling and braying from some quarters about how the Dummycrats are in Disarray again, and that they're the party of weakness and "timidity" and something something bully pulpit. There are all too many people ostensibly on "our" side who also long for a strong, authoritarian Daddy to take charge, only they want a benevolent, liberal-to-socialist Daddy who is on their side.
Given the nature of the Democratic party and coalition, that's not going to happen. What did happen, as I see it, was that the Democrats let the Republicans "cry it out" (thanks Terrapin!) and the R's in fact dug themselves a bigger hole. One, by making idiots of themselves, and two, by looking increasingly desperate to stop impeachment proceedings, in the face of damning evidence which just keeps growing.
posted by Rosie M. Banks at 6:21 AM on October 24, 2019 [13 favorites]
I'm not gonna try to speak for the faction you are defining here, but I am not happy with the way that this was handled at all, and not because I want a Strong Daddy or whatever.
At the base level of all of this is a fundamental failure of our institutions to enforce criminal law. There are explicitly admitted crimes that have not resulted in the perpetrators facing charges. For Trump, impeachment and removal from office followed by criminal prosecution for him and so many others is what should be happening. But the rule of law is being flouted.
That makes me angry. And every time a new law is broken with impunity, it is just fury-inducing. They obtained unauthorized access to a SCIF and brought electronic devices. Framing the response of the Democrats and Capitol Police as letting them "cry it out" is just a way of saying that they decided to not enforce the rule of law. Each new time this line is crossed, it makes the next one a little easier. Crossing these lines also encourages stochastic terrorism from the Fox News viewer set which sees this as bold and brave.
I don't think we need an authoritarian to enforce the rule of law, and I don't think this is a Dems in Disarray moment either. I do think it has been almost 3 years and thousands have died here and elsewhere due to the failure of our institutions to enforce the rule of law. I'm angry and I'm tired and I really think it is past time to stop basing law enforcement decisions on a gamed-out theory of political optics.
posted by lazaruslong at 6:49 AM on October 24, 2019 [46 favorites]
At the base level of all of this is a fundamental failure of our institutions to enforce criminal law. There are explicitly admitted crimes that have not resulted in the perpetrators facing charges. For Trump, impeachment and removal from office followed by criminal prosecution for him and so many others is what should be happening. But the rule of law is being flouted.
That makes me angry. And every time a new law is broken with impunity, it is just fury-inducing. They obtained unauthorized access to a SCIF and brought electronic devices. Framing the response of the Democrats and Capitol Police as letting them "cry it out" is just a way of saying that they decided to not enforce the rule of law. Each new time this line is crossed, it makes the next one a little easier. Crossing these lines also encourages stochastic terrorism from the Fox News viewer set which sees this as bold and brave.
I don't think we need an authoritarian to enforce the rule of law, and I don't think this is a Dems in Disarray moment either. I do think it has been almost 3 years and thousands have died here and elsewhere due to the failure of our institutions to enforce the rule of law. I'm angry and I'm tired and I really think it is past time to stop basing law enforcement decisions on a gamed-out theory of political optics.
posted by lazaruslong at 6:49 AM on October 24, 2019 [46 favorites]
So not giving them a pay-off (getting arrested) robs them of the storyline they wanted, and heels they remain.
I think the all-for-show interpretation is exactly right. Careful reading of Taylor's opening statement made clear that Trump didn't really want an actual investigation of anything related to Biden. What he was holding out for was the President of Ukraine, saying on TV in front of cameras, that an investigation was warranted. They would have made political hay of that forever on Fox.
I think this is going to be a critical aspect of making the case against Trump. He wasn't withholding access and defense funds to actually fight corruption (indeed, his administration was trying to cut off funds for that kind of work). They were only doing it for the sound bite, purely for Trump's political benefit.
posted by Sublimity at 6:55 AM on October 24, 2019 [19 favorites]
I think the all-for-show interpretation is exactly right. Careful reading of Taylor's opening statement made clear that Trump didn't really want an actual investigation of anything related to Biden. What he was holding out for was the President of Ukraine, saying on TV in front of cameras, that an investigation was warranted. They would have made political hay of that forever on Fox.
I think this is going to be a critical aspect of making the case against Trump. He wasn't withholding access and defense funds to actually fight corruption (indeed, his administration was trying to cut off funds for that kind of work). They were only doing it for the sound bite, purely for Trump's political benefit.
posted by Sublimity at 6:55 AM on October 24, 2019 [19 favorites]
I'd say its not so much that the wicked leftie hippies are longing for a strong daddy, but more that the centrist Democrats are terrified of power and refuse to use it even when cleary necessary.
Centrist Democrats see that bad people have used power and have reached the absurd conclusion that using power is therefore bad and that even **WANTING** power is therefore bad.
Power is not inherently bad. Using power is not inherently bad nor does it make you authoritarian. Enforcing the rules is not bad nor authoritarian. Letting criminal scum Republicans get away with blatant rule breaking simply encourages further rule breaking and normalizes their rule breaking.
I'd also like to note that Democratic Reps have been cuffed, arrested, and dragged away for much, much, less than this.
posted by sotonohito at 7:04 AM on October 24, 2019 [13 favorites]
Centrist Democrats see that bad people have used power and have reached the absurd conclusion that using power is therefore bad and that even **WANTING** power is therefore bad.
Power is not inherently bad. Using power is not inherently bad nor does it make you authoritarian. Enforcing the rules is not bad nor authoritarian. Letting criminal scum Republicans get away with blatant rule breaking simply encourages further rule breaking and normalizes their rule breaking.
I'd also like to note that Democratic Reps have been cuffed, arrested, and dragged away for much, much, less than this.
posted by sotonohito at 7:04 AM on October 24, 2019 [13 favorites]
Trump just wanted the announcement of an investigation, which would have allowed him to sow doubt and false equivalency narratives. It would have sucked for Trump if Hillary's email investigation had concluded before his campaign ended. I'm surprised he didn't say something like "you don't really need to investigate even."
posted by xammerboy at 7:05 AM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 7:05 AM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
"...centrist Democrats are terrified of power and refuse to use it even when cleary necessary."
It's not that they're terrified of power, it's that they suspect if they push the moment to its crisis, they will discover that they don't have power.
"Centrist Democrats see that bad people have used power and have reached the absurd conclusion that using power is therefore bad and that even **WANTING** power is therefore bad.
Power is not inherently bad. Using power is not inherently bad nor does it make you authoritarian. Enforcing the rules is not bad nor authoritarian. Letting criminal scum Republicans get away with blatant rule breaking simply encourages further rule breaking and normalizes their rule breaking."
My guess is that they assumed that the assholes had a plan in place for if the democrats called the cops on them and they did not want to give them an opportunity to enact their disgusting and douchey plan because they hope to avoid turning a soft coup into a full-on toppling of the state. Pelosi's way is infuriatingly unpyrotechnic, but it's probably also really smart, given that the enemy is utterly without a conscience and ruthless and Putinified to the max and currently controls two and a half of three branches.
posted by Don Pepino at 7:19 AM on October 24, 2019 [19 favorites]
It's not that they're terrified of power, it's that they suspect if they push the moment to its crisis, they will discover that they don't have power.
"Centrist Democrats see that bad people have used power and have reached the absurd conclusion that using power is therefore bad and that even **WANTING** power is therefore bad.
Power is not inherently bad. Using power is not inherently bad nor does it make you authoritarian. Enforcing the rules is not bad nor authoritarian. Letting criminal scum Republicans get away with blatant rule breaking simply encourages further rule breaking and normalizes their rule breaking."
My guess is that they assumed that the assholes had a plan in place for if the democrats called the cops on them and they did not want to give them an opportunity to enact their disgusting and douchey plan because they hope to avoid turning a soft coup into a full-on toppling of the state. Pelosi's way is infuriatingly unpyrotechnic, but it's probably also really smart, given that the enemy is utterly without a conscience and ruthless and Putinified to the max and currently controls two and a half of three branches.
posted by Don Pepino at 7:19 AM on October 24, 2019 [19 favorites]
Law and the news as institutions have fallen. It turns out that all you need to do to game the law is argue that what you are doing does not, in fact, break the law. All you need to do to game the news is heavily promote a false viewpoint.
A lot of this is done by returning their arguments to first principles. If someone doesn't know how a lightbulb works, it's fairly easy to explain. If someone is skeptical that electricity exists, it's gong to take weeks to explain.
Trump similarly demands the argument of what is and isn't lawful be taken to first principles. All arguments regarding what is true or lawful have to start from their most basic premises: What is a country, anyway? What is a president? What is law?
It's excruciating, and I can't believe how effective it is. I used to think in the book 1984 that totalitarianism resulted in a state where citizens could be made to doubt 2+2=4 through prolonged brutality. I now see this kind of doubt as the starting point and basis of oppression.
posted by xammerboy at 7:24 AM on October 24, 2019 [35 favorites]
A lot of this is done by returning their arguments to first principles. If someone doesn't know how a lightbulb works, it's fairly easy to explain. If someone is skeptical that electricity exists, it's gong to take weeks to explain.
Trump similarly demands the argument of what is and isn't lawful be taken to first principles. All arguments regarding what is true or lawful have to start from their most basic premises: What is a country, anyway? What is a president? What is law?
It's excruciating, and I can't believe how effective it is. I used to think in the book 1984 that totalitarianism resulted in a state where citizens could be made to doubt 2+2=4 through prolonged brutality. I now see this kind of doubt as the starting point and basis of oppression.
posted by xammerboy at 7:24 AM on October 24, 2019 [35 favorites]
Don Pepino I don't understand. It seems as if you are arguing that if we don't let the Republicans do everything they want we will become a dictatorship, while letting them do everything they want will prevent dictatorship. I'm pretty sure that's not what you're saying because that seems absurd, but it's the only way I could parse what you wrote despite the fact that I'm pretty sure it's not what you meant.
Could you expand please?
posted by sotonohito at 7:44 AM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
Could you expand please?
posted by sotonohito at 7:44 AM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
I would be delighted if there were a formal parliamentary-style process for declaring someone an asshole. I'd like to see the declarations on record.
NSW upper house labels Trump ‘a revolting slug' unfit for public office (10/13/16)
On Thursday, Jeremy Buckingham, an upper house Greens MP, tabled a motion condemning “misogynistic, hateful” comments the US Republican presidential candidate has made against women and minorities, including his remarks revealed at the weekend describing sexual assault.
The motion also called out what is described as the divisive, destructive impact of hate speech from political candidates and agreed with those describing Trump as a “slug” unfit for office.
Buckingham’s motion was unanimously carried.
We did this three years ago.
posted by adept256 at 7:44 AM on October 24, 2019 [21 favorites]
NSW upper house labels Trump ‘a revolting slug' unfit for public office (10/13/16)
On Thursday, Jeremy Buckingham, an upper house Greens MP, tabled a motion condemning “misogynistic, hateful” comments the US Republican presidential candidate has made against women and minorities, including his remarks revealed at the weekend describing sexual assault.
The motion also called out what is described as the divisive, destructive impact of hate speech from political candidates and agreed with those describing Trump as a “slug” unfit for office.
Buckingham’s motion was unanimously carried.
We did this three years ago.
posted by adept256 at 7:44 AM on October 24, 2019 [21 favorites]
The GOP/Fox News would definitely have used arrests to make political hay, but I strongly suspect that not getting any kind of push-back on, I emphasize, a physical break-in to disrupt the impeachment investigation just brings us closer to the point of outright, sanctioned political violence.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:50 AM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:50 AM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
The Australian conservatives voted to carry the motion as well? Given how Australia's Prime Minister is modelling himself on Trump, that does seem out of character.
posted by acb at 7:51 AM on October 24, 2019
posted by acb at 7:51 AM on October 24, 2019
Pelosi's way is infuriatingly unpyrotechnic, but it's probably also really smart, given that the enemy is utterly without a conscience and ruthless and Putinified to the max and currently controls two and a half of three branches.
That really only applies to yesterday's stunts. It does nothing to explain why those who have received subpoenas are being not just allowed to walk free, but to continue admitting to (and even doing) All the Crimes, often on live TV.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:53 AM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
That really only applies to yesterday's stunts. It does nothing to explain why those who have received subpoenas are being not just allowed to walk free, but to continue admitting to (and even doing) All the Crimes, often on live TV.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:53 AM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
...a physical break-in to disrupt the impeachment investigation just brings us closer to the point of outright, sanctioned political violence.
This is sounding quite likely. Folks are buying guys for a civil war should Trump be impeached. It strikes me that, should he lose the election, they might pull the same stuff: "fake votes" from "not-real Americans."
This is what I'm finding frustrating with the GOP. I think they realize Trump is guilty of treason, etc., and will and should be impeached. But they haven't figured out how to do it surgically: remove the cancer that is Trump without risking their own jobs or 2020.
Really, at this point, for the good of the party and the nation, they need to suck it up. Accept 2020 is gone, and they may lose seats. Start softening the ground for an impeachment--pivot to accept and find outrage in some of the findings. Win over more moderate Republican voters so the MAGA-heads start to realize they are really the minority.
Won't happen, I now.
posted by MrGuilt at 7:56 AM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
This is sounding quite likely. Folks are buying guys for a civil war should Trump be impeached. It strikes me that, should he lose the election, they might pull the same stuff: "fake votes" from "not-real Americans."
This is what I'm finding frustrating with the GOP. I think they realize Trump is guilty of treason, etc., and will and should be impeached. But they haven't figured out how to do it surgically: remove the cancer that is Trump without risking their own jobs or 2020.
Really, at this point, for the good of the party and the nation, they need to suck it up. Accept 2020 is gone, and they may lose seats. Start softening the ground for an impeachment--pivot to accept and find outrage in some of the findings. Win over more moderate Republican voters so the MAGA-heads start to realize they are really the minority.
Won't happen, I now.
posted by MrGuilt at 7:56 AM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
> Law and the news as institutions have fallen. It turns out that all you need to do to game the law is argue that what you are doing does not, in fact, break the law. All you need to do to game the news is heavily promote a false viewpoint.
Regarding news as an institution, it seems many people currently have unrealistic expectations or definitions of the news. American commercial media’s news programs are nothing more than entertainment masquerading as information. So, I would argue “the news” heavily promotes false viewpoints all on its own. All you have to do is hold a false or flawed viewpoint, and they’ll take care of the rest (assuming you have the right skin color, gender, and/or political party).
Considering the GOP’s obstruction/intimidation tactics yesterday, how many times have you seen a large group of old white men arrested on the news? This is all a form of regulatory capture, albeit a softer one, because some people can’t conceive of (and are discouraged from) such imagery in the public discourse and social consciousness.
I’m not disagreeing and hopefully my points appear additive rather than mutually exclusive. To your point about only having to say you didn’t break the law, has anyone else noticed the One Weird Trick for Republican talking points around unscrupulous behavior? If it’s illegal, say it isn’t unconstitutional; if it’s unconstitutional, say it isn’t illegal. Like you, I’m upset with how effective all this “social engineering” is.
posted by Arson Lupine at 8:05 AM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
Regarding news as an institution, it seems many people currently have unrealistic expectations or definitions of the news. American commercial media’s news programs are nothing more than entertainment masquerading as information. So, I would argue “the news” heavily promotes false viewpoints all on its own. All you have to do is hold a false or flawed viewpoint, and they’ll take care of the rest (assuming you have the right skin color, gender, and/or political party).
Considering the GOP’s obstruction/intimidation tactics yesterday, how many times have you seen a large group of old white men arrested on the news? This is all a form of regulatory capture, albeit a softer one, because some people can’t conceive of (and are discouraged from) such imagery in the public discourse and social consciousness.
I’m not disagreeing and hopefully my points appear additive rather than mutually exclusive. To your point about only having to say you didn’t break the law, has anyone else noticed the One Weird Trick for Republican talking points around unscrupulous behavior? If it’s illegal, say it isn’t unconstitutional; if it’s unconstitutional, say it isn’t illegal. Like you, I’m upset with how effective all this “social engineering” is.
posted by Arson Lupine at 8:05 AM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
...not getting any kind of push-back on, I emphasize, a physical break-in to disrupt the impeachment investigation
That's howcome they didn't stage it like a physical break-in and instead staged it like a fun frat pizza party. As we know, boys will be boys, and if the boys in question are rich white guys in authority, it's super hard to get the cops to take an interest or recognize their hijinx as crimes. Does anybody not notice this? Effective pushback would've been great. But ineffective pushback would've been ruinous. This was probably the right call.
if we don't let the Republicans do everything they want we will become a dictatorship, while letting them do everything they want will prevent dictatorship. I'm pretty sure that's not what you're saying because that seems absurd, but it's the only way I could parse what you wrote despite the fact that I'm pretty sure it's not what you meant.
It's not what I meant. The time to stop Trump was back in the seventies or eighties, whenever it was that he first started committing his gigantic, obvious whiteguy crimes. Trump and everyone sharing his bracket; the time to stop corruption is when it starts, not when it's been maelstroming for decades and is a huge, ungovernable shitstorm.
Like, instead of hiring Larry Summers et alia to let Jamie Dimon and the rest of the fanged monsterbankers off the hook, some, a few token rich white people could maybe have gone to jail for bankrupting the economy and destroying the country? No! Only Bernie Madoff, who defrauded rich white people, saw jail.
We've been letting obvious criminals get away with their obvious crimes for so long and allowing them to promote one another to positions of power for so long that they now gleefully crime away their days right there in the capitol with absolute impunity! So the solution is to pick away at this problem from the thinner, weaker edges. Throw Paul Manafort in jail, get Guliani's cronies, blah blah blah, and wait for opinion, and control, to shift. It's unbearably slow, it's demeaning, it sucks, but they control the court, the executive, and the senate, so it's the more prudent approach.
This is why Biden should be hipchecked off the dais yesterday. He's why Clarence Thomas and Clarence Thomas is why Bret Kavanaugh: Unca Joe is why they have the court.
posted by Don Pepino at 8:20 AM on October 24, 2019 [25 favorites]
That's howcome they didn't stage it like a physical break-in and instead staged it like a fun frat pizza party. As we know, boys will be boys, and if the boys in question are rich white guys in authority, it's super hard to get the cops to take an interest or recognize their hijinx as crimes. Does anybody not notice this? Effective pushback would've been great. But ineffective pushback would've been ruinous. This was probably the right call.
if we don't let the Republicans do everything they want we will become a dictatorship, while letting them do everything they want will prevent dictatorship. I'm pretty sure that's not what you're saying because that seems absurd, but it's the only way I could parse what you wrote despite the fact that I'm pretty sure it's not what you meant.
It's not what I meant. The time to stop Trump was back in the seventies or eighties, whenever it was that he first started committing his gigantic, obvious whiteguy crimes. Trump and everyone sharing his bracket; the time to stop corruption is when it starts, not when it's been maelstroming for decades and is a huge, ungovernable shitstorm.
Like, instead of hiring Larry Summers et alia to let Jamie Dimon and the rest of the fanged monsterbankers off the hook, some, a few token rich white people could maybe have gone to jail for bankrupting the economy and destroying the country? No! Only Bernie Madoff, who defrauded rich white people, saw jail.
We've been letting obvious criminals get away with their obvious crimes for so long and allowing them to promote one another to positions of power for so long that they now gleefully crime away their days right there in the capitol with absolute impunity! So the solution is to pick away at this problem from the thinner, weaker edges. Throw Paul Manafort in jail, get Guliani's cronies, blah blah blah, and wait for opinion, and control, to shift. It's unbearably slow, it's demeaning, it sucks, but they control the court, the executive, and the senate, so it's the more prudent approach.
This is why Biden should be hipchecked off the dais yesterday. He's why Clarence Thomas and Clarence Thomas is why Bret Kavanaugh: Unca Joe is why they have the court.
posted by Don Pepino at 8:20 AM on October 24, 2019 [25 favorites]
At the base level of all of this is a fundamental failure of our institutions to enforce criminal law.
In this instance however, not the Law, but House Rules, which take precedence, via the debate clause.
BUT that doesn't change the essence of your argument. If they're not referred to the ethics committee and punished to the fullest extent of the House Rules, the "Rule of Law" is a joke.
posted by mikelieman at 8:26 AM on October 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
In this instance however, not the Law, but House Rules, which take precedence, via the debate clause.
BUT that doesn't change the essence of your argument. If they're not referred to the ethics committee and punished to the fullest extent of the House Rules, the "Rule of Law" is a joke.
posted by mikelieman at 8:26 AM on October 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
I understand where you're coming from there, but I think that viewpoint may be an artifact of how the goalposts of normalcy have been gradually moved to like, Toledo. In any sane world, regardless of the House rules, the act of unauthorized access to a SCIF, the violation of security protocols leading to endangering national security, and the disruption of the process of witness testimony in an impeachment investigation would constitute obstruction of justice and witness intimidation, which are crimes. But here we are.
posted by lazaruslong at 8:55 AM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by lazaruslong at 8:55 AM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
In any sane world, regardless of the House rules, the act of unauthorized access to a SCIF, the violation of security protocols leading to endangering national security, and the disruption of the process of witness testimony in an impeachment investigation would constitute obstruction of justice and witness intimidation, which are crimes. But here we are.
I'm going to re-iterate my belief that the lack of dueling to the death upon the Field of Honor is the root cause of all these issues which we, in the 21st Century, expect to be handled by Constitutional or Legal processes but are not.
Sadly, the popularity of the musical Hamilton has not lead to a resurgence of the concept in Congress.
posted by mikelieman at 9:06 AM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
I'm going to re-iterate my belief that the lack of dueling to the death upon the Field of Honor is the root cause of all these issues which we, in the 21st Century, expect to be handled by Constitutional or Legal processes but are not.
Sadly, the popularity of the musical Hamilton has not lead to a resurgence of the concept in Congress.
posted by mikelieman at 9:06 AM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
Not to spoil the ending or anything, but duelling doesn't help Hamilton much.
posted by adept256 at 9:10 AM on October 24, 2019 [30 favorites]
posted by adept256 at 9:10 AM on October 24, 2019 [30 favorites]
Really, at this point, for the good of the party and the nation, they need to suck it up. Accept 2020 is gone, and they may lose seats. Start softening the ground for an impeachment--pivot to accept and find outrage in some of the findings.
Politically, I'm not seeing this. Let's assume that the GOP is now assuming Trump can't win in 2020. What percentage is in it for them to impeach him? Unless they can remove him and get in another candidate that can win, which -- given the timeline -- is extremely unlikely, then they are likely better off holding the party line and just quietly letting him lose while maintaining their seats. Only if they feel their seats will go down with him would there be a percentage in impeaching. Otherwise, they should STFU or put just enough distance between them and him to keep above water. Keep the ability to deny, but don't condemn outright.
posted by Bovine Love at 9:12 AM on October 24, 2019
Politically, I'm not seeing this. Let's assume that the GOP is now assuming Trump can't win in 2020. What percentage is in it for them to impeach him? Unless they can remove him and get in another candidate that can win, which -- given the timeline -- is extremely unlikely, then they are likely better off holding the party line and just quietly letting him lose while maintaining their seats. Only if they feel their seats will go down with him would there be a percentage in impeaching. Otherwise, they should STFU or put just enough distance between them and him to keep above water. Keep the ability to deny, but don't condemn outright.
posted by Bovine Love at 9:12 AM on October 24, 2019
Barr and the captured DOJ is the real problem. Why would you fear criminal prosecution when the AG is criming for the same boss you are? We need a plan to get rid of Barr so the DOJ can do it's job and start prosecuting people.
Trumpism is a cult, and the only ways to break a cult is a schism after the death of a leader, or a superior force imprisoning the leader. How the fuck do we do that when the DOJ head is a member of the cult?
posted by benzenedream at 9:16 AM on October 24, 2019 [22 favorites]
Trumpism is a cult, and the only ways to break a cult is a schism after the death of a leader, or a superior force imprisoning the leader. How the fuck do we do that when the DOJ head is a member of the cult?
posted by benzenedream at 9:16 AM on October 24, 2019 [22 favorites]
The time to stop Trump was back in the seventies or eighties, whenever it was that he first started committing his gigantic, obvious whiteguy crimes.
In the early 90s, when all of Trump’s businesses were going belly up, he convinced his creditors that not only was keeping the Trump name on his buildings crucial to salvaging any value in the structures but that they needed give him $250k/month allowance to keep him from publicly tanking the business.
Whoever says finance guys are smart never met the suckers who agreed to those terms. They could have broken him then, and we never would have gotten The Apprentice etc., etc.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 9:19 AM on October 24, 2019 [10 favorites]
In the early 90s, when all of Trump’s businesses were going belly up, he convinced his creditors that not only was keeping the Trump name on his buildings crucial to salvaging any value in the structures but that they needed give him $250k/month allowance to keep him from publicly tanking the business.
Whoever says finance guys are smart never met the suckers who agreed to those terms. They could have broken him then, and we never would have gotten The Apprentice etc., etc.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 9:19 AM on October 24, 2019 [10 favorites]
MetaFilter: it's been maelstorming for decades and is a huge, ungovernable shitstorm.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:23 AM on October 24, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 9:23 AM on October 24, 2019 [10 favorites]
We've been letting obvious criminals get away with their obvious crimes for so long and allowing them to promote one another to positions of power for so long that they now gleefully crime away their days right there in the capitol with absolute impunity!
I think it's interesting that this has been become the conservative narrative as well. Many conservatives now acknowledge that it was racism and ambiguous dog whistling that drove Republican support all along, not small government philosophy. Without the philosophy, the party is simply promoting a trade of racist policy in return for money and power for the rich. I don't say that. Conservatives say that.
posted by xammerboy at 9:24 AM on October 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
I think it's interesting that this has been become the conservative narrative as well. Many conservatives now acknowledge that it was racism and ambiguous dog whistling that drove Republican support all along, not small government philosophy. Without the philosophy, the party is simply promoting a trade of racist policy in return for money and power for the rich. I don't say that. Conservatives say that.
posted by xammerboy at 9:24 AM on October 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
Wall Street Journal [Editorial] Says Trump Shouldn’t Be Impeached Because “He Was Too Inept to Execute” Ukraine Quid Pro Quo (Elliot Hannon, Slate)
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:24 AM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:24 AM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
Regarding news as an institution, it seems many people currently have unrealistic expectations or definitions of the news. American commercial media’s news programs are nothing more than entertainment masquerading as information. So, I would argue “the news” heavily promotes false viewpoints all on its own.
I like this. One party says the sky is blue. The other says the sky is red. A reporter could just go outside and take a look for themselves, but that would defeat the point of reporting on the controversy driving their click-stream.
posted by xammerboy at 9:27 AM on October 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
I like this. One party says the sky is blue. The other says the sky is red. A reporter could just go outside and take a look for themselves, but that would defeat the point of reporting on the controversy driving their click-stream.
posted by xammerboy at 9:27 AM on October 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
Wall Street Journal [Editorial] Says Trump Shouldn’t Be Impeached Because “He Was Too Inept to Execute” Ukraine Quid Pro Quo (Elliot Hannon, Slate)
That's a ...novel defense...but profoundly foolish (though from the Wall Street Journal editorial page, one expects nothing else). The Watergate scandal involved an attempted but unsuccessful bugging of the Democratic National Committee and an attempted but unsuccessful cover-up. Nixon would have been booted from office based on what he intended to do irrespective of whether he succeeded.
posted by Gelatin at 9:29 AM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
That's a ...novel defense...but profoundly foolish (though from the Wall Street Journal editorial page, one expects nothing else). The Watergate scandal involved an attempted but unsuccessful bugging of the Democratic National Committee and an attempted but unsuccessful cover-up. Nixon would have been booted from office based on what he intended to do irrespective of whether he succeeded.
posted by Gelatin at 9:29 AM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
1972: break-in to bug the DNC
2019: break-in to order pizza inside a SCIF
it really is stupid watergate
posted by ryanrs at 9:32 AM on October 24, 2019 [40 favorites]
2019: break-in to order pizza inside a SCIF
it really is stupid watergate
posted by ryanrs at 9:32 AM on October 24, 2019 [40 favorites]
Politically, I'm not seeing this. Let's assume that the GOP is now assuming Trump can't win in 2020. What percentage is in it for them to impeach him?
The good news is the Republican party is screwed - maybe. They can either stick with Trump and piss off swing voters, or impeach him and piss off maga-heads. They've tied the party to Trump, and they may all end up going down with him, eventually.
posted by xammerboy at 9:33 AM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
The good news is the Republican party is screwed - maybe. They can either stick with Trump and piss off swing voters, or impeach him and piss off maga-heads. They've tied the party to Trump, and they may all end up going down with him, eventually.
posted by xammerboy at 9:33 AM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
I thought the same thing about Bush though. I thought the party would lose a generation of voters.
posted by xammerboy at 9:35 AM on October 24, 2019 [14 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 9:35 AM on October 24, 2019 [14 favorites]
I thought the same thing about Bush though. I thought the party would lose a generation of voters.
The older generation would need to die off first for that to have any effect.
Assuming there is still a country.
posted by MrGuilt at 9:37 AM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
The older generation would need to die off first for that to have any effect.
Assuming there is still a country.
posted by MrGuilt at 9:37 AM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
I'm going to re-iterate my belief that the lack of dueling to the death upon the Field of Honor is the root cause of all these issues which we, in the 21st Century, expect to be handled by Constitutional or Legal processes but are not.
I made a joke yesterday that got deleted about predicting that Gaetz will savagely beat Schiff on the floor of the House while Nunes holds everyone at bay with a pistol. I thought everyone would understand the reference to the caning of Charles Sumner but I guess my humor was a bit too subtle.
There is a legitimate concern right now about the breakdown of reasoned discourse and yesterday’s storming of the deposition is exhibit A. I don’t think the solution is amp up the rhetoric until they’re beating each other in the aisles or challenging opposing representatives to duels. I think Democrats need to make a show of confusion — “WTF are these guys smoking?” Point out that 45 Republicans have the right to sit in on the depositions (and almost 200 Democrats cannot). Emphasize that they’re at the fact-gathering phase and why privacy is essential at this phase (cops don’t invite the public to crime scenes, do they?) but assure everyone that there absolutely, unquestionably will be public hearings before anything is brought to a vote. Make a show of reasonableness, not outrage. I think that would make the GOP’s shenanigans look unreasonable and out of proportion to most people.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 9:44 AM on October 24, 2019 [26 favorites]
I made a joke yesterday that got deleted about predicting that Gaetz will savagely beat Schiff on the floor of the House while Nunes holds everyone at bay with a pistol. I thought everyone would understand the reference to the caning of Charles Sumner but I guess my humor was a bit too subtle.
There is a legitimate concern right now about the breakdown of reasoned discourse and yesterday’s storming of the deposition is exhibit A. I don’t think the solution is amp up the rhetoric until they’re beating each other in the aisles or challenging opposing representatives to duels. I think Democrats need to make a show of confusion — “WTF are these guys smoking?” Point out that 45 Republicans have the right to sit in on the depositions (and almost 200 Democrats cannot). Emphasize that they’re at the fact-gathering phase and why privacy is essential at this phase (cops don’t invite the public to crime scenes, do they?) but assure everyone that there absolutely, unquestionably will be public hearings before anything is brought to a vote. Make a show of reasonableness, not outrage. I think that would make the GOP’s shenanigans look unreasonable and out of proportion to most people.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 9:44 AM on October 24, 2019 [26 favorites]
It's worth noting that for all the Republican clamoring about having an open investigation, Trump and Pompeo are refusing to release Bill Taylor's own documents and contemporaneous notes from the State Department supporting his testimony.
Meanwhile we have Sondland today claiming "I don't recall" regarding Taylor's testimony on the quid pro quo. The withheld documents would prove Sondland is a liar.
posted by JackFlash at 9:53 AM on October 24, 2019 [11 favorites]
Meanwhile we have Sondland today claiming "I don't recall" regarding Taylor's testimony on the quid pro quo. The withheld documents would prove Sondland is a liar.
posted by JackFlash at 9:53 AM on October 24, 2019 [11 favorites]
It's worth noting that for all the Republican clamoring about having an open investigation, Trump and Pompeo are refusing to release Bill Taylor's own documents and contemporaneous notes from the State Department supporting his testimony.
Exactly. As many (notably Josh Marshall) have observed, Trump has been acting like he's hiding something since the 2016 election. His tax returns, for one thing.
Adam Schiff should go on TV and tell Trump he'll make a deal: He'll hold live, public hearings if the Trump Administration honors every subpoena.
Call his bluff.
posted by Gelatin at 9:56 AM on October 24, 2019 [29 favorites]
Exactly. As many (notably Josh Marshall) have observed, Trump has been acting like he's hiding something since the 2016 election. His tax returns, for one thing.
Adam Schiff should go on TV and tell Trump he'll make a deal: He'll hold live, public hearings if the Trump Administration honors every subpoena.
Call his bluff.
posted by Gelatin at 9:56 AM on October 24, 2019 [29 favorites]
WaPo: 9:15 a.m.: Hoyer says Trump will have opportunity to defend himself at Senate trial
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said Thursday that Trump will have ample opportunity to defend himself once a trial is held in the Senate. [...] “Frankly, [Supreme Court] Chief Justice Roberts will preside over the trial,” Hoyer said. “That’s in America … where you get the chance to call witnesses, to present evidence, to cross-examine the people who are asserting wrongdoing. That’s when you get that chance, not now.”posted by katra at 10:03 AM on October 24, 2019 [15 favorites]
Hoyer also dismissed GOP critics who have called for a vote to formally open the impeachment inquiry. “They’re going to get a vote. They’re going to get a vote on the floor. That’s the only way impeachment can happen,” Hoyer said.
I reluctantly agree that the Dems were right not to give the intruders their Fox-fodder frogmarch and am okay waiting for the real frogmarch at the end of all this. But can't they get in Trouble somehow? Can't the Dems impose some boring, non-telegenic fines, or quietly remove them from committees, or make ordinary off-camera individual arrests, or at least make some kind of black mark on somebody's permanent record somewhere, that might somehow inconvenience them at some time in the future?
Are the bad guys really not going to pay in any way for doing something that any of us would be arrested for? It's not like it wasn't on television. We all saw a bunch of white guys breaking the law and getting away with it. What is going to deter these guys from doing the same or worse the next time they feel like criming?
posted by bink at 10:16 AM on October 24, 2019 [18 favorites]
Are the bad guys really not going to pay in any way for doing something that any of us would be arrested for? It's not like it wasn't on television. We all saw a bunch of white guys breaking the law and getting away with it. What is going to deter these guys from doing the same or worse the next time they feel like criming?
posted by bink at 10:16 AM on October 24, 2019 [18 favorites]
The Republicans took a dump on democracy and left ....
SCIF marks.
Thanks, I'll be here all week.
posted by freecellwizard at 10:20 AM on October 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
SCIF marks.
Thanks, I'll be here all week.
posted by freecellwizard at 10:20 AM on October 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
Gaetz also broke House rules Wednesday when his staff handed out expired congressional passes to some uncredentialed reporters and the crew of HBO’s “The Swamp.”
posted by bink at 10:21 AM on October 24, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by bink at 10:21 AM on October 24, 2019 [13 favorites]
I don't understand where this "let's all work it out" mentality comes from. I really don't.
I think it comes from not wanting to recognize how bad it really is. It's how you get people rationalizing all sorts of abusive situations rather than confronting them. And sometimes that is what you need to do to survive.
But we can't just leave. We're trapped with this fascist, genocidal death cult. And when a delusional, genocidal, fascist wants to hurt you, there is nothing you can say or do to reason them out of their position, because they did not arrive there by reason. They just want to hurt you.
We can't stop them without confronting this, and that means confronting their recruitment channels, too. I don't know how to do that, and I suspect no one else does, either, so they go on pretending there's a way to work it all out. But it's not just Fox News. The next generation is on YouTube. As long as Fox News, YouTube, and the rest are allowed to act as recruiters for a death cult, we're going to constantly be on the edge of violence.
posted by schadenfrau at 10:31 AM on October 24, 2019 [16 favorites]
I think it comes from not wanting to recognize how bad it really is. It's how you get people rationalizing all sorts of abusive situations rather than confronting them. And sometimes that is what you need to do to survive.
But we can't just leave. We're trapped with this fascist, genocidal death cult. And when a delusional, genocidal, fascist wants to hurt you, there is nothing you can say or do to reason them out of their position, because they did not arrive there by reason. They just want to hurt you.
We can't stop them without confronting this, and that means confronting their recruitment channels, too. I don't know how to do that, and I suspect no one else does, either, so they go on pretending there's a way to work it all out. But it's not just Fox News. The next generation is on YouTube. As long as Fox News, YouTube, and the rest are allowed to act as recruiters for a death cult, we're going to constantly be on the edge of violence.
posted by schadenfrau at 10:31 AM on October 24, 2019 [16 favorites]
What the fuck? HBO is turning this into a TV show? This is the first I've heard of it, and Google doesn't seem to know anything about it either aside from this stunt.
As an HBO subscriber, unless they're going to secretly bring in Christopher Guest at the last minute to turn it a mockumentary, I have questions.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:41 AM on October 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
As an HBO subscriber, unless they're going to secretly bring in Christopher Guest at the last minute to turn it a mockumentary, I have questions.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:41 AM on October 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
Why is GOP spin growing more pathetic and lawless? Because Trump’s defenses are collapsing. (Greg Sargent, WaPo Opinion)
Yes, of course the transcripts should be released, and of course the American people should have all the facts. But that will happen; that the initial investigative phase is private is eminently defensible. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, has vowed to release the transcripts, with redactions for classified and sensitive information. [...] Indeed, the very same witnesses Republicans claim they have reduced to a puddle of incoherence will likely undergo open questioning once the inquiry moves into its public phase. [...] So, good news, Republicans: Whether it’s by released transcripts or by open hearings, or both, the public will get to see all of you modern-day Clarence Darrows ruthlessly dismantle Taylor’s claims.posted by katra at 10:42 AM on October 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
[...] There’s another layer of absurdity here. Once the transcripts are released or once we get public hearings, it is highly likely that they will not actually show that Republicans have lacerated Taylor’s case. But for Trump’s most ardent loyalists, this simply won’t matter. If and when publicly revealed testimony does not exonerate Trump, they’ll simply lie to the contrary, and treat the fact of public release as the hook to claim that the Democratic coverup has been exposed, counting on their massive propaganda apparatus to amplify that story line. This is exactly what happened with the Nunes memo — it was a total fiasco, yet Republicans widely pretended it was deeply revelatory.
The story we’ve seen in this whole scandal is that one after another, Trump’s levees are collapsing in the face of successive waves of factual revelations. Indeed, as the New York Times reports:Some Republicans are growing increasingly uneasy about the inquiry, and fretting that it could get much, much worse for them. Publicly, they are taking their cues from the president, and Wednesday’s performance appeared intended to please Mr. Trump. The president has fumed publicly and privately that Republicans have not been tough enough in defending him.So these displays are all about showing that Republicans are fighting for Trump. But they would not be so worried about where this is all going if more public disclosure were likely to help exonerate him.
If the whiny Republicans want open hearings all they have to do is schedule them right now. Moscow Mitch and the Republicans hold a majority in the Senate. They could call any witness they wanted.
But they don't really want to. The calls for open hearings is just propaganda stunt to discredit the impeachment investigation.
posted by JackFlash at 10:48 AM on October 24, 2019 [13 favorites]
But they don't really want to. The calls for open hearings is just propaganda stunt to discredit the impeachment investigation.
posted by JackFlash at 10:48 AM on October 24, 2019 [13 favorites]
Trump allies mull how to quickly quash impeachment articles (Jordain Carney, The Hill)
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:54 AM on October 24, 2019
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:54 AM on October 24, 2019
Fox News legal analyst surprises Fox & Friends by destroying impeachment talking points (Walter Einenkel, Daily Kos)
Andrew Napolitano to Brian Kilmeade (tweet of show segment)
Andrew Napolitano to Brian Kilmeade (tweet of show segment)
"When were the rules written last? In January of 2015. And who signed them? John Boehner. And who enacted them? A Republican majority."posted by ZeusHumms at 11:00 AM on October 24, 2019 [16 favorites]
GOP Drama Queens Stage a Pizza Party Sit-In at Impeachment Hearing
Today, a bunch of attention-starved GOP congressman crashed a closed impeachment deposition like the cast of Rent descending upon the Life Café after Maureen's show, except in this production of Rent everyone is irredeemable and annoying and the American people are the waiter who sings "No, please, no. Not tonight; can't have a scene."posted by kirkaracha at 11:02 AM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
...
I suppose you could summarize Gaetz's actions today as a "Tiff with Schiff in the SCIF" and that bit of rhyming is pretty much the only redeeming aspect of today's rift.
...
So what now? Girl, I don't know! Is this bad? Well, it's not great. A number of GOP congressman tweeted from inside the room and Rep. Alex Mooney actually made a voice memo and tweeted that out, all of which is like, super illegal. The House Parliamentarian ruled that the representatives who crashed the meeting were in violation of the House deposition rules, according to an official on the Intelligence Committee. So, I guess everyone has to go to jail. Like, every single person. Pretend it's midway through the second act of Hello, Dolly! Lock the whole cast up. Or! Lock the door to the room from the outside, leaving them alone in the SCIF with the greasy miasma of empty pizza boxes, and let the adults get back to work.
I don't understand where this "let's all work it out" mentality comes from. I really don't.
It is crystal clear the Democratic establishment strategy is to position themselves as middle of the road, bi-partisan, centrists. They're collaborators, but they've got us. There's nowhere to turn. We'll probably be voting emphatically and passionately, crawling through broken glass, going to door to door, begging people to vote for Democratic ham sandwich candidates for the rest of our lives.
posted by xammerboy at 11:02 AM on October 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
It is crystal clear the Democratic establishment strategy is to position themselves as middle of the road, bi-partisan, centrists. They're collaborators, but they've got us. There's nowhere to turn. We'll probably be voting emphatically and passionately, crawling through broken glass, going to door to door, begging people to vote for Democratic ham sandwich candidates for the rest of our lives.
posted by xammerboy at 11:02 AM on October 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
White House Aides Feared That Trump Had Another Ukraine Back Channel (NYT)
Senior national security officials grew concerned about Kash Patel, a colleague who had been involved in Republicans’ efforts to undermine the Russia investigation.
Senior national security officials grew concerned about Kash Patel, a colleague who had been involved in Republicans’ efforts to undermine the Russia investigation.
Mr. Patel was previously best known as a lead author of the politically charged memo released early last year accusing the F.B.I. and Justice Department leaders of abusing their power in the early stages of the Russia investigation. Mr. Patel worked at the time as an investigator for the House Intelligence Committee under Representative Devin Nunes of California, who ran the panel when Republicans had control of the chamber. Mr. Patel’s efforts to discredit the Russia investigation made him a minor celebrity in conservative circles but a divisive figure on Capitol Hill.posted by katra at 11:07 AM on October 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
As an intelligence committee aide, Mr. Patel helped investigate the theory that Ukrainians were responsible for spreading information about Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election. Mr. Trump has returned to the accusation of Ukrainian meddling repeatedly in public and private conversations. [...] Mr. Patel is closely aligned on the National Security Council staff with another alumnus of Mr. Nunes’s committee, Michael Ellis, now a top White House lawyer. Mr. Ellis worked for Mr. Nunes for years as a lawyer on the House Intelligence Committee and helped champion Mr. Patel’s work on the staff, a person familiar with their roles said.
Mr. Ellis was involved in another bizarre episode early in the Trump administration in which he and another White House lawyer printed highly classified reports to show Mr. Nunes, who used them to accuse Obama administration officials of spying on Mr. Trump and his associates. The claims quickly unraveled, and Mr. Nunes eventually recused himself from his committee’s own Russia investigation as a result. [...]
The memo that Mr. Patel wrote as a House Intelligence Committee aide focused on the F.B.I.’s use of a dossier of explosive, unverified claims about Mr. Trump that Christopher Steele, a former British spy, compiled in 2016 for a Democratic-funded research mission. House Republicans long ago seized on the dossier as evidence that the Russia investigation was tainted, to little avail.
Lawyers for Ukrainian oligarch have another client: The columnist who pushed Biden corruption claims (Politico)
Solomon confirmed to POLITICO that Toensing and diGenova “have been my lawyers for a very long time, along with other lawyers across many different law firms.” Solomon said he used Toensing and diGenova “for libel review, to help review book and movie offers, and to do personnel contracts.”posted by katra at 11:15 AM on October 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
The arrangement demonstrates how interconnected the cast of characters at the heart of the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry has become, and raises new questions about legal privileges that could help shield key players from scrutiny. “It raises very serious questions about whether these individuals are trying to use a lawyer-client relationship to hide communications involving illicit activities,” said Ryan Goodman, a law professor at New York University. [...]
Toensing and diGenova also represent Dmitry Firtash, a Ukrainian gas magnate who lives in Vienna and is fighting extradition to the U.S. on bribery charges. Firtash paid the lawyers $1 million to uncover dirt on Joe Biden and to win help in his legal case from Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, according to Bloomberg News. Solomon was the first to report on an affidavit obtained from Firtash by his lawyers, Toensing and diGenova, who are also Solomon’s lawyers.
The lawyers’ son, Brady, joined DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel in June as a senior counsel. [...]
A series of articles Solomon published about Ukraine were mentioned in an anonymous complaint by an intelligence community whistleblower, which characterized Solomon’s work as part of the “circumstances leading up to” Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. In that call, Trump asked Zelensky to investigate the Bidens and “get to the bottom of” Ukraine’s alleged interference in the 2016 election.
Things that they can do that don't include physical violence in any form are: Holding people accountable for defying subpoenas by putting them in jail until they comply, forcing document requests to be fulfilled under threat of arrest,
If I were in the position of needing to respond to the naked aggression of Gaetz, it would not be obvious to me that these actions would not include physical violence.
posted by PMdixon at 11:16 AM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
If I were in the position of needing to respond to the naked aggression of Gaetz, it would not be obvious to me that these actions would not include physical violence.
posted by PMdixon at 11:16 AM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
Gaetz's aggression, in the service of Trump (for now), needs to be checked. Guy's a first-time congressman, in his mid-30s, and he's cast himself as the GOP attack dog. (CNN, June 28, 2019) - The House Ethics Committee announced Friday it was investigating a complaint that Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz tried to threaten Michael Cohen ahead of his congressional testimony.
(The Florida Bar Association wrapped up its investigation in August, finding 'no probable cause' he violated rules with the tweet.)
Two years ago (Wired, 7/28/17), Gaetz staffer Devin Murphy consulted "r/The_Donald, a notoriously conspiracy-minded subreddit" to crowd-source the finer points of an amendment Gaetz sponsored; "Yes, Devin is a staffer in our office," Gaetz wrote in an email to WIRED. "It is the responsibility of our staff to gather as much information as possible when researching a subject and provide that information for consideration. We pride ourselves on seeking as much citizen input as possible.” A year later, Murphy was still employed as a "senior legislative aide" to Gaetz.
The idea of watching the congressman's antics for the next 40+ years is nausea-inducing.
posted by Iris Gambol at 11:53 AM on October 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
(The Florida Bar Association wrapped up its investigation in August, finding 'no probable cause' he violated rules with the tweet.)
Two years ago (Wired, 7/28/17), Gaetz staffer Devin Murphy consulted "r/The_Donald, a notoriously conspiracy-minded subreddit" to crowd-source the finer points of an amendment Gaetz sponsored; "Yes, Devin is a staffer in our office," Gaetz wrote in an email to WIRED. "It is the responsibility of our staff to gather as much information as possible when researching a subject and provide that information for consideration. We pride ourselves on seeking as much citizen input as possible.” A year later, Murphy was still employed as a "senior legislative aide" to Gaetz.
The idea of watching the congressman's antics for the next 40+ years is nausea-inducing.
posted by Iris Gambol at 11:53 AM on October 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
I want to see Matt Gaetz and his gaggle of fratboy oathbreaking traitors frogmarched in chains out of the Capitol and into a jail cell for the rest of their miserable, treasonous lives as much as anyone. But the fact is that it's just not an option right now. Exactly as Don Pepino said, the failures in the past to prosecute good-old-boys like Gaetz for the crimes they've committed have left us in a situation where they now have too much political power to just immediately enforce the law upon them as we might want. It's clear that being arrested was exactly what they wanted yesterday, and by refusing to give it to them the headlines today are about how stupid and ineffectual their little protest was rather than about how they martyred themselves in defense of the president.
I get that it's frustratingly slow to work within the limits of what's politically possible, but the fact is that it's actually working. The tide of public opinion is increasingly turning against Trump and the Republicans. Or rather, perhaps it would be more accurate to describe it as their defensive walls crumbling: the majority opinion has been against them since 2017, but the 40%-ish that have continued to support them have been enough to make their power unassailable. But that is changing. The core Trumpists are all fascists or proto-fascists, and fascists take and hold power by projecting an image of strength and superiority. One of the greatest fears of fascists is of looking foolish, because that makes their power over the minds of their followers begin to evaporate. The more desperate they become, the more they flail, they more they try stupid stunts like this, the more opportunities they create for making them look foolish. I'm sure their core supporters are unfazed by any of this, but this image of impotent protest that neither achieved their stated aim nor allowed them to be martyrs for their cause, this is going to chip away at the margins of their support. Fortunately, their core of support never really needs to be reached, because it is probably unreachable: it just needs to be whittled down to the point that they can be removed from power.
If and when the Democrats manage to wrest control of the government back from the fascists and their allies, that is when the reckoning needs to happen. If these lawless would-be tyrants are allowed once again to go free with no consequences, they will rise again and again until the republic falls. The Democrats must, must avoid the trap of "looking forward" and "healing divisions" this time. Every one of these fuckers' crimes needs to be rooted out, exposed, and prosecuted, stopping not just with the corrupt elected officials but all of their puppet masters, domestic and foreign. This is going to take years, and really needs to be a top priority of the next administrations.
But for right now, as much as I hate it, the fascists and protofascists are too politically protected by a base of support that hovers around 50% of the electorate, and by a system that has been slowly perverted by them and their right-wing predecessors for decades. Bringing charges right now would probably fail. The judiciary has been packed with too many Federalist Society judges; too many prosecutors are either politically aligned with the fascists and protofascists or maintain an allegiance to the Republican party that trumps their own oaths of office; too many other Republican officials at both the federal and state level fear political or even physical reprisal from their own voters for working with Democrats to see that the law is properly enforced. It's not right and it's not just that these assholes get to flout the law with impunity, but when roughly 50% of the population support not only the criminals but also their criminal behavior, it's necessary to be patient and pick your moments to strike carefully. But it's also necessary to be ready to strike at a moment's notice when the opportunity presents itself, and I really, really hope the Democratic leadership sees that.
posted by biogeo at 11:54 AM on October 24, 2019 [18 favorites]
I get that it's frustratingly slow to work within the limits of what's politically possible, but the fact is that it's actually working. The tide of public opinion is increasingly turning against Trump and the Republicans. Or rather, perhaps it would be more accurate to describe it as their defensive walls crumbling: the majority opinion has been against them since 2017, but the 40%-ish that have continued to support them have been enough to make their power unassailable. But that is changing. The core Trumpists are all fascists or proto-fascists, and fascists take and hold power by projecting an image of strength and superiority. One of the greatest fears of fascists is of looking foolish, because that makes their power over the minds of their followers begin to evaporate. The more desperate they become, the more they flail, they more they try stupid stunts like this, the more opportunities they create for making them look foolish. I'm sure their core supporters are unfazed by any of this, but this image of impotent protest that neither achieved their stated aim nor allowed them to be martyrs for their cause, this is going to chip away at the margins of their support. Fortunately, their core of support never really needs to be reached, because it is probably unreachable: it just needs to be whittled down to the point that they can be removed from power.
If and when the Democrats manage to wrest control of the government back from the fascists and their allies, that is when the reckoning needs to happen. If these lawless would-be tyrants are allowed once again to go free with no consequences, they will rise again and again until the republic falls. The Democrats must, must avoid the trap of "looking forward" and "healing divisions" this time. Every one of these fuckers' crimes needs to be rooted out, exposed, and prosecuted, stopping not just with the corrupt elected officials but all of their puppet masters, domestic and foreign. This is going to take years, and really needs to be a top priority of the next administrations.
But for right now, as much as I hate it, the fascists and protofascists are too politically protected by a base of support that hovers around 50% of the electorate, and by a system that has been slowly perverted by them and their right-wing predecessors for decades. Bringing charges right now would probably fail. The judiciary has been packed with too many Federalist Society judges; too many prosecutors are either politically aligned with the fascists and protofascists or maintain an allegiance to the Republican party that trumps their own oaths of office; too many other Republican officials at both the federal and state level fear political or even physical reprisal from their own voters for working with Democrats to see that the law is properly enforced. It's not right and it's not just that these assholes get to flout the law with impunity, but when roughly 50% of the population support not only the criminals but also their criminal behavior, it's necessary to be patient and pick your moments to strike carefully. But it's also necessary to be ready to strike at a moment's notice when the opportunity presents itself, and I really, really hope the Democratic leadership sees that.
posted by biogeo at 11:54 AM on October 24, 2019 [18 favorites]
yeah, PMdixon, that stood out to me, too: "putting them in jail" would almost have to involve violence, given whom we're dealing with. They are briarpatching like mad, hoping to generate their noxious "optics." It's kinda hard to miss.
The first part of yesterday's Trumpcast wherein VA Heffernan talks to Ian Madrigal is all about how there are separate laws for rich people and how they never ever go to jail and how it's all white supremacy and patriarchy turtles all the way down. The whole thing is real good yummy delicious candy. Highly recommend.
posted by Don Pepino at 11:55 AM on October 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
The first part of yesterday's Trumpcast wherein VA Heffernan talks to Ian Madrigal is all about how there are separate laws for rich people and how they never ever go to jail and how it's all white supremacy and patriarchy turtles all the way down. The whole thing is real good yummy delicious candy. Highly recommend.
posted by Don Pepino at 11:55 AM on October 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
How about bumping Gaetz & company to the end of the seniority list for congressional offices?
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:40 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:40 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
It's his first term. He's already at the end of the seniority list.
posted by ryanrs at 12:44 PM on October 24, 2019
posted by ryanrs at 12:44 PM on October 24, 2019
Second term; he was first elected in 2016.
posted by stopgap at 12:50 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by stopgap at 12:50 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
It's excruciating, and I can't believe how effective it is. I used to think in the book 1984 that totalitarianism resulted in a state where citizens could be made to doubt 2+2=4 through prolonged brutality. I now see this kind of doubt as the starting point and basis of oppression.
The problem is, our system was designed to handle lies, flat-out. Lies issued as an attempt to mask the truth, which was respected as an entity to be feared, or at least regarded as powerful.
What our system can't handle, or hasn't adjusted to handling yet, is bullshit. Content whose truth or falsity is secondary to some other purpose. To dwell on the thing even long enough to refute it is to give it power unearned.
This is why it drives us crazy when the media reports stories that are untrue, simply to debunk them. If the story is reported on, it gains a respectability that the debunking can't undo.
It's why the alt-right thrives, not because of supporters, but because of detractors who'll quote-tweet them and discuss them endlessly.
It's why the gish gallop is so effective at steering narratives: it doesn't matter if Trump tells 40 lies a day, if we're so hell-bent on addressing each of them that by nightfall we're still 25 behind.
Honestly, though, as someone who came of age under George W. Bush, I'm not sure I believe that what we're dealing with now is more dystopian than the old system, in which the "respectable" narrative controlled every major communications outlet on the planet. The New York Times remains a great proponent of that system, and still pumps out disgusting authoritarianism on a regular basis. It's not like we needed Fox News to get into a war with Iraq, or to illegally slaughter hundreds of thousands to millions of innocent people. This new dystopia is far more colorful, far more exhausting, and far more confrontational, because freedom of information enables bullshit in a way that the old system didn't, but it's a symptom of the same thing the old system was: we as a society lack fundamental media literacy, a fact which is as true on the left as it is on the right. Before the consequence was ignorant endorsements of problematic mainstream thinking, and now the consequence is lunatic fringe thinking, but both situations are the fault of a media that is essentially unchecked and unexamined.
(I'd argue that Fox News is only as powerful as it is because it was the first news channel to exist outside of the original few behemoths. It was the harbinger of the new era, even if it took us the Internet to take Fox to its logical conclusion.)
I think the cure is simpler than it seems, but it's hard to articulate because the language we need to discuss it is still nascent. The first change, though, will come about when our various institutions examine the ways in which simply paying Trump attention gave him unearned power, and when the media examines its own power and devises a way to use it more responsibly. From there we'll have to work out what it looks like to consume media and the news responsibly—a process that, again, will implicate the left as much as it does the right, even if the right's irresponsibility is far more obviously ludicrous than most of the left's is. It's not undoable, it just requires work in a direction that runs perpendicular to where we're used to working.
posted by rorgy at 12:51 PM on October 24, 2019 [22 favorites]
The problem is, our system was designed to handle lies, flat-out. Lies issued as an attempt to mask the truth, which was respected as an entity to be feared, or at least regarded as powerful.
What our system can't handle, or hasn't adjusted to handling yet, is bullshit. Content whose truth or falsity is secondary to some other purpose. To dwell on the thing even long enough to refute it is to give it power unearned.
This is why it drives us crazy when the media reports stories that are untrue, simply to debunk them. If the story is reported on, it gains a respectability that the debunking can't undo.
It's why the alt-right thrives, not because of supporters, but because of detractors who'll quote-tweet them and discuss them endlessly.
It's why the gish gallop is so effective at steering narratives: it doesn't matter if Trump tells 40 lies a day, if we're so hell-bent on addressing each of them that by nightfall we're still 25 behind.
Honestly, though, as someone who came of age under George W. Bush, I'm not sure I believe that what we're dealing with now is more dystopian than the old system, in which the "respectable" narrative controlled every major communications outlet on the planet. The New York Times remains a great proponent of that system, and still pumps out disgusting authoritarianism on a regular basis. It's not like we needed Fox News to get into a war with Iraq, or to illegally slaughter hundreds of thousands to millions of innocent people. This new dystopia is far more colorful, far more exhausting, and far more confrontational, because freedom of information enables bullshit in a way that the old system didn't, but it's a symptom of the same thing the old system was: we as a society lack fundamental media literacy, a fact which is as true on the left as it is on the right. Before the consequence was ignorant endorsements of problematic mainstream thinking, and now the consequence is lunatic fringe thinking, but both situations are the fault of a media that is essentially unchecked and unexamined.
(I'd argue that Fox News is only as powerful as it is because it was the first news channel to exist outside of the original few behemoths. It was the harbinger of the new era, even if it took us the Internet to take Fox to its logical conclusion.)
I think the cure is simpler than it seems, but it's hard to articulate because the language we need to discuss it is still nascent. The first change, though, will come about when our various institutions examine the ways in which simply paying Trump attention gave him unearned power, and when the media examines its own power and devises a way to use it more responsibly. From there we'll have to work out what it looks like to consume media and the news responsibly—a process that, again, will implicate the left as much as it does the right, even if the right's irresponsibility is far more obviously ludicrous than most of the left's is. It's not undoable, it just requires work in a direction that runs perpendicular to where we're used to working.
posted by rorgy at 12:51 PM on October 24, 2019 [22 favorites]
and when the media examines its own power and devises a way to use it more responsibly.
Chomsky has some doubts about this happening.
posted by Harry Caul at 1:04 PM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
Chomsky has some doubts about this happening.
posted by Harry Caul at 1:04 PM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
(Apologies for my earlier mistake - Gaetz is in his second term, and up for re-election in 2020.)
Rep. Matt Gaetz, on twitter, 4 hours ago: If Democrats are going to have a world with no rules, Republicans have got to stop thinking that we can use the Marquess of Queensberry rules of engagement when we’re fighting against an angry pack of rabid hyenas.
Also Rep. Matt Gaetz's twitter, yesterday, in response to Bloomberg.com's "GOP Members Disrupt Impeachment Hearing With Trump’s Blessing": This is false. I organized and led this press conference, including entering the committee room. I never discussed this with any White House official including the President.
posted by Iris Gambol at 1:09 PM on October 24, 2019
Rep. Matt Gaetz, on twitter, 4 hours ago: If Democrats are going to have a world with no rules, Republicans have got to stop thinking that we can use the Marquess of Queensberry rules of engagement when we’re fighting against an angry pack of rabid hyenas.
Also Rep. Matt Gaetz's twitter, yesterday, in response to Bloomberg.com's "GOP Members Disrupt Impeachment Hearing With Trump’s Blessing": This is false. I organized and led this press conference, including entering the committee room. I never discussed this with any White House official including the President.
posted by Iris Gambol at 1:09 PM on October 24, 2019
Rep. Matt Gaetz, on twitter, 4 hours ago: If Democrats are going to have a world with no rules, Republicans have got to stop thinking that we can use the Marquess of Queensberry rules of engagement when we’re fighting against an angry pack of rabid hyenas.
The rules that Democrats are playing by are the literally the exact same fucking rules as the Republican rules that were trotted out by Boehner, voted on, and approved by, a REPUBLICAN FUCKING HOUSE.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:31 PM on October 24, 2019 [20 favorites]
The rules that Democrats are playing by are the literally the exact same fucking rules as the Republican rules that were trotted out by Boehner, voted on, and approved by, a REPUBLICAN FUCKING HOUSE.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:31 PM on October 24, 2019 [20 favorites]
I just wish the fourth estate would do something like run with "Gaetz goes on tirade about rules implemented by his own party" instead of "Gaetz claims Democrats are playing by no rules".
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:33 PM on October 24, 2019 [76 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:33 PM on October 24, 2019 [76 favorites]
Your Childhood Pet Rock wins today.
posted by Melismata at 1:35 PM on October 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by Melismata at 1:35 PM on October 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
If Democrats are going to have a world with no rules, Republicans have got to stop thinking that we can use the Marquess of Queensberry rules of engagement when we’re fighting against an angry pack of rabid hyenas.
There they go again. They go on some spectacularly stupid and destructive spree and then claim that the other side did the exact imbecile world-ruining thing they just did. It's like everybody in a maga hat is stumbling around under heavy anesthesia. Today I'm sitting at the mechanic waiting for my car and the lobby TV is talking about a woman who tied a baggie full of meth in her hair like a bow and left it flopping on her skull during a traffic stop and of course got arrested, and the TV experts were all yacking about how stupid she was, and I'm like, "Okay? I guess? But have you seen Americans lately? Meth hairbow lady is not really standing out."
posted by Don Pepino at 2:42 PM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
There they go again. They go on some spectacularly stupid and destructive spree and then claim that the other side did the exact imbecile world-ruining thing they just did. It's like everybody in a maga hat is stumbling around under heavy anesthesia. Today I'm sitting at the mechanic waiting for my car and the lobby TV is talking about a woman who tied a baggie full of meth in her hair like a bow and left it flopping on her skull during a traffic stop and of course got arrested, and the TV experts were all yacking about how stupid she was, and I'm like, "Okay? I guess? But have you seen Americans lately? Meth hairbow lady is not really standing out."
posted by Don Pepino at 2:42 PM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
I just wish the fourth estate would do something like run with "Gaetz goes on tirade about rules implemented by his own party" instead of "Gaetz claims Democrats are playing by no rules".
It would be nice, but I don't think I need it to happen. The rules are Republican, this is a fact, and Gaetz is going to fade into the background noise soon enough. Take a note from their desire to be arrested: ignoring this story is the best defense. Let it die, Gaetz nor Republicans in general cannot profit from it except from additional opportunities to spout their opinions to reporters who think the story still has legs.
posted by rhizome at 2:49 PM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
It would be nice, but I don't think I need it to happen. The rules are Republican, this is a fact, and Gaetz is going to fade into the background noise soon enough. Take a note from their desire to be arrested: ignoring this story is the best defense. Let it die, Gaetz nor Republicans in general cannot profit from it except from additional opportunities to spout their opinions to reporters who think the story still has legs.
posted by rhizome at 2:49 PM on October 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
It is crystal clear the Democratic establishment strategy is to position themselves as middle of the road, bi-partisan, centrists. They're collaborators, but they've got us. There's nowhere to turn. We'll probably be voting emphatically and passionately, crawling through broken glass, going to door to door, begging people to vote for Democratic ham sandwich candidates for the rest of our lives.
More defeatism. Join a party and run for office -- AOC did, and took out one of those middle of the road bipartisan centrists. Pelosi and the gang of olds won't be around much longer, the time to reform the Dems is now.
posted by benzenedream at 2:50 PM on October 24, 2019 [27 favorites]
More defeatism. Join a party and run for office -- AOC did, and took out one of those middle of the road bipartisan centrists. Pelosi and the gang of olds won't be around much longer, the time to reform the Dems is now.
posted by benzenedream at 2:50 PM on October 24, 2019 [27 favorites]
Iris Gambol: Gaetz is in his second term, and up for re-election in 2020
And per 538, in a very safe seat.
That's Matt Gaetz, the congressman from Florida who is most known for his seven arrests for driving impared, and working with Roger Stone and Donald Trump to create a fake story about the FBI and Mueller’s investigation. (Polipace, December 13, 2017)
Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress take the reins in impeachment defense amid damaging testimony for Trump (Jeremy Herb, Manu Raju, Lauren Fox and Phil Mattingly for CNN, Oct. 24, 2019)
What did he say before?
Republicans focus on Democrats -- not Trump -- in impeachment inquiry (Alex Rogers and Ted Barrett for CNN, October 23, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 3:04 PM on October 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
And per 538, in a very safe seat.
That's Matt Gaetz, the congressman from Florida who is most known for his seven arrests for driving impared, and working with Roger Stone and Donald Trump to create a fake story about the FBI and Mueller’s investigation. (Polipace, December 13, 2017)
Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress take the reins in impeachment defense amid damaging testimony for Trump (Jeremy Herb, Manu Raju, Lauren Fox and Phil Mattingly for CNN, Oct. 24, 2019)
Faced with a barrage of damaging headlines for President Donald Trump stemming from impeachment inquiry testimony, congressional Republicans are beginning to coalesce around a strategy aimed at discrediting key witnesses and taking a more confrontational stance against the Democratic-led impeachment process.
Republicans on Thursday ramped up their skepticism of the testimony delivered by US diplomat Bill Taylor — which undercut White House claims Ukraine aid wasn't tied to an investigation that could help him politically — and the Senate's No. 2 Republican Sen. John Thune walked back earlier concerns he expressed about Taylor's opening statement.
Republicans in the Senate have also shown little interest in investigating the frozen Ukraine aid, with two committee chairmen signaling that's not a priority right now.
...
But on Thursday, Thune argued "we are hearing one side of the story."
"From what I could tell, a lot of the interactions and statements had been based on second-hand information and those are obviously points that can be disputed, but I think until the administration has an opportunity to put on their response and answer some of those questions. ... I think we all sit and wait until the full body of this comes out," Thune said.
What did he say before?
Republicans focus on Democrats -- not Trump -- in impeachment inquiry (Alex Rogers and Ted Barrett for CNN, October 23, 2019)
A day after Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in Ukraine, undermined President Donald Trump's defenses with his testimony in the House impeachment investigation, most Republicans in Congress blasted not Trump for his conduct but the Democrats for theirs.So what was this counter-reporting that you expect to hear? Have you been talking with Conspiracy Spinner Matt Gaetz?
In fact, the most significant criticism of the situation by any leading Republican came from Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, who simply acknowledged he was troubled by what Taylor revealed.
"The picture coming out of it, based on the reporting that we've seen, I would say is not a good one," said the second-ranking senator in GOP leadership, in the most significant criticism of the situation by any leading Republican.
But even those comments were the exception among GOP members of Congress.
posted by filthy light thief at 3:04 PM on October 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
I reluctantly agree that the Dems were right not to give the intruders their Fox-fodder frogmarch and am okay waiting for the real frogmarch at the end of all this. But can't they get in Trouble somehow? Can't the Dems impose some boring, non-telegenic fines, or quietly remove them from committees, or make ordinary off-camera individual arrests, or at least make some kind of black mark on somebody's permanent record somewhere, that might somehow inconvenience them at some time in the future?I thought they should have made a show of confiscating their phones and any other contraband electronic items found in the possession of those representatives who stormed the SCIF and then announced that they would be returned to them only after forensic experts from a counterintelligence service cleared them. Or alternatively simply destroyed them out of an abundance of caution -- after all, everybody agrees on the importance of national security, yes? And then they should have been symbolically patted on the head in a patronizing manner and firmly escorted out of the SCIF. But if you want to dissuade such stunts in the future, making them clearly look ridiculous and juvenile is probably more effective than forcing a high-drama showdown. You may not be able to control how the showdown plays out but it's hard to look cool to the other kids when you have to turn your phone in to Vice Principal Schiff. Modern Republicans may not be vulnerable to shame in the way that we have traditionally expected from our politicians but I think they are probably still acutely sensitive to embarrassment.
posted by Nerd of the North at 3:22 PM on October 24, 2019 [14 favorites]
I thought they should have said "You know what? You're right. We have the transcripts, and we're releasing them. Everyone has a right to know what these witnesses are saying. Just sit tight, and we'll let you know when they're released." Ten minutes later: "Wait!!! You can't do this!!! Stop!!!"
posted by xammerboy at 3:47 PM on October 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 3:47 PM on October 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
We have the transcripts, and we're releasing them.
I really think this is the basic plan and has been all along. The way Schiff has described this is effectively like a grand jury that is deliberating in secret with the end goal of producing a public document. Let these scared and increasingly desperate crooks bash their heads against the wall for a little bit longer with demands for testimony whose contents they are actively afraid of. They'll get their wish soon enough.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:02 PM on October 24, 2019 [16 favorites]
I really think this is the basic plan and has been all along. The way Schiff has described this is effectively like a grand jury that is deliberating in secret with the end goal of producing a public document. Let these scared and increasingly desperate crooks bash their heads against the wall for a little bit longer with demands for testimony whose contents they are actively afraid of. They'll get their wish soon enough.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:02 PM on October 24, 2019 [16 favorites]
Because the “tide” is turning, so we should shut the fuck up about it, already, like they’re doing “everything they can.” Right.
I understand you're angry and frustrated, but I didn't say either that you should shut the fuck up, or that the Democrats are doing everything they can. Please don't put words in my mouth. What I did say is that the slow approach is working to change public opinion. I also said that it's essential not to give the fascists more power by letting them look strong, and that the Democrats simply don't have the power to do things like throw these fuckers in jail right now. I also expressed concern that the Democrats need to actually prosecute them once they do have the power to, which is something they've absolutely failed to do in the past.
What do not see is any damn Democrat fucking fighting like their lives depend on it.
I don't know what fighting like their lives depend on it looks like, but fighting Republicans is basically the full-time job description of all the Democratic elected officials right now. I'm sure they could be doing it better than they are, but I honestly can't see how they could possibly be doing more than they are. If you've got ideas for how we get these assholes into jail cells where they belong faster than what the Democrats are doing will, without provoking the magahats to actually start the armed rebellion they keep talking about, I'm very interested in discussing that. But if all you've got to say is that the Democrats aren't doing enough, well, you're welcome to talk as much about that as you want, but I don't think it's actually helping anyone, and in fact I think it's demoralizing.
posted by biogeo at 5:14 PM on October 24, 2019 [19 favorites]
I understand you're angry and frustrated, but I didn't say either that you should shut the fuck up, or that the Democrats are doing everything they can. Please don't put words in my mouth. What I did say is that the slow approach is working to change public opinion. I also said that it's essential not to give the fascists more power by letting them look strong, and that the Democrats simply don't have the power to do things like throw these fuckers in jail right now. I also expressed concern that the Democrats need to actually prosecute them once they do have the power to, which is something they've absolutely failed to do in the past.
What do not see is any damn Democrat fucking fighting like their lives depend on it.
I don't know what fighting like their lives depend on it looks like, but fighting Republicans is basically the full-time job description of all the Democratic elected officials right now. I'm sure they could be doing it better than they are, but I honestly can't see how they could possibly be doing more than they are. If you've got ideas for how we get these assholes into jail cells where they belong faster than what the Democrats are doing will, without provoking the magahats to actually start the armed rebellion they keep talking about, I'm very interested in discussing that. But if all you've got to say is that the Democrats aren't doing enough, well, you're welcome to talk as much about that as you want, but I don't think it's actually helping anyone, and in fact I think it's demoralizing.
posted by biogeo at 5:14 PM on October 24, 2019 [19 favorites]
Surprise: Democrats are actually mounting an effective impeachment inquiry (Paul Waldman, WaPo Opinion)
The biggest problem Republicans have, however, is the facts. It’s indicative of how brutal this process has been for the administration that the president and his advocates can’t seem to decide on what the defense of him is supposed to be. Are the allegations all fabricated? Did Trump not pressure Ukraine to dig up dirt on Joe Biden to help his reelection campaign, or was it completely fine that he did so? Was there no quid pro quo, or are quid pro quos good? Whatever they’re saying today, they’ll probably be saying something different tomorrow. They can’t decide because there is so little ambiguity around what Trump did, and no good way to justify it.posted by katra at 5:26 PM on October 24, 2019 [23 favorites]
Which is why the methodical approach the Democrats are taking is working well. In the current phase, they’re gathering testimony from officials, which is adding up to a damning indictment of the president. Then next month, they’ll move to public hearings, which will provide dramatic, made-for-TV moments in which Trump’s abuse of power will be laid bare. [...]
Republicans will continue to flail as they try desperately to find a defense of Trump that doesn’t sound ludicrous. The president himself will grow more unhinged, rage-tweeting day after day in order to keep his base from abandoning him. And all of it will play out against the backdrop of the 2020 election, when the voters get to decide if they want four more years of this.
It’s almost as if the Democrats know what they’re doing.
NYT: Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation
"Justice Department officials have shifted an administrative review of the Russia investigation closely overseen by Attorney General William P. Barr to a criminal inquiry, according to two people familiar with the matter. The move gives the prosecutor running it, John H. Durham, the power to subpoena for witness testimony and documents, to impanel a grand jury and to file criminal charges.
The opening of a criminal investigation is likely to raise alarms that Mr. Trump is using the Justice Department to go after his perceived enemies."
posted by jocelmeow at 5:30 PM on October 24, 2019 [11 favorites]
"Justice Department officials have shifted an administrative review of the Russia investigation closely overseen by Attorney General William P. Barr to a criminal inquiry, according to two people familiar with the matter. The move gives the prosecutor running it, John H. Durham, the power to subpoena for witness testimony and documents, to impanel a grand jury and to file criminal charges.
The opening of a criminal investigation is likely to raise alarms that Mr. Trump is using the Justice Department to go after his perceived enemies."
posted by jocelmeow at 5:30 PM on October 24, 2019 [11 favorites]
I'm thinking the hearings won't be televised except on cspan...
posted by Windopaene at 5:32 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Windopaene at 5:32 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
Another thing in favor of this approach that I think is worth mentioning is that by doing preliminary hearings in private, they public hearings will be that much less likely to result in a surprise or a fizzle. If people change their statements, they were still on the record earlier and can be challenged on the discrepancy.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:32 PM on October 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:32 PM on October 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
by doing preliminary hearings in private, they public hearings will be that much less likely to result in a surprise or a fizzle. If people change their statements, they were still on the record earlier and can be challenged on the discrepancy.
See also this comment upthread by katra describing how that was exactly the approach taken for the Watergate hearings.
posted by biogeo at 5:52 PM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
See also this comment upthread by katra describing how that was exactly the approach taken for the Watergate hearings.
posted by biogeo at 5:52 PM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
"Soooo... if someone is impeached, it doesn't mean they're automatically removed, right?" -- my reasonably-woke, MSNBC-watching husband, two minutes ago.
Democrats are doing so bad at explaining this process to the American people. I'm mildly unsurprised at this, but jfc it can't be that difficult to write a few talking points and just hammer them into the body politic for a few weeks, e.g.:
--The job of the House of Representatives is to investigate allegations of misconduct that may be impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors. We're doing that right now through committee hearings and committees will then present their recommendations to the full House for a vote.
--The job of the Senate, if the House votes to impeach the President, is to hold a trial to decide whether the House's findings should result in removal of the President from office.
--We expect Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans to conduct the Senate trial seriously, and not to put their party's interests before the good of the country. Same goes for House Republicans, who as of today seem to care more about pizza parties than the rule of law.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:15 PM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
Democrats are doing so bad at explaining this process to the American people. I'm mildly unsurprised at this, but jfc it can't be that difficult to write a few talking points and just hammer them into the body politic for a few weeks, e.g.:
--The job of the House of Representatives is to investigate allegations of misconduct that may be impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors. We're doing that right now through committee hearings and committees will then present their recommendations to the full House for a vote.
--The job of the Senate, if the House votes to impeach the President, is to hold a trial to decide whether the House's findings should result in removal of the President from office.
--We expect Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans to conduct the Senate trial seriously, and not to put their party's interests before the good of the country. Same goes for House Republicans, who as of today seem to care more about pizza parties than the rule of law.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:15 PM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
The opening of a criminal investigation is likely to raise alarms that Mr. Trump is using the Justice Department to go after his perceived enemies."
This is exactly what is happening, for god's sake. It's reality, not perception. Just once I'd like to see some reporting from NYT that doesn't treat the abuse of our politics to the point of tyranny like a "zesty" game.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:16 PM on October 24, 2019 [25 favorites]
This is exactly what is happening, for god's sake. It's reality, not perception. Just once I'd like to see some reporting from NYT that doesn't treat the abuse of our politics to the point of tyranny like a "zesty" game.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:16 PM on October 24, 2019 [25 favorites]
NYT: Trump’s Connections to 2 Indicted Giuliani Associates: What We Know
"The criminal case against two associates of President Trump’s private lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, became explicitly connected to the president on Wednesday when a defense lawyer made a surprising argument that some of the evidence gathered in the investigation could be subject to executive privilege."
...
"The professional relationship between Mr. Parnas and Mr. Giuliani is at the heart of the suggestion that materials in the case might be protected by executive privilege, which is the president’s power to limit access to executive branch information about sensitive or confidential issues.
On Wednesday, Mr. Parnas’s lawyer noted Mr. Giuliani had been retained by Mr. Trump and Mr. Parnas at the same time.
That raised the possibility that the White House might invoke executive privilege to protect some of the voluminous evidence in the case, the lawyer, Edward B. MacMahon Jr., said."
...
"Earlier John M. Dowd, a lawyer representing Mr. Parnas and Mr. Fruman in the impeachment investigation, went even further, arguing that the two men had helped Mr. Giuliani on behalf of Mr. Trump, and so their work was covered by executive privilege."
posted by jocelmeow at 6:44 PM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
"The criminal case against two associates of President Trump’s private lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, became explicitly connected to the president on Wednesday when a defense lawyer made a surprising argument that some of the evidence gathered in the investigation could be subject to executive privilege."
...
"The professional relationship between Mr. Parnas and Mr. Giuliani is at the heart of the suggestion that materials in the case might be protected by executive privilege, which is the president’s power to limit access to executive branch information about sensitive or confidential issues.
On Wednesday, Mr. Parnas’s lawyer noted Mr. Giuliani had been retained by Mr. Trump and Mr. Parnas at the same time.
That raised the possibility that the White House might invoke executive privilege to protect some of the voluminous evidence in the case, the lawyer, Edward B. MacMahon Jr., said."
...
"Earlier John M. Dowd, a lawyer representing Mr. Parnas and Mr. Fruman in the impeachment investigation, went even further, arguing that the two men had helped Mr. Giuliani on behalf of Mr. Trump, and so their work was covered by executive privilege."
posted by jocelmeow at 6:44 PM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
NYT: Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation
I'm listening to this being discussed on Maddow right now and... I just...this sounds bad. This sounds to me even worse than asking Ukraine to manufacture dirt on Biden. This is directing our actual Justice Department to engage in the fabrication of evidence for a bullshit conspiracy theory. And one wants to think that this will all turn out ok in the end because the obviousness and desperation of the ploy... but this is the era of Fox News where half the country is willing to believe whatever Glorious Leader tells them, and doesn't understand how "evidence" works.
Even assuming it all falls apart as the joke it is, I feel like it seriously adds to the depth of the foul muck that needs to be aired out and cleaned up if we ever hope to get back to being a functioning country.
posted by dnash at 6:50 PM on October 24, 2019 [19 favorites]
I'm listening to this being discussed on Maddow right now and... I just...this sounds bad. This sounds to me even worse than asking Ukraine to manufacture dirt on Biden. This is directing our actual Justice Department to engage in the fabrication of evidence for a bullshit conspiracy theory. And one wants to think that this will all turn out ok in the end because the obviousness and desperation of the ploy... but this is the era of Fox News where half the country is willing to believe whatever Glorious Leader tells them, and doesn't understand how "evidence" works.
Even assuming it all falls apart as the joke it is, I feel like it seriously adds to the depth of the foul muck that needs to be aired out and cleaned up if we ever hope to get back to being a functioning country.
posted by dnash at 6:50 PM on October 24, 2019 [19 favorites]
Is it though? (Honest question.) My understanding per that NYT report is that the DOJ internal investigation into the roots of the Russia election interference inquiry is now becoming a criminal investigation. Obviously the original reason for this investigation is that Barr wanted to muddy the waters by providing information that the Trump regime can use to claim that they were persecuted by Obama. But is there a possibility that this investigation will actually demonstrate that there was no improper political interference, and maybe even reiterate some of the intelligence findings that led to the opening of the original Russia investigation?
The article notes that the head of this investigation is a pre-regime, career DOJ prosecutor, so we already know that he'll get the Muller treatment as soon as he publishes anything damaging to Trump. But I'm not sure that this is particularly worse (or different, even) to the Muller investigation and report. I'm basing this solely on my reading of the NYT article, though, so maybe I'm missing the fuller context.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:22 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
The article notes that the head of this investigation is a pre-regime, career DOJ prosecutor, so we already know that he'll get the Muller treatment as soon as he publishes anything damaging to Trump. But I'm not sure that this is particularly worse (or different, even) to the Muller investigation and report. I'm basing this solely on my reading of the NYT article, though, so maybe I'm missing the fuller context.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:22 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
But is there a possibility that this investigation will actually demonstrate that there was no improper political interference, and maybe even reiterate some of the intelligence findings that led to the opening of the original Russia investigation?
Short answer: No.
Longer answer: This will be framed according to the Inverse Culpability Scale:
* All parking tickets received by Democrats are actually felonies that must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and JAIL FOR ONE THOUSAND YEARS.
* All felonies committed by Republicans are actually parking tickets that it would be ridiculous to do anything about, if they are not in fact heroic acts worthy of commendation.
The conservative technique will be to review the results, discover even the slightest ethical lapse or technicality, and use that to PROVE that the entire enterprise was HORRIBLY CORRUPT and A CONSPIRACY FROM THE VERY BEGINNING in the eyes and ears of their faithful. And a probe of this scope into an investigation of these types of activities will produce _something_, however humble it may well be, that will feed these rotary howling machines that generate Fox News headlines.
posted by delfin at 7:36 PM on October 24, 2019 [17 favorites]
Short answer: No.
Longer answer: This will be framed according to the Inverse Culpability Scale:
* All parking tickets received by Democrats are actually felonies that must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and JAIL FOR ONE THOUSAND YEARS.
* All felonies committed by Republicans are actually parking tickets that it would be ridiculous to do anything about, if they are not in fact heroic acts worthy of commendation.
The conservative technique will be to review the results, discover even the slightest ethical lapse or technicality, and use that to PROVE that the entire enterprise was HORRIBLY CORRUPT and A CONSPIRACY FROM THE VERY BEGINNING in the eyes and ears of their faithful. And a probe of this scope into an investigation of these types of activities will produce _something_, however humble it may well be, that will feed these rotary howling machines that generate Fox News headlines.
posted by delfin at 7:36 PM on October 24, 2019 [17 favorites]
...If you've got ideas for how we get these assholes into jail cells where they belong faster than what the Democrats are doing will, without provoking the magahats to actually start the armed rebellion they keep talking about...
and right there, right exactly there, is one of the fatal flaws of the whole framing of this clusterfuck:
Preemptively constraining the enforcement of the rule of law in the service of quelling hypothetical violence from right-wing extremists.
I don't direct this at you personally, but that is just garbage. For one, there's simply no way to game out what politcal optics will provoke right wing terrorism. They aren't processing "our" message and reacting. They are processing whatever Fox puts out, which is always going to be DEMS EVIL REPUBS GOOD regardless of what actions we take.
Also, this hypothetical violence from right wing extremists is ALREADY HAPPENING.
When I said before that it is "past time to stop basing law enforcement decisions on a gamed-out theory of political optics", this is a prime example. We can't control right wing terrorists, and they are already murdering us anyway. So yes, we need to do more. And yes, we need to do better. And no, we aren't doing that right now.
posted by lazaruslong at 7:45 PM on October 24, 2019 [26 favorites]
and right there, right exactly there, is one of the fatal flaws of the whole framing of this clusterfuck:
Preemptively constraining the enforcement of the rule of law in the service of quelling hypothetical violence from right-wing extremists.
I don't direct this at you personally, but that is just garbage. For one, there's simply no way to game out what politcal optics will provoke right wing terrorism. They aren't processing "our" message and reacting. They are processing whatever Fox puts out, which is always going to be DEMS EVIL REPUBS GOOD regardless of what actions we take.
Also, this hypothetical violence from right wing extremists is ALREADY HAPPENING.
When I said before that it is "past time to stop basing law enforcement decisions on a gamed-out theory of political optics", this is a prime example. We can't control right wing terrorists, and they are already murdering us anyway. So yes, we need to do more. And yes, we need to do better. And no, we aren't doing that right now.
posted by lazaruslong at 7:45 PM on October 24, 2019 [26 favorites]
"Earlier John M. Dowd, a lawyer representing Mr. Parnas and Mr. Fruman in the impeachment investigation, went even further, arguing that the two men had helped Mr. Giuliani on behalf of Mr. Trump, and so their work was covered by executive privilege."
Note that John Dowd is the same guy who was Trump's personal White House attorney last year, so he would be in a position to know whether his clients and Guiliani were working for Trump.
posted by JackFlash at 7:46 PM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
Note that John Dowd is the same guy who was Trump's personal White House attorney last year, so he would be in a position to know whether his clients and Guiliani were working for Trump.
posted by JackFlash at 7:46 PM on October 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
Justice department opens criminal inquiry into origins of Russia investigation – source (Guardian)
Democrats and some former law enforcement officials say Barr is using the justice department to chase unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that could benefit the Republican president politically and undermine the former special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.Trump’s quest for vengeance against John Brennan (Politico, Oct 22, 2019)
The emerging focus of the Barr-Durham investigation — the CIA and intelligence community’s work with the FBI on the Russia probe — emphasizes the increasingly blurred lines between politics and law enforcement in the Trump era. In May, Trump gave Barr unprecedented authority to review the intelligence community’s “surveillance activities” during the 2016 election, issuing a sweeping declassification order that granted Barr “unprecedented” powers over the nation’s secrets, former officials said.Barr personally asked foreign officials to aid inquiry into CIA, FBI activities in 2016 (WaPo, Sept 30, 2019)
It was a break with protocol that Trump’s allies see as a necessary check on the so-called “deep state” but that critics have lambasted as an attempt to create the impression of scandal—especially given Barr’s comments earlier this year hinting at a predisposed belief that inappropriate “spying” occurred in 2016 and that the Steele dossier may have been Russian disinformation.
The direct involvement of the nation’s top law enforcement official shows the priority Barr places on the investigation being conducted by John Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, who has been assigned the sensitive task of reviewing U.S. intelligence work surrounding the 2016 election and its aftermath. [...] Current and former intelligence and law enforcement officials expressed frustration and alarm Monday that the head of the Justice Department was taking such a direct role in reexamining what they view as conspiracy theories and baseless allegations of misconduct.posted by katra at 7:52 PM on October 24, 2019
NYT: Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation
This is a legal maneuver which gives the investigator subpoena power. I'm guessing there are a lot of pissed off intelligence community people who have told the investigator thus far to go piss up a rope. The investigator wants to compel their testimony, so Barr escalated the investigation to a criminal inquiry to be able to issue subpoenas.
posted by JackFlash at 7:53 PM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
This is a legal maneuver which gives the investigator subpoena power. I'm guessing there are a lot of pissed off intelligence community people who have told the investigator thus far to go piss up a rope. The investigator wants to compel their testimony, so Barr escalated the investigation to a criminal inquiry to be able to issue subpoenas.
posted by JackFlash at 7:53 PM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation
Also funny after all the administration and his supporters were always complaining about how the Mueller probe was so awful in wasting taxpayer money to keep revisiting the 2016 election. Now that Mueller's work is finally totally done and the attorney general says it "exonerates" DJT, they want to go back and revisit it even more.
posted by p3t3 at 7:53 PM on October 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
Also funny after all the administration and his supporters were always complaining about how the Mueller probe was so awful in wasting taxpayer money to keep revisiting the 2016 election. Now that Mueller's work is finally totally done and the attorney general says it "exonerates" DJT, they want to go back and revisit it even more.
posted by p3t3 at 7:53 PM on October 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
Also, this hypothetical violence from right wing extremists is ALREADY HAPPENING.
I don't mean terrorism, which, yes, is happening. I mean warfare, which I believe could happen.
posted by biogeo at 8:14 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
I don't mean terrorism, which, yes, is happening. I mean warfare, which I believe could happen.
posted by biogeo at 8:14 PM on October 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
Democrats say whistleblower’s testimony is unnecessary as other witnesses come forward (WaPo)
The House’s impeachment investigation has been moving at a breakneck pace since Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) launched the probe on Sept. 24. Now, Democrats are moving into the phase where they are hoping to corroborate much of the testimony they have already heard with information from other witnesses who were involved in Ukraine policy.posted by katra at 8:24 PM on October 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
The panel on Wednesday heard from deputy assistant secretary of defense Laura Cooper, who gave a largely technical accounting of the American military aid program for Ukraine, according to people familiar with the testimony. Cooper offered details that helped to round out the timeline of when various people became aware that the Trump administration had frozen the funds, said the individuals, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak frankly. While Cooper did not testify to personal knowledge of a quid pro quo, people familiar said, her testimony was in keeping with Taylor’s account.
On Saturday, the panel will interview acting assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs Philip Reeker, who, according to Taylor’s testimony, was involved in early efforts to secure a meeting between Trump and Zelensky. [...] Two top aides to former national security adviser John Bolton, whom former deputies have described as infuriated that Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney were running a side operation on Ukraine policy, are also expected to testify in the impeachment probe next week, potentially laying the groundwork for an eventual interview with Bolton himself. [...] former deputy assistant to the president for national security affairs Charles Kupperman, who is expected to appear in closed session on Monday [...] could also reveal details about the July 25 call between Trump and Zelensky, as he was one of the officials listening in on it — and is likely to field questions from lawmakers as to whether there was an effort, as Democrats have alleged, to “cover up” the call by moving it to a more-secure server.
The National Security Council’s current senior director for Europe and Russia, Timothy Morrison, whom Bolton also brought into the National Security Council, is expected to testify next Thursday. Morrison is the person who told Taylor that the Trump administration had directly informed Ukraine “that the security assistance money would not come until President Zelenskyy committed to pursue the Burisma investigation,” according to Taylor’s opening statement to investigators [...]
Democrats say whistleblower’s testimony is unnecessary as other witnesses come forward
This makes sense and it serves to protect the whistleblower. Most of their information was second hand, so nothing much to be gained by having the whistleblower testify.
But the whistleblower already did their job. They provided a roadmap outlining the criminal activity and identified the specific people the committee needs to interview to provide direct evidence.
posted by JackFlash at 8:36 PM on October 24, 2019 [22 favorites]
This makes sense and it serves to protect the whistleblower. Most of their information was second hand, so nothing much to be gained by having the whistleblower testify.
But the whistleblower already did their job. They provided a roadmap outlining the criminal activity and identified the specific people the committee needs to interview to provide direct evidence.
posted by JackFlash at 8:36 PM on October 24, 2019 [22 favorites]
No, Trump couldn’t shoot someone without being investigated for it (Neal Katyal and Joshua A. Geltzer, WaPo Perspective)
One way to think about the constraints on presidential wrongdoing is using the three I’s: investigation, indictment and impeachment. Any constitutional scholar who thinks one is not available, like indictment, argues to increase the power of the other two to make up for the distortion. So scholars who believe a sitting president cannot be indicted couple that view to a belief that investigation and impeachment must be readily available. And vice versa. No serious person contends that all three are not available.posted by katra at 8:54 PM on October 24, 2019 [19 favorites]
That is why Trump keeps losing court cases, including one earlier this month in a major rebuke handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. But Trump’s argument this week took things to another level. [...] One of the judges hearing the case, testing just how far Trump’s claim of presidential immunity from investigation reached, asked whether, if Trump really did shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue as he’d proposed hypothetically on the campaign trail in 2016, “local authorities couldn’t investigate.”
“That is correct,” Trump attorney William Consovoy replied.
That is actually not correct — not by the Justice Department’s own logic, which has been the underlying rationale for many of Trump’s claims of immunity up to now. It’s true that the Justice Department continues to take the position that a sitting president can’t be criminally prosecuted or even indicted, based largely on the notion that the Constitution provides a different remedy for scrutinizing a president while in office: impeachment. But the department’s opinion on this issue doesn’t say that a president can’t be investigated. Indeed, it says precisely the opposite, explicitly recognizing that a “grand jury could continue to gather evidence during the period of immunity” a sitting president enjoys, “even passing this task down to subsequently empaneled grand juries if necessary.” That’s critical, the opinion says, for “securing and preserving evidence” — thus laying the groundwork for charging and prosecuting a president after he or she has left office. [...]
Ultimately, Trump was in court this week to defend a single premise: Donald Trump is above the law — not just as president but as a person and a businessman. [...] That’s a plausible position for a king (though even for monarchs, it has been out of fashion for several centuries). But it’s an outrageous one for a president. It’s in direct conflict with the views of the president’s own Justice Department and White House counsel. And it should be rejected in court — swiftly — to ensure that, in the United States, no one is above the law.
I don't think I'm communicating my position successfully, so I'm going to try one more time and then drop it. I believe we're worried about the same things, in particular the rise of fascism. I believe we want the same things, which is to see the would-be fascists safely in jail or at least permanently away from the levers of power, as quickly as possible. However, I also believe that while the number of actual, outright fascists in America is still relatively small, the 40% of people who have maintained support for the Trumpists throughout all of this represent a pool of potential fascists who could be converted given the right circumstances. They could also be converted back to comparatively normal right-wingers if the fascists are beaten: still dangerous, but not at imminent risk of toppling the republic to install a dictator. I honestly believe we are on a knife edge, and if the Democrats play this wrong, including by trying to push too quickly without enough ground work, there may soon be a fascist government led by someone more competent than Trump. In this environment, politics and optics aren't just about playing a game to win votes, it is quite literally about preventing enough of a shift in public opinion that fascism becomes possible.
Maybe I'm wrong that it is possible to convert the Fox News audience to full-blown fascism by giving them martyrs. Maybe the Democratic leadership is wrong for approaching the impeachment proceedings cautiously and using the strategy that worked with Watergate. But I hope to communicate that just because some of us believe in strategies that may not be as quick as we'd like, doesn't mean we lack a sense of urgency. It just means that we think that if we try to rush this we'll lose.
So forgive me if I'm not the most patient person with the Democrats these days.
I just want to emphasize as well, I don't begrudge you your impatience. I really do understand it: people are dying, and others' lives are being destroyed. I'm angry and frightened too; I think we all are.
posted by biogeo at 9:27 PM on October 24, 2019 [16 favorites]
Maybe I'm wrong that it is possible to convert the Fox News audience to full-blown fascism by giving them martyrs. Maybe the Democratic leadership is wrong for approaching the impeachment proceedings cautiously and using the strategy that worked with Watergate. But I hope to communicate that just because some of us believe in strategies that may not be as quick as we'd like, doesn't mean we lack a sense of urgency. It just means that we think that if we try to rush this we'll lose.
So forgive me if I'm not the most patient person with the Democrats these days.
I just want to emphasize as well, I don't begrudge you your impatience. I really do understand it: people are dying, and others' lives are being destroyed. I'm angry and frightened too; I think we all are.
posted by biogeo at 9:27 PM on October 24, 2019 [16 favorites]
Republicans grow nervous as each of Trump’s defenses are repeatedly reduced to rubble (Martin Longman, Alternet)
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:47 PM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
Trump really had two options. He could admit what he did and the reasons he did it and say that it was no different from what the Democrats did to him in 2016 and are intent on doing in 2020. This wouldn’t be true and the Senate might not go along, but the parameters would be clear and he’d have a decent shot at acquittal.Emphasis mine.
Or, he could admit what he did and apologize and ask for mercy, arguing that he went too far and understands his error and the voters should be the ones to pass a verdict. This is still an option, but one that becomes less viable with every passing day—and tweet.
I think he’s made a mistake to deny the substance of what he did and to force many Republicans to go out on a limb for him with throwaway defenses. He’s essentially admitted over and over again that if what people have accused him of were true, it would merit removal from office. And the charges are true.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:47 PM on October 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
No, Trump couldn’t shoot someone without being investigated for it
This is what's known as a solved problem. President Ulysses S. Grant was arrested in 1872 for speeding in his carriage. Sitting presidents can be arrested.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:31 PM on October 24, 2019 [30 favorites]
This is what's known as a solved problem. President Ulysses S. Grant was arrested in 1872 for speeding in his carriage. Sitting presidents can be arrested.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:31 PM on October 24, 2019 [30 favorites]
the two men had helped Mr. Giuliani on behalf of Mr. Trump, and so their work was covered by executive privilege
guiliani? i think i have heard repeatedly that mr. guiliani is -- is it the president's personal attorney. yes. that's right, the president's personal attorney -- that mr. guiliani is the president's personal attorney. is that right? is mr. guiliani the president's personal attorney? his personal attorney? yes, i think that is what i have heard. not the attorney general, not the white house counsel, not to solicitor general, no cabinet member, nor executive agency staff, no associate of the various firms representing him, his companies, and, yes, his office, sort of, here and there. not those: the president's personal attorney. representing the person in his personal capacity as appropriate pursuant to personal matters, like a person's personal attorney does.
it is outrageous that shady employees of the president's personal lawyer should claim their work for that personal lawyer's efforts for the person who is president is protected by the privilege the article ii executive office sometimes may enjoy. it is scandalous that dowd should assert it in a courtroom, that rudy and spokespersons of the president have not disavowed the claim. or should be.
hope that shit gets kicked to the curb pronto. or blows up/erodes all the other invocations of privilege. at a cursory scan, i don't see a whole lot of executive privilege cases involving parties that aren't the government. pretty confident a court will skewer that claim and laugh it out the door.
of course, that rudy & hench co-conspirators were, evidently, doing some sort of back-channel foreign policy chicanery might undermine this, provided there is some way such chicanery could be deemed a legitimate function of the executive.
posted by 20 year lurk at 10:35 PM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
guiliani? i think i have heard repeatedly that mr. guiliani is -- is it the president's personal attorney. yes. that's right, the president's personal attorney -- that mr. guiliani is the president's personal attorney. is that right? is mr. guiliani the president's personal attorney? his personal attorney? yes, i think that is what i have heard. not the attorney general, not the white house counsel, not to solicitor general, no cabinet member, nor executive agency staff, no associate of the various firms representing him, his companies, and, yes, his office, sort of, here and there. not those: the president's personal attorney. representing the person in his personal capacity as appropriate pursuant to personal matters, like a person's personal attorney does.
it is outrageous that shady employees of the president's personal lawyer should claim their work for that personal lawyer's efforts for the person who is president is protected by the privilege the article ii executive office sometimes may enjoy. it is scandalous that dowd should assert it in a courtroom, that rudy and spokespersons of the president have not disavowed the claim. or should be.
hope that shit gets kicked to the curb pronto. or blows up/erodes all the other invocations of privilege. at a cursory scan, i don't see a whole lot of executive privilege cases involving parties that aren't the government. pretty confident a court will skewer that claim and laugh it out the door.
of course, that rudy & hench co-conspirators were, evidently, doing some sort of back-channel foreign policy chicanery might undermine this, provided there is some way such chicanery could be deemed a legitimate function of the executive.
posted by 20 year lurk at 10:35 PM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
In the eye rolling, how-childish-can-you-get department, WH Will Order Federal Agencies To Cancel Their NYT, WaPo Subscriptions, TPM, Cristina Cabrera, October 24, 2019:
posted by cenoxo at 11:27 PM on October 24, 2019 [11 favorites]
Federal agencies are about to hit paywalls.I wonder if this also means blocking workplace access to their websites? Can't have federal employees reading subversive rags on office computers during lunch time, dontcha know.
The White House confirmed to TPM on Thursday that it will order federal agencies to terminate their subscriptions to the New York Times and the Washington Post, after President Trump said he was doing away with the papers at 1700 Pennsylvania Ave.
Press secretary Stephanie Grisham touted the decision as a cost-cutting measure. “Not renewing subscriptions across all federal agencies will be a significant cost saving for taxpayers – hundreds of thousands of dollars,” she said in a statement.
The move was first reported by the Wall Street Journal. Spokespeople for the Times and the Post told TPM they did not have a comment.
Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity earlier this week that he plans to cancel the White House’s subscriptions to the two major newspapers. “They’re fake,” Trump complained. However, the President did not say at the time that the ban would extend to all federal agencies.
posted by cenoxo at 11:27 PM on October 24, 2019 [11 favorites]
half the country...doesn't understand how "evidence" works.
Oh, they understand it. They're simply willing to set evidence aside to win. Rs are the New England Patriots of governance. And I *hate* sports metaphors.
posted by j_curiouser at 11:37 PM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
Oh, they understand it. They're simply willing to set evidence aside to win. Rs are the New England Patriots of governance. And I *hate* sports metaphors.
posted by j_curiouser at 11:37 PM on October 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
The White House confirmed to TPM on Thursday that it will order federal agencies to terminate their subscriptions to the New York Times and the Washington Post, after President Trump said he was doing away with the papers at 1700 Pennsylvania Ave.
Apart from being childish, it's also stupid. If you don't know what your opponents are doing and saying, you can't prepare a defence. But, I know, they've already decided that their strategy is to scream louder. Like a 3 year old in a supermarket.
(When witnessing a screaming 3 year old in a supermarket, I always want to go and tell the parent that they mustn't give in, and that they are doing the right thing. It's horrible while it lasts, but the reward is enduring)
posted by mumimor at 1:47 AM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
Apart from being childish, it's also stupid. If you don't know what your opponents are doing and saying, you can't prepare a defence. But, I know, they've already decided that their strategy is to scream louder. Like a 3 year old in a supermarket.
(When witnessing a screaming 3 year old in a supermarket, I always want to go and tell the parent that they mustn't give in, and that they are doing the right thing. It's horrible while it lasts, but the reward is enduring)
posted by mumimor at 1:47 AM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
Apart from being childish, it's also stupid.
My understanding is these subscriptions are free for government employees. Can you imagine the hissy fit Republicans would have if they were told Fox News was banned for government employees?
posted by xammerboy at 2:58 AM on October 25, 2019 [13 favorites]
My understanding is these subscriptions are free for government employees. Can you imagine the hissy fit Republicans would have if they were told Fox News was banned for government employees?
posted by xammerboy at 2:58 AM on October 25, 2019 [13 favorites]
There’s a good summary of the Barr investigation of the Mueller investigation of the Russia investigation at Mueller report: Criminal probe into Russia inquiry begins, BBC News, October 25, 2019:
posted by cenoxo at 6:03 AM on October 25, 2019 [7 favorites]
Why is the Mueller report being investigated?And then, who will investigate the Barr investigation? I can’t tell if this is ping pong, racquetball, or lawn tennis.
The administrative review of the Mueller investigation began in May. It is being overseen by the US Attorney-General William Barr and is run by US federal prosecutor John Durham.
Mr Durham was tasked with determining whether the collection of intelligence on the Trump campaign in 2016 was lawful. He is widely respected and known for investigating links between FBI agents and organised crime, and investigating the destruction of CIA interrogation videos.
Last April, Mr Barr told members of Congress that he believed "spying did occur" on the Trump campaign in 2016, adding: "The question is whether it was adequately predicated. And I'm not suggesting that it wasn't adequately predicated. But I need to explore that."
Critics accused Mr Barr of launching an administrative review more in the interests of the president than the interests of justice.
posted by cenoxo at 6:03 AM on October 25, 2019 [7 favorites]
From upthread a ways, but:
Democrats are doing so bad at explaining this process to the American people. I'm mildly unsurprised at this, but jfc it can't be that difficult to write a few talking points and just hammer them into the body politic for a few weeks
THIS. THIS is what baffles me. If there's one thing we've got more of than at any other point in human history, it's 1) Channels to disseminate messaging far and wide, 2) Smart people to craft those messages, and 3) People with the money to pay for it all. I mean, OK, no frogmarches for those craven fuckers the other day, but could somebody on the Hill at least recognize and grasp the opportunity this affords our side? And no, I'm not talking about Chuck and Nancy wheezing from a podium, ffs.
TL;DR: The only thing worse than living in a soundbite society is not creating your own soundbites.
posted by Rykey at 7:11 AM on October 25, 2019 [22 favorites]
Democrats are doing so bad at explaining this process to the American people. I'm mildly unsurprised at this, but jfc it can't be that difficult to write a few talking points and just hammer them into the body politic for a few weeks
THIS. THIS is what baffles me. If there's one thing we've got more of than at any other point in human history, it's 1) Channels to disseminate messaging far and wide, 2) Smart people to craft those messages, and 3) People with the money to pay for it all. I mean, OK, no frogmarches for those craven fuckers the other day, but could somebody on the Hill at least recognize and grasp the opportunity this affords our side? And no, I'm not talking about Chuck and Nancy wheezing from a podium, ffs.
TL;DR: The only thing worse than living in a soundbite society is not creating your own soundbites.
posted by Rykey at 7:11 AM on October 25, 2019 [22 favorites]
Not renewing subscriptions across all federal agencies will be a significant cost saving for taxpayers – hundreds of thousands of dollars
Ooh, is that a lot? How much would not building the fucking wall save?
posted by kirkaracha at 7:24 AM on October 25, 2019 [21 favorites]
Ooh, is that a lot? How much would not building the fucking wall save?
posted by kirkaracha at 7:24 AM on October 25, 2019 [21 favorites]
The Democratic Party seems also, along with the media, to have been suckered by modern movement conservatism's decades-long "liberal media" propaganda campaign.
For the media's part, the refs have been thoroughly worked, and they will bend over backward to give conservatives the benefit of the doubt -- perhaps in the name of "balance" -- even when they deserve none. This phony balance includes uncritical acceptance of Republican talking points -- such as quoting Mitch McConnel's frequent and false slanders of the Democrats -- or at least amplifying Republican talking points even if they're counterbalanced with the truth. It includes holding Democrats to standards it doesn't even pretend to apply to Republicans -- for example, John Edwards abandoned his campaign for the Democratic nomination when it was revealed he had an affair when Republicans from Trump on down display no shame at all; for another, only Democrats are ever asked how they'll pay for their policy preferences, such as Elizabeth Warren's universal health care proposals, whereas Republican claims that tax cuts pay for themselves are barely challenged if at all despite having been proved false again and again.
But worse, the Democrats seem to believe they can count on the media to play fair and to fulfill its role in educating the American public. I agree that this approach is dangerously naive, and often makes the Democrats more lazy and reactive about crafting and pushing their message. Of course, if the Democrats point out the objectively true facts that Trump is a crook, that almost every Republican backs him out of cowardice or lack of conscience, and that their policies are unpopular and don't work, and that Republicans routinely lie about just about everything because the facts are never on their side, the media will accuse them of "excessive partisanship" an "polarization," so I can see their dilemma. But that dilemma doesn't excuse the Democrats' lack of cynicism about the media, which has created an asymmetrical advantage for the Republicans.
posted by Gelatin at 7:34 AM on October 25, 2019 [11 favorites]
For the media's part, the refs have been thoroughly worked, and they will bend over backward to give conservatives the benefit of the doubt -- perhaps in the name of "balance" -- even when they deserve none. This phony balance includes uncritical acceptance of Republican talking points -- such as quoting Mitch McConnel's frequent and false slanders of the Democrats -- or at least amplifying Republican talking points even if they're counterbalanced with the truth. It includes holding Democrats to standards it doesn't even pretend to apply to Republicans -- for example, John Edwards abandoned his campaign for the Democratic nomination when it was revealed he had an affair when Republicans from Trump on down display no shame at all; for another, only Democrats are ever asked how they'll pay for their policy preferences, such as Elizabeth Warren's universal health care proposals, whereas Republican claims that tax cuts pay for themselves are barely challenged if at all despite having been proved false again and again.
But worse, the Democrats seem to believe they can count on the media to play fair and to fulfill its role in educating the American public. I agree that this approach is dangerously naive, and often makes the Democrats more lazy and reactive about crafting and pushing their message. Of course, if the Democrats point out the objectively true facts that Trump is a crook, that almost every Republican backs him out of cowardice or lack of conscience, and that their policies are unpopular and don't work, and that Republicans routinely lie about just about everything because the facts are never on their side, the media will accuse them of "excessive partisanship" an "polarization," so I can see their dilemma. But that dilemma doesn't excuse the Democrats' lack of cynicism about the media, which has created an asymmetrical advantage for the Republicans.
posted by Gelatin at 7:34 AM on October 25, 2019 [11 favorites]
Trump should be very worried about Senate Republicans (Jennifer Rubin, WaPo Opinion)
No senator is saying openly that the president’s conduct is not impeachable. No senator is saying the witnesses lack credibility. No senator is saying it is perfectly appropriate for the president to use his powers to aid his campaign effort. There is a reason for that stunning silence: There is every reason to view this conduct as unprecedented, impeachable and amply provable through multiple witnesses and documents.posted by katra at 7:52 AM on October 25, 2019 [3 favorites]
The “unfairness” excuse to attack the House is also of very limited duration. Next month, the House case will be put on in public. What excuse will Republicans use then?
Even the unctuous Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) could not actually include a condemnation of the House in his worthless resolution. It was more like a request for the House to be more transparent. Apparently, anything stronger was not going to keep Republicans together. [...]
Graham delivered another elbow to Trump’s ribs by declaring, “I’m not here to tell you that Donald Trump’s done nothing wrong.” With groveling sycophants like Graham, who needs enemies?
Guardian: Bolton reportedly in talks to speak to impeachment investigators
John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, is reportedly in talks to sit for a deposition with the House committees investigating impeachment.posted by katra at 7:57 AM on October 25, 2019 [19 favorites]
So, per current reporting, Graham's toothless resolution complaining about House procedures for witness depositions has 44 supporters. That's six fewer than voted to confirm Justin Walker, a 37-year-old law professor who's never tried a case as an attorney and was rated "not qualified" by the ABA, to a lifetime seat as a federal district judge. If the process whinge can't even reach that threshold, then I think Rubin may be on to something.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:02 AM on October 25, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:02 AM on October 25, 2019 [15 favorites]
Giuliani probe snowballs (Politico)
The scrutiny isn’t coming just from the previously known probes by FBI agents and the U.S. attorney’s office based out of Manhattan, according to two people familiar with the investigation. The criminal division of the Justice Department in Washington has taken an interest in the former New York mayor, too, meaning an expansion of resources that indicates the politically sensitive probe into the president’s personal attorney is both broader and moving at a faster pace than previously understood. [...]posted by katra at 8:25 AM on October 25, 2019 [3 favorites]
Giuliani’s troubles aren’t just his alone. He has turned members of the Trump team he’s worked with over the past 18 months into potential witnesses for federal prosecutors, who are trying to unravel the tangled relationships he brought to the mix in advising the president while still juggling an international consulting business that promised proximity to the White House.
“He appears to be a subject, if not a target of an active investigation. So to have him be a part of the legal team would be troublesome to say the least,” said Greg Brower, who served as the FBI’s top liaison to Congress until 2018. “At best, it’s a messy situation and more likely it’s just completely dysfunctional.” [...]
Additional attention to these issues has come from DOJ headquarters, which in August was tasked with examining Trump’s phone call asking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to dig up dirt on the American leader’s political rivals. A statement released by DOJ spokeswoman Kerri Kupec in late September said the department’s criminal division reviewed the official record of the call “and determined, based on the facts and applicable law, that there was no campaign finance violation and that no further action was warranted.” [...] A senior Justice Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity said Kupec’s Sept. 25 statement was limited to the campaign finance issue raised by a referral from the Intelligence Community Inspector General and was not intended to rule in or out the possibility of Justice officials examining any other legal issues related to the Trump-Zelensky call, if warranted.
Bolton testifying strikes me as the event that will be remembered as the point Trump's removal from office moved from some hypothetical "talk behind closed doors" to something that could actually happen. He's been in GOP circles long enough to have credibility, was a Trump appointee (so he's not some "deep state" career civil servant), and knows the foreign policy space well enough that he knows where the grey areas are. As many have said, if Bolton thinks it's wrong, it must be something pretty cleanly in the "I'll go to jail for this" space.
With those bona fides, it will be hard for all but the hard core MAGA heads to make a case that Trump shouldn't be removed from office.
Regarding MAGA Heads: I'm still amazed the whole country is basically held hostage by those folks. The GOP has manipulated the election machinery in enough states that they'll likely win regardless of the candidate, so the only risk to an incumbent is being primaried from the right. The moderates wouldn't vote for a democrat to save their life. So, they keep pushing rightward. They claim to be patriots, but selling out the country to foreign powers is preferable to having a Democrat in office. They love this country so much they will start a civil war if Trump is removed through a constitutional practice that would, by definition, require bipartisan action.
posted by MrGuilt at 8:28 AM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
With those bona fides, it will be hard for all but the hard core MAGA heads to make a case that Trump shouldn't be removed from office.
Regarding MAGA Heads: I'm still amazed the whole country is basically held hostage by those folks. The GOP has manipulated the election machinery in enough states that they'll likely win regardless of the candidate, so the only risk to an incumbent is being primaried from the right. The moderates wouldn't vote for a democrat to save their life. So, they keep pushing rightward. They claim to be patriots, but selling out the country to foreign powers is preferable to having a Democrat in office. They love this country so much they will start a civil war if Trump is removed through a constitutional practice that would, by definition, require bipartisan action.
posted by MrGuilt at 8:28 AM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
And then, who will investigate the Barr investigation? I can’t tell if this is ping pong, racquetball, or lawn tennis.
We're in jai alai territory now.
posted by jquinby at 8:37 AM on October 25, 2019 [18 favorites]
We're in jai alai territory now.
posted by jquinby at 8:37 AM on October 25, 2019 [18 favorites]
NSC official plans to testify in impeachment probe even if White House tries to block him (Politico)
Tim Morrison, a National Security Council official who has been identified as a witness to one of the most explosive pieces of evidence unearthed by House impeachment investigators, plans to testify Thursday even if the White House attempts to block him.posted by katra at 8:41 AM on October 25, 2019 [12 favorites]
“If subpoenaed, Mr. Morrison plans to appear for his deposition,” his attorney, Barbara Van Gelder, said. [...] Morrison, however, would be the first currently serving White House official to testify. He’s also the first official believed to be on a July 25 phone call between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during which Trump pressed his counterpart to investigate former vice president Joe Biden.
Morrison was also a crucial figure identified Tuesday by Trump’s ambassador to Ukraine, William Taylor, as a witness to Trump’s effort to withhold military aid from Ukraine in order to bend Zelensky to his will.
Guardian: Democrats slam reported investigation of Russia inquiry
News broke last night that the Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into its own Russia investigation, which Donald Trump spent more than two years criticizing as a “witch-hunt”. [...]WaPo: 10:45 a.m.: Inspectors general take issue with Justice Department opinion
Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler, the Democratic chairmen of the House intelligence and judiciary committees, issued a statement last night warning that the reported criminal investigation could signal the Justice Department has become “a tool of political retribution”. Schiff and Nadler said: “These reports, if true, raise profound new concerns that the Department of Justice under AG Barr has lost its independence and become a vehicle for President Trump’s political revenge.
“If the Department of Justice may be used as a tool of political retribution, or to help the President with a political narrative for the next election, the rule of law will suffer new and irreparable damage.”
The group representing government inspectors general said in a letter released Friday that the intelligence community whistleblower’s complaint about Trump’s phone call with his Ukrainian counterpart should have been turned over to Congress, and the Justice Department was wrong to block it. [...] Signed by dozens of inspectors general from an eclectic mix of government agencies, it asks Steven A. Engel, who heads the Office of Legal Counsel, to withdraw or modify the opinion. [...] The letter is likely to fuel allegations that the Justice Department sought to bury the complaint on specious legal grounds to protect the president.posted by katra at 8:50 AM on October 25, 2019 [13 favorites]
So, per current reporting, Graham's toothless resolution complaining about House procedures for witness depositions has 44 supporters.
That was down to 40 by the time the Today show aired on the West Coast (10 a.m. Eastern).
posted by kirkaracha at 9:09 AM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
That was down to 40 by the time the Today show aired on the West Coast (10 a.m. Eastern).
posted by kirkaracha at 9:09 AM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
You could send something like this to your R cps/sens. Even makes sense for some Ds:
Gaetz et al did not 'barge in to a private meeting' as the media and Republican allies know.posted by j_curiouser at 9:10 AM on October 25, 2019 [21 favorites]
You and I both know they illegally breached a SCIF with cellphones. Broke national security law on camera. I've been working in [place redacted] in defense IT for 25 years. I know what the repurcussions are meant to be.
Your district is filled with defense IT, civilian govt, and military who work in SCIFs every day of their careers. Every single one of them would be arrested and lose their clearance and jobs if they did what Gaetz et al did.
You have a responsibility to your patriotic, hard-working, and law-abiding constituency:
- Make a criminal referral to the FBI for all of them.
- publicly denounce them as scofflaws and unpatriotic threats to our national security processes and infrastructure.
I guess alternatively, you could publicly advocate that every clearance holder in your district is free to violate their clearance guidelines and national security law in order to further the political fortunes of certain so-called Republicans.
Your continued silence will speak volumes.
The biggest reason that Republicans are going nuts: Trump's ability to block testimony is crumbling (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos)
[…] Because Trump’s wall of fear is crumbling. And it’s very, very hard to maintain a conspiracy when those who have been roped into it refuse to be silent.posted by ZeusHumms at 9:13 AM on October 25, 2019 [13 favorites]
The group representing government inspectors general
Yeah I'm not feeling the heat on this one.
posted by rhizome at 9:13 AM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
Yeah I'm not feeling the heat on this one.
posted by rhizome at 9:13 AM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
Because Trump’s wall of fear is crumbling. And it’s very, very hard to maintain a conspiracy when those who have been roped into it refuse to be silent.
Refusing to honor subpoenas is great for core members of the Trump crime cartel like Mulvaney, Barr, and Pompeo, but now you have folks like Bill Taylor stepping forward with testimony that they wanted no part of Trump's influence-peddling scheme, and Sondland, who was part of it but seems unwilling to take the fall for Trump.
(And indeed, who would? So it's reasonable to suppose that those who are participating in the stonewalling have nearly as much wrongdoing to cover up as Trump himself.)
posted by Gelatin at 9:22 AM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
Refusing to honor subpoenas is great for core members of the Trump crime cartel like Mulvaney, Barr, and Pompeo, but now you have folks like Bill Taylor stepping forward with testimony that they wanted no part of Trump's influence-peddling scheme, and Sondland, who was part of it but seems unwilling to take the fall for Trump.
(And indeed, who would? So it's reasonable to suppose that those who are participating in the stonewalling have nearly as much wrongdoing to cover up as Trump himself.)
posted by Gelatin at 9:22 AM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
(And indeed, who would? So it's reasonable to suppose that those who are participating in the stonewalling have nearly as much wrongdoing to cover up as Trump himself.)
The narrative that very many Republicans are compromised has never been more compelling. Pick at enough threads and sooner or later the whole tapestry unravels - and we've got a whole year to build up momentum before it's time for the October Surprisalooza.
posted by Devonian at 9:28 AM on October 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
The narrative that very many Republicans are compromised has never been more compelling. Pick at enough threads and sooner or later the whole tapestry unravels - and we've got a whole year to build up momentum before it's time for the October Surprisalooza.
posted by Devonian at 9:28 AM on October 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
Trump wages battle against impeachment with a barrage of provocations, contradictions and exhortations (WaPo)
Without the luxury of undivided attention, anyone who tried to follow the bouncing ball of Trump’s hourly utterances and tweets was doomed to fail, and there is no relief on the horizon. Simply tracking the provocations, contradictions and exhortations that fill the average day of this president can be an overwhelming task.posted by katra at 9:31 AM on October 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
But it has also become an increasingly consequential one as the impeachment case against Trump unfolds and his foreign policy decisions come under greater scrutiny both in the United States and abroad. [...] The resulting controversies have only amped up Trump’s response. Over a sample of seven days between Oct. 14 and 20, he sent a blur of 206 tweets and spent hours talking in front of news cameras, always seeking to monopolize attention, for good or ill. The defense of his actions is dependent less on the merit of his words than the sheer number of them. He dazzles and misdirects, prods and pokes, changes topics midsentence, and frequently offers claims that are on their face so bizarre that they demand repetition by the media, if only to be discounted.
“When you are in a fight, there are only two ways to win: You can bring your opponent to submission or you can break their will to fight,” said Steve Schmidt, a Trump critic who managed Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. “There is no doubt that the effect of the great Trump fog machine is a type of exhaustion that has disengaged millions of Americans from politics.” [...]
For his part, Trump seems quite clear about the effect he hopes to have on the overwhelmed American public. He shared a video three times over the weekend that asked Americans to just turn off the news.
“This is just noise. Tune it out,” advised a Fox News pundit in the clip. “You know how you feel.”
Bolton testifying strikes me as the event that will be remembered as the point Trump's removal from office moved from some hypothetical "talk behind closed doors" to something that could actually happen.
Do not trust Bolton. And please, no "enemy of my enemy" stuff.
Bolton is a sociopathic snake and he will turn around and bite you hard.
posted by JackFlash at 9:31 AM on October 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
Do not trust Bolton. And please, no "enemy of my enemy" stuff.
Bolton is a sociopathic snake and he will turn around and bite you hard.
posted by JackFlash at 9:31 AM on October 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
He may be a snake but if so he’s a rattlesnake that we need to milk in order to produce some anti venom.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 9:41 AM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Big Al 8000 at 9:41 AM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
The enemy of my enemy is a potentially useful tool.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:41 AM on October 25, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:41 AM on October 25, 2019 [16 favorites]
John Bolton, welcome to the Resistance? (Politico)
For now, plenty of Democrats who love the idea of aides turning on Trump are unwilling to rope Bolton into the so-called Resistance. It is possible, they argue, to be a purveyor of terrible policy ideas while at the same time balking at illegal, or at least impeachable, acts.posted by katra at 9:52 AM on October 25, 2019
The narrative that very many Republicans are compromised has never been more compelling.
I still hold out the possibility that this is just a big experiment in party discipine, a purpose sufficiently big-picture for Bannon or Miller to come up with, since they don't have experience in the weeds (aka implementation details). Not that they aren't also compromised to varying degrees.
posted by rhizome at 9:53 AM on October 25, 2019
I still hold out the possibility that this is just a big experiment in party discipine, a purpose sufficiently big-picture for Bannon or Miller to come up with, since they don't have experience in the weeds (aka implementation details). Not that they aren't also compromised to varying degrees.
posted by rhizome at 9:53 AM on October 25, 2019
Bolton is a sociopathic snake and he will turn around and bite you hard.
It looks like Trump's about to learn that lesson the hard way, and I say good.
posted by Gelatin at 9:53 AM on October 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
It looks like Trump's about to learn that lesson the hard way, and I say good.
posted by Gelatin at 9:53 AM on October 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
Bolton is responsible for the killing of millions of civilians and his primary motivation here is his desire to have leaders competent enough to kill millions more. Fuck him. He's not a snake, he's not a tool, he's the murderous heart of an evil empire. Rehabilitating him on any level in the hope of bringing down Trump is incomprehensible to me unless that opposition to Trump is purely aesthetic: support Bolton if you want to see a more serious and dignified-acting white man on the TV declare that we're nuking Tehran.
posted by Rust Moranis at 9:55 AM on October 25, 2019 [18 favorites]
posted by Rust Moranis at 9:55 AM on October 25, 2019 [18 favorites]
agreeing with Rust Moranis and Jack Flash's assessments, i don't see why taking Bolton's testimony would require any support (beyond that necessary to secure his testimony) or rehabilitation.
posted by 20 year lurk at 10:00 AM on October 25, 2019 [21 favorites]
posted by 20 year lurk at 10:00 AM on October 25, 2019 [21 favorites]
No one's talking about rehabilitating Bolton or acclaiming him a hero. Bolton is no fan of the Russians either, and if it turns out that Trump withholding vital Ukraine aid is a bridge too far for him, and he's willing to testify to the fact, then good. It'd also make it harder for those few Republicans who still consider themelves strong on national security (read: hawkish, of course) to continue to turn a blind eye to Trump's wrongdoing. None of the above exonerates Bolton from his own ultra-hawkishness or washes the abundant blood off his hands.
posted by Gelatin at 10:14 AM on October 25, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by Gelatin at 10:14 AM on October 25, 2019 [19 favorites]
Explosive William Barr news points to Trump’s weakness and panic (Greg Sargent, WaPo Opinion)
Consider: The Times and Post both carefully note that it’s not clear what potential crime Durham and Barr are investigating, how serious it is, or when this criminal investigation started.posted by katra at 10:22 AM on October 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
As Cato Institute senior fellow Julian Sanchez notes, this signals the possibility that the criminal matter could be something relatively less serious — say, an examination of early leaks out of the Russia probe. Putting this out now, Sanchez notes, helps overshadow the impeachment inquiry’s fusillade of devastating revelations, by creating the impression that the “Deep State coup is about to come crashing down."
Who do you think frantically wants to create that impression? The Mad King does. [...] To be clear, I’m not saying Barr’s machinations aren’t deeply dangerous. They absolutely are.
Barr is at the nexus of everything. [...] Regardless, no matter what Barr does to discredit the special counsel investigation, he cannot make its extensive findings of Russian sabotage of the 2016 election, and Trump’s likely criminal efforts to cover it up, disappear. The same goes for the devastating Ukraine revelations now emerging about Trump. All Barr can do is try to fog those facts over with misdirection and propaganda.
Feds blow door off safe, issue subpoenas as probe into Giuliani associates escalates
posted by octothorpe at 10:30 AM on October 25, 2019 [20 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 10:30 AM on October 25, 2019 [20 favorites]
Mod note: Folks, cool it. We're not the John Bolton Deposition Y/N Committee, tack back to actual impeachment news if there is any or waiting for some if there isn't.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:34 AM on October 25, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:34 AM on October 25, 2019 [13 favorites]
ryanrs: 1972: break-in to bug the DNC
2019: break-in to order pizza inside a SCIF -- and per jammer upthread, there are already 46 GOP members
it really is stupid watergate
Kayfabe watergate? Though that might be demeaning to wrestling, because those men and women practice and prepare for their performances, while these goons seem to be fumbling their way through everything, yet constantly failing up.
katra: Now, Democrats are moving into the phase where they are hoping to corroborate much of the testimony they have already heard with information from other witnesses who were involved in Ukraine policy.
The panel on Wednesday heard from deputy assistant secretary of defense Laura Cooper, who gave a largely technical accounting of the American military aid program for Ukraine, according to people familiar with the testimony. Cooper offered details that helped to round out the timeline of when various people became aware that the Trump administration had frozen the funds, said the individuals, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak frankly. While Cooper did not testify to personal knowledge of a quid pro quo, people familiar said, her testimony was in keeping with Taylor’s account.
Emphasis mine -- this is where drunk driving Gaetz and his crew of goons barged in, to interrupt the corroboration of evidence. Nothing suspicious about their timing, nope.
cenoxo: Press secretary Stephanie Grisham touted the decision as a cost-cutting measure. “Not renewing subscriptions across all federal agencies will be a significant cost saving for taxpayers – hundreds of thousands of dollars,” she said in a statement.
And keep (some) bad press of Trump out of Federal offices. But also cut off the agency's access to some outside information (though this gap may be filled by people bringing in their own copies, because this is more symbolic than anything).
katra: For his part, Trump seems quite clear about the effect he hopes to have on the overwhelmed American public. He shared a video three times over the weekend that asked Americans to just turn off the news.
Huh, now this seems to be a pattern for Trump. Did he also tell them that Fox News is the only Real News? Also, there's a move to get Trump to stop calling things "fake news" -- My Journalism Organization Is Trying to Trademark "Fake News" to Stop Donald Trump From Using It -- In this op-ed, Teen Vogue reporter Emily Bloch explains why her local Society of Professional Journalists branch is sending Donald Trump cease and desist letters over the use of the term “fake news.”
Fuck yeah, Teen Vogue and their reporters!
posted by filthy light thief at 10:40 AM on October 25, 2019 [32 favorites]
2019: break-in to order pizza inside a SCIF -- and per jammer upthread, there are already 46 GOP members
it really is stupid watergate
Kayfabe watergate? Though that might be demeaning to wrestling, because those men and women practice and prepare for their performances, while these goons seem to be fumbling their way through everything, yet constantly failing up.
katra: Now, Democrats are moving into the phase where they are hoping to corroborate much of the testimony they have already heard with information from other witnesses who were involved in Ukraine policy.
The panel on Wednesday heard from deputy assistant secretary of defense Laura Cooper, who gave a largely technical accounting of the American military aid program for Ukraine, according to people familiar with the testimony. Cooper offered details that helped to round out the timeline of when various people became aware that the Trump administration had frozen the funds, said the individuals, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak frankly. While Cooper did not testify to personal knowledge of a quid pro quo, people familiar said, her testimony was in keeping with Taylor’s account.
Emphasis mine -- this is where drunk driving Gaetz and his crew of goons barged in, to interrupt the corroboration of evidence. Nothing suspicious about their timing, nope.
cenoxo: Press secretary Stephanie Grisham touted the decision as a cost-cutting measure. “Not renewing subscriptions across all federal agencies will be a significant cost saving for taxpayers – hundreds of thousands of dollars,” she said in a statement.
And keep (some) bad press of Trump out of Federal offices. But also cut off the agency's access to some outside information (though this gap may be filled by people bringing in their own copies, because this is more symbolic than anything).
katra: For his part, Trump seems quite clear about the effect he hopes to have on the overwhelmed American public. He shared a video three times over the weekend that asked Americans to just turn off the news.
Huh, now this seems to be a pattern for Trump. Did he also tell them that Fox News is the only Real News? Also, there's a move to get Trump to stop calling things "fake news" -- My Journalism Organization Is Trying to Trademark "Fake News" to Stop Donald Trump From Using It -- In this op-ed, Teen Vogue reporter Emily Bloch explains why her local Society of Professional Journalists branch is sending Donald Trump cease and desist letters over the use of the term “fake news.”
Fuck yeah, Teen Vogue and their reporters!
posted by filthy light thief at 10:40 AM on October 25, 2019 [32 favorites]
New report reveals how crises trigger Trump’s nearly pathological need for fawning praise (Alex Henderson, AlterNet)
Report comes from the Daily Beast:
Trump Cuts Out Media That Doesn’t ‘Make Him Feel Beautiful’ (Asawin Suebsaeng, Daily Beast)
Report comes from the Daily Beast:
Trump Cuts Out Media That Doesn’t ‘Make Him Feel Beautiful’ (Asawin Suebsaeng, Daily Beast)
It’s a comfort mechanism for the president that intensifies whenever he feels under siege and when scandal swirls. […]posted by ZeusHumms at 11:08 AM on October 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
Nowadays, faced with a rapidly escalating impeachment inquiry and a potentially tough re-election fight, Trump is going to even greater lengths than usual to try to banish—or retaliate against—news outlets he perceives as unfriendly, and to build an even more tightly packed media igloo of praise and flattery for himself.
[…] Following a MAGA rally, staff began compiling packets, which would sometimes stretch numerous pages, exclusively displaying tweets about the rally Trump had just headlined. His campaign team began providing these packets to the candidate to review after each event, so much so that he began expecting them after every rally.
Trump became so accustomed to these pages that, according to a source familiar with the matter, he would complain to senior aides if he didn’t have the packet of Twitter posts in hand to read over within 20 minutes of the campaign rally ending.
“It remains to this day a source of joy for the president,” one senior administration official said. “He will sometimes wave [the post-rally print-outs] around, talking about how much people love him and what a great job he did.”
Mod note: Clarifying so folks know to reload and stop responding to stuff that's not there anymore: network blip or something means half the comments I'd just deleted per note upthread didn't get deleted. Rectified, sorry for the confusion, carry on.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:10 AM on October 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:10 AM on October 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
The latest entity undermining Giuliani - his own ass:
The call came in at 11:07 p.m. and went to voicemail; the reporter was asleep.posted by NoxAeternum at 12:14 PM on October 25, 2019 [49 favorites]
The next morning, a message exactly three minutes long was sitting in his voicemail. In the recording, the words tumbling out of Giuliani’s mouth were not directed at the reporter. He was speaking to someone else, someone in the same room.
Giuliani can be heard discussing overseas dealings and lamenting the need for cash, though it's difficult to discern the full context of the conversation.
It appeared to be one of the most unfortunate of faux pas: what is known, in casual parlance, as a butt dial.
And it wasn’t the first time it had happened.
Butts lol
posted by Melismata at 12:17 PM on October 25, 2019 [24 favorites]
posted by Melismata at 12:17 PM on October 25, 2019 [24 favorites]
Talking points sent to the opposition. Information given in a butt dial. An "exhonorating" transcript that's really incriminating.
If someone who was even slightly competent (like, George W. Bush level), we'd be really screwed.
posted by MrGuilt at 12:25 PM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
If someone who was even slightly competent (like, George W. Bush level), we'd be really screwed.
posted by MrGuilt at 12:25 PM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
Ironically one of the few cases in which Giuliani isn't talking out of his ass.
posted by biogeo at 12:36 PM on October 25, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by biogeo at 12:36 PM on October 25, 2019 [7 favorites]
Yeah, but he's asking for money, so it's probably a recording of a crime in progress, once they figure out who he was meeting with.
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 12:40 PM on October 25, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 12:40 PM on October 25, 2019 [3 favorites]
Actually after reading the linked transcript, I retract that. Giuliani clearly talks out of his ass even when he's in private.
I wonder how many times he's butt dialed a foreign agent while in sensitive meetings with U.S. government officials.
posted by biogeo at 12:44 PM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
I wonder how many times he's butt dialed a foreign agent while in sensitive meetings with U.S. government officials.
posted by biogeo at 12:44 PM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
District Judge Beryl Howell just ordered the DOJ to turn over previously-redacted grand jury materials from the Mueller investigation to the House Judiciary Committee. I'm still trying to track down a PDF of the ruling but it includes a specific finding that yes, the House is engaged in impeachment proceedings for all legal purposes.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:46 PM on October 25, 2019 [18 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:46 PM on October 25, 2019 [18 favorites]
It appeared to be one of the most unfortunate of faux pas: what is known, in casual parlance, as a butt dial.
And it wasn’t the first time it had happened.
do we have any prosecutors here who can weigh in on whether or not this is like...normal levels of incompetence for rich criminals?
I'm just trying gauge how much of this is historical levels of dumbassery and how much is just the usual level of criming in the upper echelons of society
and the only difference is that we never bother to try to catch the rest of them
posted by schadenfrau at 12:47 PM on October 25, 2019 [7 favorites]
And it wasn’t the first time it had happened.
do we have any prosecutors here who can weigh in on whether or not this is like...normal levels of incompetence for rich criminals?
I'm just trying gauge how much of this is historical levels of dumbassery and how much is just the usual level of criming in the upper echelons of society
and the only difference is that we never bother to try to catch the rest of them
posted by schadenfrau at 12:47 PM on October 25, 2019 [7 favorites]
I'm wondering if someone not Giuliani called the reporter and played a recording they had made into the voicemail.
posted by rhizome at 12:47 PM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by rhizome at 12:47 PM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
The reporter has previously talked with Giuliani on that cell so he'd be able to check which number it came from.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:54 PM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:54 PM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
Judge orders DOJ to release redacted Mueller grand jury information to House
Oh snap!
posted by MrGuilt at 12:56 PM on October 25, 2019 [16 favorites]
Oh snap!
posted by MrGuilt at 12:56 PM on October 25, 2019 [16 favorites]
....and that's exactly why news about Barr's fishing expedition evolving into a criminal case went public yesterday.
posted by Sublimity at 1:01 PM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Sublimity at 1:01 PM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
yeah, how much you want to bet that Barr defies this, saying "We can't release this information while the investigation is under investigation."
posted by mach at 1:02 PM on October 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by mach at 1:02 PM on October 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
My absolute favorite part of the decision:
posted by lazaruslong at 1:03 PM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) claims that existing law bars disclosure to the(newline added by me)
Congress of grand jury information. See DOJ’s Resp. to App. of HJC for an Order Authorizing
Release of Certain Grand Jury Materials (“DOJ Resp.”), ECF No. 20.
DOJ is wrong.
posted by lazaruslong at 1:03 PM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
Remember the mystical powers and arcane magicks they bestowed upon an email server? I remember wailing at their tech illiteracy, and despairing for their believers that didn't understand either. For us techies, it just convinced us that these old white men can't tech. It would be so sweet if they were brought down by a butt dial.
posted by adept256 at 1:05 PM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by adept256 at 1:05 PM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
Trump denies knowing indicted Giuliani associates Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman despite photos (USA Today, Oct. 10, 2019)
Dating back to 2015, the private Instagram account of Lev Parnas, a Ukrainian-American indicted for illegal campaign donations, appears to show VIP access to President Trump and a close relationship with Rudy Giuliani. WSJ’s Shelby Holliday reports (Oct. 21, 2019)
His collection of private Instagram includes a photo with the description "Fraud Guarantee* pow wow at Lique. The Atmosphere TRUMPS the rest!" and it's a photo with Lev and Trump's first wife. And then there's pictures with Donny himself, and a signed letter of support from Donald Trump, stating:
posted by filthy light thief at 1:22 PM on October 25, 2019 [10 favorites]
Dating back to 2015, the private Instagram account of Lev Parnas, a Ukrainian-American indicted for illegal campaign donations, appears to show VIP access to President Trump and a close relationship with Rudy Giuliani. WSJ’s Shelby Holliday reports (Oct. 21, 2019)
His collection of private Instagram includes a photo with the description "Fraud Guarantee* pow wow at Lique. The Atmosphere TRUMPS the rest!" and it's a photo with Lev and Trump's first wife. And then there's pictures with Donny himself, and a signed letter of support from Donald Trump, stating:
To: Lev Parnas,* This seems like the worst business name ever. Rudy Giuliani admits ‘Fraud Guarantee’ paid him $500,000 to work for indicted associate (Raw Story, October 14, 2019)
Thank you for your friendship and your dedication to our cause. Leaders like you in Florida are the key to fulfilling our bold agenda to Make America Great Again!
posted by filthy light thief at 1:22 PM on October 25, 2019 [10 favorites]
So Judge Howell's decision gives DoJ until 10/30 to provide the grand jury material to the House. Does anyone more legally savvy than me know whether DoJ can (or, if so, is likely to) appeal this decision to a higher court and get a stay before 10/30? Or will this deadline stand no matter what?
posted by scarylarry at 1:30 PM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by scarylarry at 1:30 PM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
A nice bonus in that document, the section starting on page 49:
'No House “Impeachment Inquiry” Resolution is Required'
posted by jammer at 1:34 PM on October 25, 2019 [11 favorites]
'No House “Impeachment Inquiry” Resolution is Required'
posted by jammer at 1:34 PM on October 25, 2019 [11 favorites]
So Judge Howell's decision gives DoJ until 10/30 to provide the grand jury material to the House. Does anyone more legally savvy than me know whether DoJ can (or, if so, is likely to) appeal this decision to a higher court and get a stay before 10/30? Or will this deadline stand no matter what?
My expectation is that they will file the appeal together with a request to stay the judgment by this evening, and that the court will grant the stay because if there's one thing federal appellate judges hate regardless of political affiliation, it's district court rulings that kick in before they've had a chance to do their job. I personally doubt DOJ will win in the DC Circuit (you can't get an entire panel of Neomis Rao) but SCOTUS is...dicier.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:48 PM on October 25, 2019 [7 favorites]
My expectation is that they will file the appeal together with a request to stay the judgment by this evening, and that the court will grant the stay because if there's one thing federal appellate judges hate regardless of political affiliation, it's district court rulings that kick in before they've had a chance to do their job. I personally doubt DOJ will win in the DC Circuit (you can't get an entire panel of Neomis Rao) but SCOTUS is...dicier.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:48 PM on October 25, 2019 [7 favorites]
Trump confronts limits of his impeachment defense strategy (AP)
White House officials, who have been treating unified Republican support for Trump as a given, have grown increasingly fearful of GOP defections in a House impeachment vote and a potential Senate trial. While they do not believe there will be enough votes to remove the president, as Democrats hope, the West Wing believes more must be done to shore up Republican support to avoid embarrassment and genuine political peril.White House seeks a communications guru to fight Trump impeachment (Politico)
[...] Democrats reject Trump arguments that the House interview process is unfair, and White House officials privately acknowledge their legal objections may not win the day. But they believe it’s a political argument that will hold sway with the American people.
However, the White House strategy comes with an expiration date: In coming weeks, the closed-door testimony will give way to public hearings. [...] Some Trump allies believe the White House can’t afford not to directly address what’s already been revealed. They note that as more Trump appointees offer disparaging information to Congress, and as it is corroborated by official sources, the president will have increasing difficulty simply complaining he is the target of a new “witch hunt.”
The president continues to insist he has done nothing wrong, a contention that can be difficult to square with the testimony coming on a nearly daily basis from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
The Republican close to the White House derided the idea of a full war room as too retro but conceded the administration now sees the need for greater help.posted by katra at 3:19 PM on October 25, 2019 [3 favorites]
Earlier today, Trump dismisses need for impeachment team: 'I'm the team' (Brett Samuels, The Hill)
posted by ZeusHumms at 3:30 PM on October 25, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 3:30 PM on October 25, 2019 [11 favorites]
That’s delicious.
posted by lostburner at 3:38 PM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by lostburner at 3:38 PM on October 25, 2019 [8 favorites]
WaPo: 10:45 a.m.: Inspectors general take issue with Justice Department opinion
DOJ's Inspector General (And 70 Colleagues) Say DOJ's Lawyers Fucked Up (Marcy Wheeler, emptywheel)
DOJ's Inspector General (And 70 Colleagues) Say DOJ's Lawyers Fucked Up (Marcy Wheeler, emptywheel)
I’m more interested in what it means that CIGIE’s Chair, Michael Horowitz, wrote it. Horowitz also happens to be DOJ’s Inspector General, the same guy Bill Barr has loaded up with investigations designed to take down Trump’s critics, someone whom the frothy right has invested a lot of their respect.posted by katra at 3:53 PM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
[...] And I view this letter, in addition to being a very public and powerful stand on an important principle, as a tactic. One thing the letter does, for example, is lay out that a top DOJ lawyer violated Congress’ intent on how Inspectors General are supposed to work. That’s the kind of thing that — if my years of watching Horowitz are any indication — we may hear the next time Horowitz testifies about his work and the scope of DOJ’s IG, which is limited in ways that other IGs aren’t. [...]
Horowitz may not have the authority to investigate Steve Engel, but he does have the authority to investigate the people who found ways not to investigate this complaint competently, and his concern on OLC may reflect a concern on what else happened at DOJ. [...] Thus far, the American public has had little success at disciplining OLC lawyers for the bullshit they cause (though even courts are inching closer to doing so). This letter seems, to me, like the first step in an attempt by Horowitz to be able to do so.
Earlier today, Trump dismisses need for impeachment team: 'I'm the team' (Brett Samuels, The Hill)Operation Barbarossa failed because the fascists underestimated the enemy, writing them off as unworthy adversaries, while overestimating their own abilities, being as how they were the master race and all.
History doesn't repeat but it's sure as hell rhyming.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 3:56 PM on October 25, 2019 [10 favorites]
History doesn't repeat but it's sure as hell rhyming.
I'm just thinking about how Don may be literally the only person in America who has never heard "There is no I in TEAM."
posted by Faint of Butt at 3:58 PM on October 25, 2019 [9 favorites]
I'm just thinking about how Don may be literally the only person in America who has never heard "There is no I in TEAM."
posted by Faint of Butt at 3:58 PM on October 25, 2019 [9 favorites]
...but there is an M and an E!
posted by Flannery Culp at 4:19 PM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Flannery Culp at 4:19 PM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
L'équipe c'est moi.
posted by kirkaracha at 4:41 PM on October 25, 2019 [14 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 4:41 PM on October 25, 2019 [14 favorites]
My expectation is that they will file the appeal together with a request to stay the judgment by this evening, and that the court will grant the stay because if there's one thing federal appellate judges hate regardless of political affiliation, it's district court rulings that kick in before they've had a chance to do their job. I personally doubt DOJ will win in the DC Circuit (you can't get an entire panel of Neomis Rao) but SCOTUS is...dicier.
OTOH, that decision was scathing and encouragingly shows that the Court has zero tolerance for the sov-cit level arguments the DOJ made and hopefully the Appellate court kicks their ass to the curb too.
posted by mikelieman at 4:43 PM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
OTOH, that decision was scathing and encouragingly shows that the Court has zero tolerance for the sov-cit level arguments the DOJ made and hopefully the Appellate court kicks their ass to the curb too.
posted by mikelieman at 4:43 PM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
Trump denies knowing indicted Giuliani associates Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman despite photos
So, how's their executive privilege claim going, then?
posted by jackbishop at 5:18 PM on October 25, 2019 [19 favorites]
So, how's their executive privilege claim going, then?
posted by jackbishop at 5:18 PM on October 25, 2019 [19 favorites]
The Collapse of the President’s Defense (Benjamin Wittes, Lawfare)
Yes, Trump’s approval numbers show there are cracks in the wall, as every pundit is busily pointing out. But the larger point, it seems to me, is that there is still a wall. [And] it is the comparative strength of that wall, not any demonstration of Trump’s innocence or guilt, that will regulate the decision as to the president’s fate. The president’s defense, in other words, has been reduced to raw political power; it is not a genuine examination of facts but rather a numbers game to assemble enough elected officials aligned with the president’s faction to refuse to look reality in the eye and thus to ensure Trump’s acquittal.posted by ZeusHumms at 6:54 PM on October 25, 2019 [24 favorites]
Of course, no senators or members of the House of Representatives can say this outright. Despite this era of shredded norms and broken taboos, it is still verboten to state what is so obviously true: “I refuse to support Trump’s impeachment because, however merited it may be, I am a Republican and he is a Republican and the advantage of my party would be ill-served by his removal—which might also threaten my own prospects of reelection, which depend on voters who like the president more than they like me.”
The poor Donald is trapped between a rock and a hard place. He demands complete loyalty from everyone he hires (and enforces it with lifetime NDAs and threats of financially ruinous lawsuits). At the same time, he knows he cannot ever trust anyone except himself. Eventually, he fires them or, tired of his shenanigans, they resign in one way or another. Rinse and repeat, ad infinitum.
posted by cenoxo at 9:06 PM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by cenoxo at 9:06 PM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
The poor Donald is trapped between a rock and a hard place.
To be fair, he's the one that decided to crawl into that space by continually committing actions that would otherwise be the end of any administration with an ounce of shame.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:12 PM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
To be fair, he's the one that decided to crawl into that space by continually committing actions that would otherwise be the end of any administration with an ounce of shame.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:12 PM on October 25, 2019 [1 favorite]
From the Lawfare article above:
posted by lostburner at 9:25 PM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
It all could change, of course. Polls are unmovable until they move. Cracks in the wall are mere cracks until the wall comes down and we realize the bricks were actually just the spaces between the cracks. Senators are a fickle lot, and when the winds shift, they can shift suddenly.I keep seeing this sentiment and I’m not sure if it’s just wishful thinking. I haven’t lately seen any examples shown of instances where the public’s or legislators’ opinions have stuck firm in a highly partisan subject and then suddenly shifted like a dam breaking. Do any come to mind?
posted by lostburner at 9:25 PM on October 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
So, how's their executive privilege claim going, then?
Giuliani associate will have tough time keeping documents from prosecutors: experts (Reuters)
Giuliani associate will have tough time keeping documents from prosecutors: experts (Reuters)
David Sklansky, a former federal prosecutor, said the privilege is limited to communications inside the executive branch and would not apply to communications between Trump and Giuliani. Giuliani was acting as a private adviser for Trump and not part of the White House, said Sklansky, a professor at Stanford Law School.posted by katra at 9:32 PM on October 25, 2019 [4 favorites]
John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley, agreed. “I don’t think they have any plausible claim to protection under any kind of executive privilege or immunity,” Yoo said. [...]
Peter Joy, a professor of criminal law at Washington University in St. Louis, said communications between Giuliani and Parnas could be protected by attorney-client privilege only if they were kept confidential and made for the purpose of seeking or giving legal advice. Discussions between the two men in furtherance of Giuliani’s Biden-related efforts in Ukraine were unlikely to be protected, he said. “It is not legal work to try to get opposition information,” Joy said.
Communications aimed at furthering an illegal act also are not covered by attorney-client privilege, said Daniel Medwed, a professor of criminal law at Northeastern University School of Law. [...] “If it turns out these communications related to a crime or fraud, then the privilege claim is not going to fly,” Medwed said.
I haven’t lately seen any examples shown of instances where the public’s or legislators’ opinions have stuck firm in a highly partisan subject and then suddenly shifted like a dam breaking. Do any come to mind?
How Richard Nixon Lost the Battle for Public Opinion (Alex Shepard, New Republic, Oct 3, 2019)
posted by katra at 9:46 PM on October 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
How Richard Nixon Lost the Battle for Public Opinion (Alex Shepard, New Republic, Oct 3, 2019)
While the Senate hearings themselves “had little effect on perceptions of Nixon’s guilt, they did make impeachment more acceptable… once the clear and convincing ‘proof’ had been produced,” the Langs wrote. The hearings revealed that Nixon had taped all conversations in his offices, leading to a battle between Congress and Nixon to hand over the tapes, which, in turn, led to the Saturday Night Massacre in October. Nixon would eventually release edited transcripts of the tapes in April of 1974.Also: From the archives: How the Watergate crisis eroded public support for Richard Nixon (Pew Research Center)
Over this period, support for impeachment grew steadily, but it wasn’t until the House Judiciary Committee recommended impeachment in July of 1974 and the Supreme Court ordered the release of the tapes—including the “smoking gun”—that public opinion shifted dramatically in favor of removing Nixon. “When that tape came out and members of Congress heard it, it was black and white what the president was trying to do,” Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton, told me. “He could lie a million times about it and his supporters could explain it away but in the end you could hear exactly what was going on.” After the release of the “smoking gun” on August 5, 1974, a third of Republicans and over half of independents supported impeachment. [...]
The question, then, is whether Trump’s support among Republicans will eventually erode. This would almost certainly require the conservative media to turn on the president—to stop feeding right-wing voters misleading or downright false narratives in his defense. That may be too much to expect. But as Nixon wrote in his memoir, he knew that “the main danger of being impeached would come precisely from the public’s being conditioned to the idea that I was going to be impeached.” Trump’s removal doesn’t look inevitable today, but neither did Nixon’s until the very end. With Democrats now united on impeaching Trump, the conditioning of the American public is well underway.
posted by katra at 9:46 PM on October 25, 2019 [5 favorites]
speaking of the rehabilitation of war criminals, there's reuters blithely going to berkeley's john yoo (while eliding his credentials), whom you may recall from the global war on terrorism, unlawful combatants, and the soi disant torture memos, for the quote. wish they wouldn't.
posted by 20 year lurk at 10:07 PM on October 25, 2019 [23 favorites]
posted by 20 year lurk at 10:07 PM on October 25, 2019 [23 favorites]
Donald Trump Has a Big Problem in the Senate (David A. Graham, Atlantic)
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:52 PM on October 25, 2019 [11 favorites]
On Thursday, Graham announced that he’d put forward a resolution condemning the House impeachment inquiry. By mid-afternoon, when he actually announced it, the resolution had been watered down to a plea for a different and more transparent process, apparently a sop to GOP senators unwilling to go quite that far. And yet by Friday morning, only 44 of 53 Republicans in the Senate had signed on to the resolution. A gesture meant to be a show of solidarity by senators has instead become a sign of the weakness of the president’s position.The lack of enthusiasm is there.
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:52 PM on October 25, 2019 [11 favorites]
The lack of enthusiasm is there.
Corey Robin wrote a piece a couple of years ago arguing that, in politics, the goal is rarely to change your opponent's mind—culture moves only ever slowly. It's to demoralize and depress your opponent. The difference between left-leaning and right-leaning eras is not that the country abruptly turns more progressive or reactionary: it's that, at different times, different groups are energized, and find themselves in a place to control the narrative. Which in turn sparks a vicious cycle of sorts, because the more you see your opponent running the stories, the less likely you are to believe that your side has any chance. Until a new political narrative emerges, and you find your energy once again.
He brought this up both to point out the chief strength that Trump has, which is that his base is devoted to him, and to point out his weakness, too: the less Trump controls the narrative, the less fun he and his supporters have, and the more their grip slips on the story. This month, I think, has shown the relevance of that argument: it's not that there's no tactical advantage to supporting Trump, it's that it's very, very hard for his supporters to keep up their enthusiasm in the wake of the suddenly-reigning narrative. Even their frat-boy antics are barely causing a ripple.
posted by rorgy at 6:18 AM on October 26, 2019 [34 favorites]
Corey Robin wrote a piece a couple of years ago arguing that, in politics, the goal is rarely to change your opponent's mind—culture moves only ever slowly. It's to demoralize and depress your opponent. The difference between left-leaning and right-leaning eras is not that the country abruptly turns more progressive or reactionary: it's that, at different times, different groups are energized, and find themselves in a place to control the narrative. Which in turn sparks a vicious cycle of sorts, because the more you see your opponent running the stories, the less likely you are to believe that your side has any chance. Until a new political narrative emerges, and you find your energy once again.
He brought this up both to point out the chief strength that Trump has, which is that his base is devoted to him, and to point out his weakness, too: the less Trump controls the narrative, the less fun he and his supporters have, and the more their grip slips on the story. This month, I think, has shown the relevance of that argument: it's not that there's no tactical advantage to supporting Trump, it's that it's very, very hard for his supporters to keep up their enthusiasm in the wake of the suddenly-reigning narrative. Even their frat-boy antics are barely causing a ripple.
posted by rorgy at 6:18 AM on October 26, 2019 [34 favorites]
I keep seeing this sentiment and I’m not sure if it’s just wishful thinking. I haven’t lately seen any examples shown of instances where the public’s or legislators’ opinions have stuck firm in a highly partisan subject and then suddenly shifted like a dam breaking. Do any come to mind?
Not so much at the federal level at least explicitly but gay marriage and pot legalization are pretty substantial examples of rapid opinion shifts among legislatures at the state level.
posted by srboisvert at 6:29 AM on October 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
Not so much at the federal level at least explicitly but gay marriage and pot legalization are pretty substantial examples of rapid opinion shifts among legislatures at the state level.
posted by srboisvert at 6:29 AM on October 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
Corey Robin wrote a piece a couple of years ago arguing that, in politics, the goal is rarely to change your opponent's mind—culture moves only ever slowly. It's to demoralize and depress your opponent.
The Netflix documentary "The Great Back" showed Cambridge Analytica doing exactly that type of work. Instead of getting people to vote for a certain candidate, they convinced a targeted segment not to vote, which gave their candidate the win.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 6:49 AM on October 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
The Netflix documentary "The Great Back" showed Cambridge Analytica doing exactly that type of work. Instead of getting people to vote for a certain candidate, they convinced a targeted segment not to vote, which gave their candidate the win.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 6:49 AM on October 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
Who are, and were, the holdouts on Lindsey Graham's anti-impeachment bill? (WaPo)
The article has been updated--only three Republican senators are still holding out, and it's about who you'd expect: Mitt Romney (R-UT), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Susan Collins (R-ME).
Rob Portman (R-OH) (won easily in 2016), Cory Gardner (R-CO) (facing a 2020 reelection, won by less than 40,000 votes in 2014), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Mike Enzi (R-WY), and Johnny Isakson (R-GA) (these three are all retiring) have signed on.
posted by box at 6:50 AM on October 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
The article has been updated--only three Republican senators are still holding out, and it's about who you'd expect: Mitt Romney (R-UT), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Susan Collins (R-ME).
Rob Portman (R-OH) (won easily in 2016), Cory Gardner (R-CO) (facing a 2020 reelection, won by less than 40,000 votes in 2014), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Mike Enzi (R-WY), and Johnny Isakson (R-GA) (these three are all retiring) have signed on.
posted by box at 6:50 AM on October 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
the more you see your opponent running the stories, the less likely you are to believe that your side has any chance. Until a new political narrative emerges, and you find your energy once again.
Checks history of Trump + CNN/NYT throughout 2016: yep.
posted by Harry Caul at 7:05 AM on October 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
Checks history of Trump + CNN/NYT throughout 2016: yep.
posted by Harry Caul at 7:05 AM on October 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
WRT Trump being "the team" for dealing with impeachment, it's a response that we should expect because Trump really is a narcissist.
Many years ago I had a really awful boss who had the habit of telling people, both in one on one conversations and in meetings, that he could do any of our jobs better than us and the only reason he bothered keeping anyone around is because he just didn't have enough time to get it all done himself. That's Trump.
That's what narcissism means. As far as Trump is concerned the universe begins and ends with him. He is the smartest person in the room. And the most handsome. And the richest. And the one who gets the most sex with the most beautiful women. And the most competent and knowledgeable on absolutely any topic that exists. You can't tell him anything because that would imply that he doesn't already know everything and that's anathema to him.
Which is kind of useful for us because it means that any team which does exist will be ad hoc and operating both demoralized and without any real support from Trump.
I've often thought that our best hope is to goad Trump, making use of the known weaknesses in the narcissist personality type, to drive wedges between him and the people defending him despite himself. Find his most useful defenders and say repeatedly that they're smarter than him, more capable than him, and that they're doing the real work and he'll eventually fire them because he can't stand the idea of people thinking he isn't the center of everything.
He's already driving off his supporters just by being what he is. But we (and by "we" I mean the Democrats in power and people with an audience) should be working overtime to trick Trump into firing or driving away his most competent staff.
posted by sotonohito at 7:09 AM on October 26, 2019 [14 favorites]
Many years ago I had a really awful boss who had the habit of telling people, both in one on one conversations and in meetings, that he could do any of our jobs better than us and the only reason he bothered keeping anyone around is because he just didn't have enough time to get it all done himself. That's Trump.
That's what narcissism means. As far as Trump is concerned the universe begins and ends with him. He is the smartest person in the room. And the most handsome. And the richest. And the one who gets the most sex with the most beautiful women. And the most competent and knowledgeable on absolutely any topic that exists. You can't tell him anything because that would imply that he doesn't already know everything and that's anathema to him.
Which is kind of useful for us because it means that any team which does exist will be ad hoc and operating both demoralized and without any real support from Trump.
I've often thought that our best hope is to goad Trump, making use of the known weaknesses in the narcissist personality type, to drive wedges between him and the people defending him despite himself. Find his most useful defenders and say repeatedly that they're smarter than him, more capable than him, and that they're doing the real work and he'll eventually fire them because he can't stand the idea of people thinking he isn't the center of everything.
He's already driving off his supporters just by being what he is. But we (and by "we" I mean the Democrats in power and people with an audience) should be working overtime to trick Trump into firing or driving away his most competent staff.
posted by sotonohito at 7:09 AM on October 26, 2019 [14 favorites]
WRT Trump being "the team" for dealing with impeachment, it's a response that we should expect because Trump really is a narcissist.
Trump frustrated as White House effort to defy impeachment inquiry fails to halt witness testimony, advisers say (WaPo)
Trump frustrated as White House effort to defy impeachment inquiry fails to halt witness testimony, advisers say (WaPo)
In a sign of the growing realization of his potential jeopardy, Trump has brought back Jane and Marty Raskin, criminal defense attorneys who were part of his legal team during the Mueller investigation, to help him navigate the impeachment inquiry, along with his attorney Jay Sekulow and White House lawyers. Their return is a late acknowledgment, some White House advisers say, that the facts coming out are bad for the president and that both his White House and personal attorneys need to try to get in front of what else may emerge. [...]posted by katra at 7:39 AM on October 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
The belated scramble — a month after the House formally launched its impeachment inquiry — serves as a recognition that the White House’s strategy of refusing to cooperate with the probe has failed to stymie it, according to Trump advisers and people involved in responding to House requests. That posture was driven by Trump, who dictated much of a defiant letter sent by White House Counsel Pat Cipollone to House leaders earlier this month that claimed the inquiry was constitutionally invalid, according to people familiar with his role. [...]
That has put administration officials called to appear on the Hill in a box. Late Friday, Charles Kupperman, who served as a deputy to former national security adviser John Bolton, went to court to ask a federal judge how to resolve the conflicting orders he faces: one from Congress demanding his testimony, and the other from the White House claiming he has testimonial immunity and instructing him not to appear. Kupperman, who is seeking an expedited ruling, is represented by attorney Charles Cooper, who is also serving as a lawyer for Bolton. [...]
Meanwhile, the president has ramped up calls to lawmakers in recent days, trying to make his case individually to every Republican senator, according to a senior administration official. Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who met with Trump at the White House on Thursday for lunch, said the president was defiant. “He just kept saying he did nothing wrong, he did nothing wrong,” Graham said in an interview. “He said it over and over.”
speaking of the rehabilitation of war criminals, there's reuters blithely going to berkeley's john yoo
Point well taken, but if they're going to ask the opinion of anybody about what Trump's options are, I think the most perfect person to ask is a unitary executive psycho, and Yoo is much more press-friendly than David Addington.
posted by rhizome at 8:04 AM on October 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Point well taken, but if they're going to ask the opinion of anybody about what Trump's options are, I think the most perfect person to ask is a unitary executive psycho, and Yoo is much more press-friendly than David Addington.
posted by rhizome at 8:04 AM on October 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Former top Trump aide asks court to rule on whether he must testify in impeachment inquiry (WaPo)
In a letter, White House counsel Pat Cipollone responded that “constitutional immunity” protected Trump’s current and former senior advisers and that Kupperman was “absolutely immune from compelled congressional testimony with respect to matters related to his service as a senior adviser to the President.” The letter ordered Kupperman not to comply with the subpoena.DOJ: Negotiations with House for McGahn interview are ongoing (Politico)
The directives have created a Catch-22 for Kupperman, according to the lawsuit: He wants to do his constitutional duty but needs the courts to step in to tell him exactly what that duty is.
Despite Cipollone's heated language, the Justice Department claimed talks over McGahn's testimony were far from at an impasse, had been revived on Oct. 4 and continued throughout the month. They had reached an agreement to obtain documents in McGahn's possession, the DOJ attorneys said. Intervention by a court now would be an unnecessary incursion in a case that has significant ramifications for the balance of power between Congress and the executive branch, the attorneys said.posted by katra at 8:10 AM on October 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
Democrats have been livid over DOJ's contention that senior White House officials have "absolute immunity" from testifying before Congress. DOJ has argued that requiring McGahn's testimony would imperil the ability of presidents to perform their duties and weaken the executive branch permanently. But Democrats say the argument is bogus, noting that the Supreme Court permitted the Nixon tapes to be revealed, a far more significant intrusion on private presidential discussions than speaking to McGahn would be.
Among the sticking points: House Democrats have long wanted McGahn to testify publicly, while the White House has proposed a closed-door interview. The Justice Department now claims that the Judiciary Committee has expressed openness to a private interview with McGahn, which the lawyers call "a marked change from the Committee’s prior position that it would not consider anything other than public testimony."
Diplomat who tried to squash smear campaign against colleague to testify in Trump impeachment inquiry (WaPo)
Philip Reeker, a senior State Department official who tried to counteract a campaign of falsehoods that undermined the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, is expected to testify before House impeachment investigators Saturday. [...] Based on previously released accounts, he can be expected to provide a limited but critical piece of the back story involving an informal endeavor to prod Ukrainian officials to investigate former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter ahead of the 2020 presidential election. [...]posted by katra at 8:54 AM on October 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
George Kent, the Reeker deputy overseeing Ukraine policy, warned in an email to colleagues that Yovanovitch was the victim of a “classic disinformation campaign.” Reeker passed along Kent’s concerns to David Hale, the third-highest ranking official at the State Department, and to T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, the closest confidant and longtime friend of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Their emails were provided to House investigators by the State Department’s inspector general.
Ultimately, the efforts were futile, and Yovanovitch was abruptly recalled. Reeker may be able to shed light on whether his appeals on her behalf reached Pompeo, and if so, how the secretary of state reacted. [...]
Like other diplomats who have testified before him, Reeker is a witness whose testimony will be difficult to assail. He is a career Foreign Service officer with a reputation for being apolitical, hard-working and professional. [...] The State Department ethos, particularly among officials tasked with explaining policy in public, is to stand up and speak the truth inside the building, instead of taking it public where it can become politicized. Reeker epitomized that ethos, according to friends and colleagues.
"In a letter, White House counsel Pat Cipollone responded that “constitutional immunity” protected Trump’s current and former senior advisers and that Kupperman was “absolutely immune from compelled congressional testimony with respect to matters related to his service as a senior adviser to the President.” "
This kind of language, and similarly insane arguments that contradict the clear language and intention of the Constitution, strike me as SO SIMILAR to how Biblical "literalists" twist and bend the Bible to fit their political desires while insisting it's the obvious and only reading. I think it's no accident that these particular forms of legal crazy are coming from lawyers connected to the right-wing Christian legal world -- Cipollone, Seukelow, Barr, Flood are all to a greater or lesser degree tied into that world. His lawyers who stick around tend to have STRONG ties to that world; the ones he hires who rather rapidly leave when they don't want to lose their licenses tend not to. I think these legal arguments require a certain kind of meretriciousness, and a certain kind of willingness to twist a text, and I think the Biblical literalist world that created this rightwing Christian legal advocacy network is where it comes from and why they think it's a natural and persuasive way of arguing, instead of clearly and obviously insane, as it is to everyone who doesn't already agree with them.
I guess the question is whether they packed the courts fast enough with people who share their particular brand of illogic. I don't think they have at the Appellate level, but I have some questions about the Supremes.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 9:23 AM on October 26, 2019 [35 favorites]
This kind of language, and similarly insane arguments that contradict the clear language and intention of the Constitution, strike me as SO SIMILAR to how Biblical "literalists" twist and bend the Bible to fit their political desires while insisting it's the obvious and only reading. I think it's no accident that these particular forms of legal crazy are coming from lawyers connected to the right-wing Christian legal world -- Cipollone, Seukelow, Barr, Flood are all to a greater or lesser degree tied into that world. His lawyers who stick around tend to have STRONG ties to that world; the ones he hires who rather rapidly leave when they don't want to lose their licenses tend not to. I think these legal arguments require a certain kind of meretriciousness, and a certain kind of willingness to twist a text, and I think the Biblical literalist world that created this rightwing Christian legal advocacy network is where it comes from and why they think it's a natural and persuasive way of arguing, instead of clearly and obviously insane, as it is to everyone who doesn't already agree with them.
I guess the question is whether they packed the courts fast enough with people who share their particular brand of illogic. I don't think they have at the Appellate level, but I have some questions about the Supremes.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 9:23 AM on October 26, 2019 [35 favorites]
Among the sticking points: House Democrats have long wanted McGahn to testify publicly, while the White House has proposed a closed-door interview.
Republicans: We demand public hearings!
Also Republicans: We demand a closed-door hearing!
posted by jedicus at 10:09 AM on October 26, 2019 [27 favorites]
Republicans: We demand public hearings!
Also Republicans: We demand a closed-door hearing!
posted by jedicus at 10:09 AM on October 26, 2019 [27 favorites]
Late Friday, Charles Kupperman, who served as a deputy to former national security adviser John Bolton, went to court to ask a federal judge how to resolve the conflicting orders he faces: one from Congress demanding his testimony, and the other from the White House claiming he has testimonial immunity and instructing him not to appear.
Kupperman no longer works for Trump. He is a private citizen. Trump cannot "instruct" Kupperman to do anything. There is no law or penalty that Trump can threaten Kupperman with. If Kupperman decides not to testify, it is because he chooses not to, not because of any instructions from the White House. Their legal argument is absurd but it serves to delay until multiple courts smack it down, perhaps months.
On the other hand, it hard to know to what Kupperman would testify. He is a real piece of wing-nut work, a protege of Bolton. Kupperman was recruited to the White House from the Center for Security Policy, a radical right hate group run by Frank effing Gaffney. Among other things, they are the group that pushed the story that Obama was a secret Muslim and that Hillary's assistant Huma Abedin was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Like Bolton, no matter how much Kupperman disagrees with Trump's policies, he is not inclined to say anything that will benefit the Democrats' impeachment inquiry. He's going to spin anything he says in a way that would be unhelpful or damaging to Democrats.
posted by JackFlash at 11:01 AM on October 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
Kupperman no longer works for Trump. He is a private citizen. Trump cannot "instruct" Kupperman to do anything. There is no law or penalty that Trump can threaten Kupperman with. If Kupperman decides not to testify, it is because he chooses not to, not because of any instructions from the White House. Their legal argument is absurd but it serves to delay until multiple courts smack it down, perhaps months.
On the other hand, it hard to know to what Kupperman would testify. He is a real piece of wing-nut work, a protege of Bolton. Kupperman was recruited to the White House from the Center for Security Policy, a radical right hate group run by Frank effing Gaffney. Among other things, they are the group that pushed the story that Obama was a secret Muslim and that Hillary's assistant Huma Abedin was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Like Bolton, no matter how much Kupperman disagrees with Trump's policies, he is not inclined to say anything that will benefit the Democrats' impeachment inquiry. He's going to spin anything he says in a way that would be unhelpful or damaging to Democrats.
posted by JackFlash at 11:01 AM on October 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
Among the sticking points: House Democrats have long wanted McGahn to testify publicly, while the White House has proposed a closed-door interview.
Republicans: We demand public hearings!
Also Republicans: We demand a closed-door hearing!
Note also an important difference in word choice - "testify" vs. "interview".
posted by nubs at 11:18 AM on October 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Republicans: We demand public hearings!
Also Republicans: We demand a closed-door hearing!
Note also an important difference in word choice - "testify" vs. "interview".
posted by nubs at 11:18 AM on October 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
It's probably much less damning if McGahn takes the 5th in private.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 11:22 AM on October 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 11:22 AM on October 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
'Disorder and chaos': Trump and Republicans mount furious impeachment fight (Guardian)
Bill Galston, a former policy adviser in the Clinton administration, said: “If there is a White House strategy, I haven’t discerned it up to now. It’s very difficult to form a strategy that others are prepared to rely on and execute if you have reason to believe that that what is held to be true today might not be true tomorrow.posted by katra at 12:05 PM on October 26, 2019 [16 favorites]
“The White House has a credibility problem and members of the president’s party don’t know what they don’t know.
“There’s a saying, ‘If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.’ The Scif incident we saw this week was an exercise in table-pounding by Republicans. What they’re doing now is a very poor substitute for a strategy.”
Eyebrows McGee: This kind of language, and similarly insane arguments that contradict the clear language and intention of the Constitution, strike me as SO SIMILAR to how Biblical "literalists" twist and bend the Bible to fit their political desires while insisting it's the obvious and only reading. I think it's no accident that these particular forms of legal crazy are coming from lawyers connected to the right-wing Christian legal world -- Cipollone, Seukelow, Barr, Flood are all to a greater or lesser degree tied into that world.
I've been on a StuffFundiesLike binge the past few days, and one thing I've found surprising compared to my own Evangelical experience growing up is the popularity of touch not the Lord’s anointed.
posted by clawsoon at 1:47 PM on October 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
I've been on a StuffFundiesLike binge the past few days, and one thing I've found surprising compared to my own Evangelical experience growing up is the popularity of touch not the Lord’s anointed.
posted by clawsoon at 1:47 PM on October 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
Diplomat says top leadership of the State Department rejected his entreaties to publicly support ousted U.S. ambassador to Ukraine (WaPo)
Reeker expressed his concerns over the falsehoods about Marie Yovanovitch in conversations with David Hale, the third-highest ranking official in the State Department, and T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, an adviser to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo whose friendship began when they attended U.S. Military Academy together, the person said. [...] “He was trying to get the State Department to issue a strong statement in support of Ambassador Yovanovitch,” the person said of Reeker. “Ultimately it did not get released. His understanding is it (the decision) came from on top.” But the person said Reeker, who is responsible for policy toward more than 50 countries and travels internationally extensively, has an “imperfect memory.” The person familiar with Reeker’s testimony said it is not clear exactly how the decision was communicated to him. [...]posted by katra at 2:55 PM on October 26, 2019 [8 favorites]
Reeker was named in mid-March to be acting assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs, and was confronted on his very first day with the dilemma of what to do about the rumors and conspiracy theories on Yovanovitch already spreading through conservative media. State Department officials considered them baseless and a “classic disinformation campaign.” [...]
His account offers a striking picture of the degree to which professional diplomats were frozen out of policymaking in some regions of the world, and subordinated to decisions apparently made for political reasons. Though Reeker was officially the top diplomat ultimately in charge of U.S. policy toward all of Europe, he quickly became aware that Ukrainian policy was being driven by Kurt Volker, the special envoy for the country who reported to Pompeo, and Gordon Sundland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union who has Trump’s ear. [...]
The person also said Reeker would testify that he also was aware of the involvement of Rudolph W. Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, in spreading the untrue accusations questioning Yovanovitch’s loyalty and honesty, but he was not tracking Giuliani’s actions in Ukraine beyond that. Reeker was focused on trying to shield Yovanovitch, who was a personal friend dating back decades as well as a colleague.
John Kelly says he warned Trump he’d be impeached if he hired a ‘yes man’ as chief of staff to replace him (WaPo)
Kelly also said he believed he could have prevented the current impeachment inquiry against Trump if he had stayed in the job. Kelly said the inquiry could have been avoided if president had surrounded himself with people who could rein in his worst instincts.posted by katra at 3:09 PM on October 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
His candid remarks, made during an interview at a political conference hosted by the Washington Examiner, suggests he blames acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and others in the West Wing for not doing more to stop Trump’s behavior.
“Someone has got to be a guide that tells [the president] that you either have the authority or you don’t, or Mr. President, don’t do it,” Kelly told the Washington Examiner’s Byron York. “Don’t hire someone that will just nod and say, ‘That’s a great idea Mr. President.’ Because you will be impeached.” [...]
Kelly, a retired four-star Marine, has likened his time in the White House to wrestling with a bear every day, according to a person who spoke to him. The person asked not to be identified to speak candidly.
Waiting for Bolton: A Capital Speculates on What He Will Say (NYT)
To Democrats who vilified him for years as an ultraconservative warmonger, suddenly Mr. Bolton has emerged as a much-sought witness who in the narrative they are assembling may have made a principled stand against Mr. Trump’s abuse of power to advance domestic political goals. “What it says is this is not about competing Republican versus Democratic visions of American foreign policy,” said Representative Tom Malinowski, Democrat of New Jersey. “This is about whether our foreign policy should be made in the national interest or in the personal political interests of the president.”posted by katra at 3:19 PM on October 26, 2019
[...] While Mr. Trump appreciated his firebrand style of politics on Fox News, Mr. Bolton saw his job as keeping Mr. Trump from making unwise deals with outlier states like North Korea or Iran, leading to friction. Mr. Bolton struggled with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for control of foreign policy and left just a day before Mr. Trump agreed to restore the frozen aid to Ukraine under pressure from Congress. [...]
The president’s defenders dismiss the idea that Mr. Bolton could hurt Mr. Trump. “I don’t care what Bolton says,” Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a close ally of the president’s, said on Fox News on Thursday. If the Ukrainians did not know the president had held up their aid when he was pressing them to investigate Democrats, Mr. Graham said, there is no impeachable offense. “You can’t have a crime unless you have a victim. There is no victim here.” Democrats disagree with that logic, saying it can still be an impeachable offense to pressure a foreign power to provide dirt on a political opponent regardless of when the Ukrainians knew about the suspension of the assistance. Moreover, The New York Times, citing interviews and documents, reported that in fact word of the aid freeze had gotten to high-level Ukrainian officials by the first week in August, earlier than previously known.
Mr. Bolton has hired Charles J. Cooper, one of Washington’s best-known lawyers and a colleague and friend since the Reagan administration, when Mr. Cooper was an assistant attorney general. Mr. Cooper, whose firm’s motto is “victory or death,” also represented former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, another Trump adviser who fell out with the president.
To Democrats who vilified him for years as an ultraconservative warmonger
Bolton vilifies himself as an ultraconservative warmonger.
suddenly Mr. Bolton has emerged as a much-sought witness who in the narrative they are assembling may have made a principled stand
Oh look, it's the rehabilitation.
posted by Rust Moranis at 3:25 PM on October 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Bolton vilifies himself as an ultraconservative warmonger.
suddenly Mr. Bolton has emerged as a much-sought witness who in the narrative they are assembling may have made a principled stand
Oh look, it's the rehabilitation.
posted by Rust Moranis at 3:25 PM on October 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Of course you can have a crime without a victim. Eg, attempted murder. This is the thinnest of defences.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 3:27 PM on October 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 3:27 PM on October 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Kelly, a retired four-star Marine, has likened his time in the White House to wrestling with a bear every day, according to a person who spoke to him. The person asked not to be identified to speak candidly.Kelly is an amoral monster who abandoned any credit or accolades he might have earned through his military service by knowingly choosing to cap his career in government by helping implement and defend incredibly cruel and traumatizing family separation policies inflicted upon vulnerable refugees and their children. No description of him should ever again mention his military service without also at least referencing how he chose to use the credibility and position which it had brought him.
Additionally, one would not be too far out on a limb if one suspected (based upon his own demonstrated performance in the Chief of Staff position) that Kelly's actual objection to Mulvaney's performance in the role was not that he failed to dissuade the president from doing wrong but that he failed to dissuade the president from doing wrong in a way that might be uncovered and punished.
posted by Nerd of the North at 3:29 PM on October 26, 2019 [36 favorites]
And don't forget that after leaving the White House where he implemented the child separation policy, John Kelly immediately became a member of the board of Caliburn International which operates some of those child detention facilities. Revolving door, indeed.
posted by JackFlash at 3:40 PM on October 26, 2019 [30 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 3:40 PM on October 26, 2019 [30 favorites]
About those separations: Trump Administration Has Separated 1,556 More Migrant Children Than Previously Known (Time, Oct. 25, 2019)
The Trump Administration revealed Thursday that an additional 1,556 children have been separated from their parents than previously reported, bringing the total number of family separations since July 2017 up to nearly 5,500. The new instances of family separation came to light after a judge ordered the Administration to deliver an accounting of every case.
posted by Iris Gambol at 3:41 PM on October 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
The Trump Administration revealed Thursday that an additional 1,556 children have been separated from their parents than previously reported, bringing the total number of family separations since July 2017 up to nearly 5,500. The new instances of family separation came to light after a judge ordered the Administration to deliver an accounting of every case.
posted by Iris Gambol at 3:41 PM on October 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
Of course you can have a crime without a victim. Eg, attempted murder.
“Convicted of a crime I didn't even commit. Humph, ‘attempted murder.’ Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry, do they?”
posted by kirkaracha at 3:46 PM on October 26, 2019 [6 favorites]
“Convicted of a crime I didn't even commit. Humph, ‘attempted murder.’ Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry, do they?”
posted by kirkaracha at 3:46 PM on October 26, 2019 [6 favorites]
To Democrats who vilified him for years as an ultraconservative warmonger
Bolton vilifies himself as an ultraconservative warmonger.
suddenly Mr. Bolton has emerged as a much-sought witness who in the narrative they are assembling may have made a principled stand
Oh look, it's the rehabilitation.
At the same time as it being the John Bolton rehabilitation, this is also a dogwhistle to the "Hillary is a warmonger, therefore I won't vote for Democrats" crowd.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 4:12 PM on October 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
Bolton vilifies himself as an ultraconservative warmonger.
suddenly Mr. Bolton has emerged as a much-sought witness who in the narrative they are assembling may have made a principled stand
Oh look, it's the rehabilitation.
At the same time as it being the John Bolton rehabilitation, this is also a dogwhistle to the "Hillary is a warmonger, therefore I won't vote for Democrats" crowd.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 4:12 PM on October 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
In impeachment inquiry, Republican lawmakers ask questions about whistleblower, loyalty to Trump and conspiracy theories (WaPo)
The accounts, based on interviews with 10 people involved in the depositions, also underscore the extent to which senior Republicans are directly involved in the impeachment inquiry even as party leaders claim they are being excluded from it, depicting it as a secretive — and therefore suspect — attack on the president. [...] In reality, Republican lawmakers and staffers have played a substantial — if subordinate — role since the impeachment inquiry began last month, officials said. Among those chiefly involved are Rep. Devin Nunes (Calif.), the senior Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, and Rep. Jim Jordan (Ohio), one of Trump’s most fervent defenders and the ranking Republican on the House Oversight Committee. [...]posted by katra at 5:07 PM on October 26, 2019 [9 favorites]
Nunes has used the depositions to try to link those appearing as part of the impeachment inquiry to other individuals who figured prominently in GOP efforts to discredit previous investigations of Trump’s ties with Russia in 2016, officials said. [...] Nunes has generally taken part in the early rounds of testimony, officials said, before leaving the briefing room and designating Jordan, other GOP members and a senior Republican aide to handle subsequent questioning of witnesses. [...]
Yovanovitch was asked point-blank whether she had ever spoken disparagingly about Trump while serving in Kyiv or had sought to undermine his policies — a veiled charge that she vehemently denied, officials said. Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, has said in interviews that he lobbied Trump to have Yovanovitch removed because she was acting against the president. At the time, Yovanovitch was seeking to contain efforts by Giuliani to bypass normal diplomatic channels in his efforts to persuade government officials in Ukraine to revive corruption investigations into an energy company that had employed Hunter Biden, the former vice president’s son, as a board member.
Republicans have also spent substantial time in depositions seeking to advance Trump’s unsubstantiated claims that Ukraine — and not Russia — interfered in the 2016 U.S. election. [...] Republicans appear to be trying to link their concerns about the Steele dossier to Ukraine, a country Trump has said, without evidence, interfered in the election. One Democratic official present for witness testimony said Republicans were asking witnesses things like, “Are you aware that part of the evidence in the Steele Dossier originated in Ukraine?”
“The witnesses are like, ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about,’ which makes sense, because it’s totally made up,” an official said.
John Kelly: “Don’t hire someone that will just nod and say, ‘That’s a great idea Mr. President.’ Because you will be impeached.”
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham: "I worked with John Kelly, and he was totally unequipped to handle the genius of our great President."
Spicer, Sanders, now Grisham. Where do they find them? Do they breed them in a vat?
posted by JackFlash at 5:49 PM on October 26, 2019 [22 favorites]
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham: "I worked with John Kelly, and he was totally unequipped to handle the genius of our great President."
Spicer, Sanders, now Grisham. Where do they find them? Do they breed them in a vat?
posted by JackFlash at 5:49 PM on October 26, 2019 [22 favorites]
WSJ: Sondland told House panels Trump's Ukraine action was quid pro quo (Axios)
U.S. Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland told House investigators last week the actions of President Trump and his allies to press Ukraine "amounted to a quid pro quo," his attorney told the Wall Street Journal Saturday. [...]posted by katra at 7:24 PM on October 26, 2019 [12 favorites]
Per the Journal, Sondland’s attorney Robert Luskin said his client "told House committees that he believed Ukraine agreeing to open investigations into Burisma ... and into alleged 2016 election interference was a condition for a White House meeting between Mr. Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.""Asked by a lawmaker whether that arrangement was a quid pro quo, Mr. Sondland cautioned that he wasn’t a lawyer but said he believed the answer was yes, Mr. Luskin said."
— Wall Street Journal
...breed them in a vat...
It seems relatively safe to say this kind of thing, so why not go with it, I suppose.
I mean, those who are in a position to talk about tricky stuff with some type of authority, if they misspeak and then need a lawyer reminder to better try and backpedal... that's tricky (and it may still bite Mulvaney in the butt for all we know...)
But a press secretary who slop-glorifies a self-nominated "genius" (whoever is the roadrunner in this constellation, I keep asking myself) at the expense of Your Daily persona non grata doesn't run any risk at all. If the Trump vessel keeps afloat, yay, he praised him as was his due. If the vessel capsizes, he can always say that he was forced to recite this genius stuff.
posted by Namlit at 7:34 PM on October 26, 2019
It seems relatively safe to say this kind of thing, so why not go with it, I suppose.
I mean, those who are in a position to talk about tricky stuff with some type of authority, if they misspeak and then need a lawyer reminder to better try and backpedal... that's tricky (and it may still bite Mulvaney in the butt for all we know...)
But a press secretary who slop-glorifies a self-nominated "genius" (whoever is the roadrunner in this constellation, I keep asking myself) at the expense of Your Daily persona non grata doesn't run any risk at all. If the Trump vessel keeps afloat, yay, he praised him as was his due. If the vessel capsizes, he can always say that he was forced to recite this genius stuff.
posted by Namlit at 7:34 PM on October 26, 2019
Apparently a major statement is coming tomorrow morning.
posted by rabbitrabbit at 8:11 PM on October 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by rabbitrabbit at 8:11 PM on October 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
Whatever. I'm still waiting for the big important announcement that was going to happen "Tuesday or Wednesday" back in 2017.
posted by Horkus at 8:39 PM on October 26, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by Horkus at 8:39 PM on October 26, 2019 [9 favorites]
This presidential address which is taking place at 6 AM PT is sure to be well thought out and expertly planned.
posted by feloniousmonk at 8:42 PM on October 26, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by feloniousmonk at 8:42 PM on October 26, 2019 [9 favorites]
My money's on a trade deal with China that brings us back to the status quo of January 2018.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:44 PM on October 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:44 PM on October 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
The rumor churn says it'll be an announcement that they killed al-Baghdadi, likely a result of an intelligence-for-troop-withdrawal exchange with Turkey.
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:47 PM on October 26, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:47 PM on October 26, 2019 [8 favorites]
Trump obviously thinks this will be his Bin Laden moment. I seriously doubt anyone will care by Monday.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 9:03 PM on October 26, 2019 [14 favorites]
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 9:03 PM on October 26, 2019 [14 favorites]
It is exceptionally irresponsible for the POTUS to tweet out to the public that "something big" is about to happen.
But I doubt that I have to tell that to anyone reading this.
posted by vverse23 at 11:26 PM on October 26, 2019 [6 favorites]
But I doubt that I have to tell that to anyone reading this.
posted by vverse23 at 11:26 PM on October 26, 2019 [6 favorites]
Apparently Judge Jeanine was on when he posted it, so I'm not holding my breath.
posted by miratime at 3:13 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by miratime at 3:13 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
I'm kinda taking it as a strong suggestion that someone's going to say something on one of the Sunday shows.
posted by box at 5:40 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by box at 5:40 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
The news has leaked.
United States Special Operations commandos carried out a risky raid in northwestern Syria on Saturday against a senior terrorist leader there. The target of the raid was believed to be the leader of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:58 AM on October 27, 2019 [8 favorites]
The official said that with any other president, the Pentagon would wait for absolute certainty before announcing any victory. But Mr. Trump is eager to get the news out, the official said, and Mr. Esper agreed to go on the Sunday morning television shows.
is there an internet rule/law for 'there's always a tweet'?
posted by j_curiouser at 6:11 AM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by j_curiouser at 6:11 AM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
This speech is unhinged and psychotic.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:25 AM on October 27, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:25 AM on October 27, 2019 [3 favorites]
Worse than normal.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:29 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:29 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
Who Is Bill Barr? (NYTimes Opinion)
By Emily Bazelon
By Emily Bazelon
And in blockbuster testimony before Congress last Tuesday, the top American diplomat in Ukraine, William Taylor, said that he and Gordon Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union, who was conveying Mr. Trump’s orders concerning Ukraine, discussed the possibility that Ukraine’s prosecutor would make a public statement about “investigations, potentially in coordination with Attorney General Barr’s probe.” Either people in the president’s circle are using Mr. Barr as a pawn, or he’s in deeper than he has said.posted by mumimor at 6:31 AM on October 27, 2019 [3 favorites]
Either way, maybe the lesson is the same one that applies throughout the administration: The fallout from the president’s maneuvering taints the people around him. The longer Mr. Barr stays in office, the more that Mr. Trump will look for the attorney general to do for him.
When Mr. Mueller closed up shop, he left several cases pending with the Justice Department,including charges against the Trump operative Roger Stone, which could end with disclosures at trial that damage the president (Mr. Stone has pleaded not guilty). What if Mr. Trump would rather make cases like these go away, with pardons or other inducements? Will Mr. Barr go along?
Hmmm...gotta call bullshit.
posted by j_curiouser at 6:31 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
"He died after running into a dead end tunnel, whimpering and crying and screaming all the way."
Al-Baghdadi detonated an explosive vest, killing himself and three children before the tunnel collapsed.
"He died like a dog. He died like a coward."
Multiple mentions of dogs, multiple mentions of watching video "as though you were watching a movie."
That's a really bloody story for 9 o'clock on a Sunday morning.
(Also, if we obliterated the caliphate 100% in March, why was the leader still running around in October? And if he was the number one national-security priority of your administration, why was he only under surveillance for a couple weeks?)
posted by box at 6:32 AM on October 27, 2019 [20 favorites]
Al-Baghdadi detonated an explosive vest, killing himself and three children before the tunnel collapsed.
"He died like a dog. He died like a coward."
Multiple mentions of dogs, multiple mentions of watching video "as though you were watching a movie."
That's a really bloody story for 9 o'clock on a Sunday morning.
(Also, if we obliterated the caliphate 100% in March, why was the leader still running around in October? And if he was the number one national-security priority of your administration, why was he only under surveillance for a couple weeks?)
posted by box at 6:32 AM on October 27, 2019 [20 favorites]
"We may have to fight for the oil. It's okay. Maybe someone else wants the oil. But they're gonna have a hell of a fight."
Aaaand we're taking the oil.
posted by box at 6:43 AM on October 27, 2019 [8 favorites]
Aaaand we're taking the oil.
posted by box at 6:43 AM on October 27, 2019 [8 favorites]
"The oil is so valuable, for many reasons.... We should be able to take some also."
posted by box at 6:48 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by box at 6:48 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
It doesn't seem like the intelligence report shared many details with him, LOL.
posted by Harry Caul at 6:56 AM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 6:56 AM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
Only so much room for pictures on the single page brief.
The intelligence community probably sees his preference for single page summaries with lots of pictures as a silver lining. They don't have to go to any great lengths to hide information from him, they just don't give him much of anything to begin with because, "Well, shucks, there just isn't enough room on the page and we didn't think it was important enough to take up the presidents precious time."
posted by VTX at 7:06 AM on October 27, 2019 [4 favorites]
The intelligence community probably sees his preference for single page summaries with lots of pictures as a silver lining. They don't have to go to any great lengths to hide information from him, they just don't give him much of anything to begin with because, "Well, shucks, there just isn't enough room on the page and we didn't think it was important enough to take up the presidents precious time."
posted by VTX at 7:06 AM on October 27, 2019 [4 favorites]
‘This is going to do lasting damage’: Impeachment leaves Ukraine policy in chaos (Politico)
The Trump administration would not answer basic questions about where Ukraine policy stands now and who is in charge of it. Officials at the National Security Council and U.S. Embassy to the E.U. referred requests for comment to the State Department, which did not respond to multiple inquiries.posted by katra at 7:09 AM on October 27, 2019 [6 favorites]
[...] Upon stepping down, Volker recommended a career officer with no previous involvement in Ukraine policy to replace him, according to a person with knowledge of the discussions. That is primarily because Volker didn’t think it would be possible to convince someone outside government with relevant experience in Kyiv to take it on, this person said, and it’s not clear whether they’ve agreed to take the job.
“Nobody wants to touch” Ukraine policy now “given the political environment,” they said. “So it’s kind of a vacuum, which is terrible for Ukraine, and good for Russia.” [...] William Burns, the president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former deputy secretary of state, said that “a dysfunctional Ukraine” will be looked upon fondly by Russian President Vladimir Putin. “We’ve contributed to that as well, and Putin becomes one of the big winners.”
Did everyone miss the part where he seems to say there were three children with him in the tunnel that we bombed?
The claim is that Al-Baghdadi blew up himself (and the children) by detonating an explosive vest he was wearing.
posted by zakur at 7:35 AM on October 27, 2019
The claim is that Al-Baghdadi blew up himself (and the children) by detonating an explosive vest he was wearing.
posted by zakur at 7:35 AM on October 27, 2019
Why would he be wearing an explosive vest?
posted by Grangousier at 7:43 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Grangousier at 7:43 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
He said that we were leaving Syria because the terrorism problem was solved already, though. Now he wants accolades for proving himself wrong?
posted by Selena777 at 7:48 AM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Selena777 at 7:48 AM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
There you go again, looking for logic in the turd heap. ;-)
posted by Rykey at 7:55 AM on October 27, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by Rykey at 7:55 AM on October 27, 2019 [6 favorites]
Dude probably knew the jig was up because some idiot tweeted about it, so he put on his explosive vest. Anyway, whatever happened, one thing is certain, he did not whimper and cry. That's just Trump projecting, as always.
posted by wabbittwax at 7:57 AM on October 27, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by wabbittwax at 7:57 AM on October 27, 2019 [4 favorites]
Mod note: Further discussion of al-Baghdadi should go in the Turkey/Syria thread unless it is specifically impeachment related!
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 8:06 AM on October 27, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 8:06 AM on October 27, 2019 [7 favorites]
At best, this gives Republicans a day or two as a break from the news cycle where they can say, "I'm not here to talk about impeachment, I'm here to talk about Al-Baghdadi" -- unconsciously making the point that they still have no argument and no defense. We'll have more testimony, some more damning details, and Trump and his crew will be aghast that killing off this one dude wasn't good enough to make it all go away.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 8:53 AM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by scaryblackdeath at 8:53 AM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
Yeah, there’s a fresh lineup of witnesses next week who will drag the news back to impeachment. And Trump isn’t doing himself any favors explicitly using this momentary distraction to make it all about comparing himself to Obama.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 9:12 AM on October 27, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by C'est la D.C. at 9:12 AM on October 27, 2019 [5 favorites]
Pence dodges on officials testifying on Ukraine pressure (Politico)
CBS "Face the Nation" moderator Margaret Brennan repeatedly asked Pence about statements made by officials under oath that they had knowledge of a deal being offered that made military aid contingent on Ukraine opening an investigation targeting former Vice President Joe Biden.posted by katra at 9:41 AM on October 27, 2019 [3 favorites]
[...] "I can only tell you what I know," Pence said on CBS, denying that there was any quid pro quo. Pence would not give a clear yes-or-no answer when asked if witnesses were lying or whether he had any knowledge of the arrangement being alleged.
"I'm telling you, all of my interactions with the president, all of my conversations with [Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky], were entirely focused on issues of importance to the American people, ending corruption, enlisting more European support and supporting Ukraine in a way that would restore its territorial integrity and stand by Ukraine for its sovereignty," Pence said.
Pelosi knows how to deflate a headline win.
posted by Harry Caul at 11:11 AM on October 27, 2019 [21 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 11:11 AM on October 27, 2019 [21 favorites]
The President’s Lawyers Are Making a Dangerous Argument for Presidential Immunity (Jed Shugerman, Atlantic)
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:13 AM on October 27, 2019 [4 favorites]
[...] Earlier in the argument, Consovoy had emphasized the danger of “the proliferation” of hundreds of state prosecutors investigating a president, if all 50 states were “unleashed.” Judge Christopher Droney replied, “How is that different from federal grand juries’ subpoenas? There are a lot of state [prosecutors] but there are a lot of federal U.S. Attorneys, too.”The DOJ in general has too often been a fixer for presidents, often run by a Presidential crony.
Consovoy’s answer: “Because the Attorney General exercises control at the end of the day over all [those prosecutors].”
In this answer, Consovoy revealed the precise reason state prosecutors must be able to investigate, subpoena, and even indict a sitting president. The world is now witnessing a partisan, conflicted, and perhaps even criminal co-conspirator attorney general capture a Department of Justice to protect a sitting president. [...]
posted by ZeusHumms at 11:13 AM on October 27, 2019 [4 favorites]
Top State Department official says ousting ambassador to Ukraine was a White House priority (Anya van Wagtendonk, Vox)
Philip Reeker, acting assistant secretary in the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, became the latest State Department official to testify on Capitol Hill in the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump Saturday.posted by ZeusHumms at 11:27 AM on October 27, 2019 [4 favorites]
Although the testimony occurred behind closed doors, the Wall Street Journal reported that Reeker testified that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo actively neutralized support for ousted US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch before she was abruptly removed from her post in May. Reeker also reportedly described concerns raised in a July White House meeting about defense aid being withheld from Ukraine.
Trump’s latest attempt to block impeachment inquiry testimonies faces a key court battle (Anya van Wagtendonk, Vox)
The Trump administration has attempted to block a key witness from testifying in the impeachment inquiry by claiming “constitutional immunity.” And that witness — former deputy national security adviser Charles Kupperman — has asked a judge to rule whether his testimony can proceed as planned.posted by ZeusHumms at 11:32 AM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
Kupperman made the request in a lawsuit filed Friday; he was set to testify before lawmakers on Monday, after being subpoenaed. The House Democrats leading the impeachment inquiry have been calling key witnesses related to President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine at at a rapid clip, and the Trump administration has tried — and largely failed — to derail these testimonies.
The administration had not previously invoked constitutional immunity, and the decision in Kupperman’s lawsuit could be precedent-setting at a moment in which officials are increasingly caught between directives from the executive and legislative branches that at are, as Kupperman’s lawyer said in a statement, “competing and irreconcilable.”
Monica Alba of NBC News tweets: "Full on 'LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP!' chants heard throughout the crowd at Nats Park after President Trump was announced and shown on screen here"
posted by jocelmeow at 6:45 PM on October 27, 2019 [55 favorites]
posted by jocelmeow at 6:45 PM on October 27, 2019 [55 favorites]
Other vids show the chants even louder.
But my favorite thing is "Yay,BOO, yay."
posted by NorthernLite at 7:13 PM on October 27, 2019 [14 favorites]
But my favorite thing is "Yay,BOO, yay."
posted by NorthernLite at 7:13 PM on October 27, 2019 [14 favorites]
I was saying Boo-urns.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:24 PM on October 27, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:24 PM on October 27, 2019 [11 favorites]
That is the sound of an ENTIRE STADIUM booing. Don't tell me Trump can't be impeached.
posted by xammerboy at 7:37 PM on October 27, 2019 [30 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 7:37 PM on October 27, 2019 [30 favorites]
In the picture of Trump he looks like he's about to cry. I don't remember Hillary crying. I guess it's harder to weather when you know you're really going to prison.
posted by xammerboy at 7:43 PM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 7:43 PM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
He apparently has now left the game early, and many on Twitter assume we're in for a wave of ALL CAPS rage tweets.
posted by emjaybee at 7:43 PM on October 27, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by emjaybee at 7:43 PM on October 27, 2019 [5 favorites]
Look how Trump’s face changes when he realizes an entire stadium is booing him
posted by kirkaracha at 7:44 PM on October 27, 2019 [30 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 7:44 PM on October 27, 2019 [30 favorites]
DC is 90% Democratic. It'd be like showing a picture of Obama on game day down in West Virginia. Of course people want the other guy gone.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:48 PM on October 27, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:48 PM on October 27, 2019 [5 favorites]
Now that...that is the sound of a tide turning.
posted by sexyrobot at 7:48 PM on October 27, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by sexyrobot at 7:48 PM on October 27, 2019 [6 favorites]
Pool has been told to pack up. We're now walking out to the motorcare.
10:01pm. God damn, this made my night.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:55 PM on October 27, 2019 [8 favorites]
10:01pm. God damn, this made my night.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:55 PM on October 27, 2019 [8 favorites]
Also, I love that everyone is in red...GREAT optics. Also, he's not "about" to cry, he's just straight up crying.
posted by sexyrobot at 8:03 PM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by sexyrobot at 8:03 PM on October 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
The ISIS win didn't even last him til Monday. Delicious.
posted by rifflesby at 8:04 PM on October 27, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by rifflesby at 8:04 PM on October 27, 2019 [5 favorites]
There were "Veterans for Impeachment" signs behind home plate.
posted by xammerboy at 8:04 PM on October 27, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 8:04 PM on October 27, 2019 [17 favorites]
Also also, that Deadspin piece has the guest list at the end of it...is it normal for a president to take a whole bunch of members of congress (in the middle of an impeachment investigation) to a (expensive private box seats) baseball game? Is it even legal?
posted by sexyrobot at 8:10 PM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by sexyrobot at 8:10 PM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
that game was broadcast (i assume?) through the cocoon: whatever may be said tomorrow, baseball fans nationwide had that -- an entire stadium of people in red hats, as deadspin's dan mcquaid said, booing the president the same day he held his premature isis-bigwig-killing triumph -- pumped right into their awareness. which will they remember: al baghdadi's name, or the fans in the stands at the fifth game of the world-series booing the president of the united states?
tomorrow's pundits will make d.c. sportsfans denizens of the deepstate swamp (and to the degree there are deepstate and swamp, some of its denizens are among the baseball team's fans) and millennial resistancers. some pundits might denigrate d.c. sportsfans beyond democratic party affiliation, saying they're aren't properly loyal, properly patriotic, they aren't real americans like the rest of us. and they would be right, from a taxation without representation perspective, though, likely, in no other way.
it is the best i've ever felt about d.c. sportsfans as a class. go team.
sort of anecdata aside: mom today reported some visitors to her (perfectly standard, i understand with fair confidence) suburban methodist church approached her after the service asking "is it always like this?" "like what?" mom replied. "when do they talk about politics?" was the not-particularly-direct response. "i do not recall that we ever do." the balance of the story was that visitors were from some other suburban methodist church where there was politics mixed in with the liturgy, too much, for visitors' taste -- maybe the LGBTQ stuff, mom surmised. she expects to see the visitors next sunday.
posted by 20 year lurk at 8:13 PM on October 27, 2019 [12 favorites]
tomorrow's pundits will make d.c. sportsfans denizens of the deepstate swamp (and to the degree there are deepstate and swamp, some of its denizens are among the baseball team's fans) and millennial resistancers. some pundits might denigrate d.c. sportsfans beyond democratic party affiliation, saying they're aren't properly loyal, properly patriotic, they aren't real americans like the rest of us. and they would be right, from a taxation without representation perspective, though, likely, in no other way.
it is the best i've ever felt about d.c. sportsfans as a class. go team.
sort of anecdata aside: mom today reported some visitors to her (perfectly standard, i understand with fair confidence) suburban methodist church approached her after the service asking "is it always like this?" "like what?" mom replied. "when do they talk about politics?" was the not-particularly-direct response. "i do not recall that we ever do." the balance of the story was that visitors were from some other suburban methodist church where there was politics mixed in with the liturgy, too much, for visitors' taste -- maybe the LGBTQ stuff, mom surmised. she expects to see the visitors next sunday.
posted by 20 year lurk at 8:13 PM on October 27, 2019 [12 favorites]
Democrats go after Barr over DOJ Russia investigation (Politico)
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, accused Barr on Sunday of “weaponizing” the Justice Department. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats have called on Barr to recuse himself from the department's investigation.posted by katra at 9:04 PM on October 27, 2019 [9 favorites]
"Bill Barr, on the president’s behalf, is weaponizing the Justice Department to go after the president’s enemies,” Schiff said on ABC‘s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.” “He’s demonstrating once again that he is merely a tool of the president, the president’s hand, not the representative of the American people.” [...]
Senate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee also sent a letter to Barr on Thursday that questioned the attorney general's ability to be impartial in any matter related to Trump and Ukraine. In their letter, the senators cited Trump's July 25 call with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, in which he asked Zelensky to investigate the Biden family. During that call, Trump said that both Barr and his personal attorney Rudy Giuiliani would get in touch with the Ukrainian president.
"This raises legitimate questions about your knowledge of the activities of Mr. Giuliani and others, as well as the actions that you have taken and your discussions with the President and White House about these investigations," the senators wrote. The Democratic senators also cited Barr's visit to Italy to look into the origins of the Russia investigation, and noted that Trump told Zelensky he would "like to have the Attorney General call" to discuss a conspiracy theory related to Ukraine and the 2016 election.
"Impartial enforcement of the law is essential to give the American public confidence in the Justice Department's work," the senators wrote. "Your personal connection to these matters creates the appearance of a conflict of interest and gives rise to questions about whether the Department is being used to advance the President's personal interests."
He was never not going to be booed at a DC sports game. It is true that lots of the people Trump regularly insults and who make DC the awesome place it is weren’t in the stadium to boo. But even the rich white suburban bro crowd has friends and family who didn’t get paid for a month this winter and this whole metro area takes offense to being called “the swamp” by someone who hasn’t once tried to even explore the town. If you live here, anytime you go on vacation and people ask where you’re from, you have to talk about this piece of human filth. He has crowded out everything else associated with DC. A lot of those bros moved here during the Obama years while the city was gentrifying and optimistic (for young white people with money) and covered with street art of Obama smiling, and they chose to move here rather than go try to work in finance somewhere because they care about politics or at least want to feel like their work has meaning. And the bros who grew up here know even more of the “swamp”/establishment people Trump has spent the past three years insulting. The city has been covered with “Fuck Trump” angry murals and bitter jokes about Mike Pence, and instead of people crowded around intersections when they spot a motorcade, there’s one or two people flipping the bird. There is a little flare of anger or fear when you spot a tourist (standing on the wrong side of the Metro escalator) wearing one of Those Hats. And that is just the absolute most shallow view of what this Presidency does to DC, but it does affect the mood. The anger here is monumental and it fills the city.
posted by sallybrown at 9:10 PM on October 27, 2019 [71 favorites]
posted by sallybrown at 9:10 PM on October 27, 2019 [71 favorites]
we danced in the streets that once; we shall dance there again.
posted by 20 year lurk at 9:17 PM on October 27, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by 20 year lurk at 9:17 PM on October 27, 2019 [11 favorites]
In Soviet Washington, swamp drains you, shithead.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:19 PM on October 27, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by tonycpsu at 9:19 PM on October 27, 2019 [3 favorites]
I wouldn't put too much weight on the effect of the booing. I'm guessing many of those who are stunned or overjoyed just simply don't watch sports much. None of those clips sound or show much that is different from any appearance of Roger Goodell, the commish of the NFL, any time he's announced at a game or at the draft. It's part of the flavor of American sports and the relationship the fans have with authority figures. Tr*mps handlers will assure him of this.
Sure he'll be bruised, and yes Obama, and even W, got cheers, but his base and fox news won't blink and that scene, sorry.
posted by OHenryPacey at 9:25 PM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
Sure he'll be bruised, and yes Obama, and even W, got cheers, but his base and fox news won't blink and that scene, sorry.
posted by OHenryPacey at 9:25 PM on October 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
Well, at least tomorrow the Commander-In-Chief can have a chance to salve his bruised ego as he travels to the more friendly confines of (checks notes) Chicago.
I'm sure some teachers and students will be happy to take some time away from the ongoing CPS strike to... welcome the President.
posted by tivalasvegas at 9:29 PM on October 27, 2019 [11 favorites]
I'm sure some teachers and students will be happy to take some time away from the ongoing CPS strike to... welcome the President.
posted by tivalasvegas at 9:29 PM on October 27, 2019 [11 favorites]
Impeachment Panels Threaten Contempt If Official Defies Subpoena (Bloomberg/MSN)
The House Democrats leading the impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump demanded that a former White House official appear for his scheduled hearing Monday, dismissing his attempt to challenge a subpoena in court.posted by katra at 10:50 PM on October 27, 2019 [7 favorites]
In a letter Saturday to attorneys representing Charles Kupperman, the president’s former deputy national security adviser, leaders of three House committees said his lawsuit is “lacking in legal merit and apparently coordinated with the White House,” and failure to appear for his deposition “will constitute evidence that may be used against him in a contempt proceeding.”
“Such willful defiance of a duly authorized subpoena may cause the committees to draw an adverse inference against the president,” the letter said. “The White House’s overbroad assertion of ‘absolute immunity,’ at its core, is another example of the president’s stonewalling of Congress and concerted efforts to obstruct the House’s impeachment inquiry.” [...]
The letter was sent by Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel and acting Oversight Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney.
I wouldn't put too much weight on the effect of the booing.
Yeah, but auto-tune it to the National Anthem and it's still one hell of a campaign ad.
posted by sexyrobot at 11:31 PM on October 27, 2019 [6 favorites]
Yeah, but auto-tune it to the National Anthem and it's still one hell of a campaign ad.
posted by sexyrobot at 11:31 PM on October 27, 2019 [6 favorites]
Trump looks absolutely stricken in the picture at the top of the Guardian article about the booing.
I didn't think it was possible that I would ever feel sorry for him, but I did when I saw that shot — how can anybody who's lived the life he has still be that vulnerable?
This will have consequences
posted by jamjam at 2:07 AM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
I didn't think it was possible that I would ever feel sorry for him, but I did when I saw that shot — how can anybody who's lived the life he has still be that vulnerable?
This will have consequences
posted by jamjam at 2:07 AM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
Look how Trump’s face changes when he realizes an entire stadium is booing him
This is good stuff, man
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:24 AM on October 28, 2019 [12 favorites]
This is good stuff, man
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:24 AM on October 28, 2019 [12 favorites]
It is satisfying to watch, but since "Washington" is a convenient synecdoche for Bad Liberal Stuff and Everything We Sent Trump to the White House to Fight, it's also confirmation that he's getting the right people angry.
...And look how uncivil they are! Why, when we host Rival Team at Big Land Grant University Stadium, you don't see us treating their fans that way. The man just wanted to watch a baseball game! Those nasty people! Truly we must be the Real America. Can you believe those ingrates want statehood?!
tl/dr probably not the optics we might hope they are
posted by Chef Flamboyardee at 2:43 AM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
...And look how uncivil they are! Why, when we host Rival Team at Big Land Grant University Stadium, you don't see us treating their fans that way. The man just wanted to watch a baseball game! Those nasty people! Truly we must be the Real America. Can you believe those ingrates want statehood?!
tl/dr probably not the optics we might hope they are
posted by Chef Flamboyardee at 2:43 AM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
"Why, when we host Rival Team at Big Land Grant University Stadium, you don't see us treating their fans that way"
Possibly you have never been to a game at a Big Land Grant University, sometimes they have riots and flip cars for funsies.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 4:06 AM on October 28, 2019 [21 favorites]
Possibly you have never been to a game at a Big Land Grant University, sometimes they have riots and flip cars for funsies.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 4:06 AM on October 28, 2019 [21 favorites]
sometimes they have riots and flip cars for funsies.
the rest of the time it's catharsis
posted by PMdixon at 4:32 AM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
the rest of the time it's catharsis
posted by PMdixon at 4:32 AM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
“Prople hate Trump” is not exactly news to his supporters.
Ih Ilhan Omar went to a Dallas Cowboys game and got booed, would it cause you to rethink your support?
posted by argybarg at 4:53 AM on October 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
Ih Ilhan Omar went to a Dallas Cowboys game and got booed, would it cause you to rethink your support?
posted by argybarg at 4:53 AM on October 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
The ineffable mysteries of cognitive dissonance tolerate "college hijinks", and after all, that couch burning stuff all happens outside of the stadium... I still think it looks different.
posted by Chef Flamboyardee at 4:56 AM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Chef Flamboyardee at 4:56 AM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
I wouldn't put too much weight on the effect of the booing.
I don't think folks are figuring that it will have an effect (especially not on Trump) but are seeing evidence that there has been an effect on the public, from whatever combination of impeachment hearings and the Mueller report and 3 years of Trump being a raging asshole. Yes, it's the Washington D.C. team, and D.C. didn't vote for him, but as people on Twitter have pointed out, MLB fans skew older, whiter, and wealthier than other sports fans, and on top of that it's the World Series - people come from all over and tickets aren't cheap. (Remember that the median income of Trump voters was something like $72,000.) When a stadium full of the kind of people who fit the demographic of people who voted for Trump even though they might not have liked him much or been true believers generates that kind of reaction to the President of the United States, it's not unreasonable to suspect that there's more going on than standard sports fan rowdiness.
posted by soundguy99 at 5:09 AM on October 28, 2019 [34 favorites]
I don't think folks are figuring that it will have an effect (especially not on Trump) but are seeing evidence that there has been an effect on the public, from whatever combination of impeachment hearings and the Mueller report and 3 years of Trump being a raging asshole. Yes, it's the Washington D.C. team, and D.C. didn't vote for him, but as people on Twitter have pointed out, MLB fans skew older, whiter, and wealthier than other sports fans, and on top of that it's the World Series - people come from all over and tickets aren't cheap. (Remember that the median income of Trump voters was something like $72,000.) When a stadium full of the kind of people who fit the demographic of people who voted for Trump even though they might not have liked him much or been true believers generates that kind of reaction to the President of the United States, it's not unreasonable to suspect that there's more going on than standard sports fan rowdiness.
posted by soundguy99 at 5:09 AM on October 28, 2019 [34 favorites]
It is satisfying to watch, but since "Washington" is a convenient synecdoche for Bad Liberal Stuff and Everything We Sent Trump to the White House to Fight, it's also confirmation that he's getting the right people angry.
...And look how uncivil they are! Why, when we host Rival Team at Big Land Grant University Stadium, you don't see us treating their fans that way. The man just wanted to watch a baseball game! Those nasty people! Truly we must be the Real America. Can you believe those ingrates want statehood?!
tl/dr probably not the optics we might hope they are
AmericansRacists don't want to grant statehood to DC because of bigotry and right-wing tribalism, and it has been this way for decades. They already consider DC residents to be uncivil, nasty ingrates not because of their behavior, but because they are seen as a majority-PoC population that is the only place in the US to consistently vote against the worst conservatives the country has elected. None of this has anything to do with booing at a fucking baseball game that may last all of 24 hours in the news cycle. Worrying about the "optics" (along with other nonsense like "the narrative" and "checking in on the horse race") of booing Trump is really just another depressing reminder that the media is successful in impressing on us the gamification of politics.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:11 AM on October 28, 2019 [10 favorites]
...And look how uncivil they are! Why, when we host Rival Team at Big Land Grant University Stadium, you don't see us treating their fans that way. The man just wanted to watch a baseball game! Those nasty people! Truly we must be the Real America. Can you believe those ingrates want statehood?!
tl/dr probably not the optics we might hope they are
posted by zombieflanders at 5:11 AM on October 28, 2019 [10 favorites]
One of today's YouGov questions (not an official poll, just a question on their website):
If President Donald Trump suspended military aid to Ukraine in order to incentivize the country's officials to investigate his political rival, Joe Biden, and his son, would you support or oppose impeachment?
Strongly support 49%
Somewhat support 8%
Somewhat oppose 9%
Strongly oppose 18%
Don’t know 16%
posted by box at 5:24 AM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
If President Donald Trump suspended military aid to Ukraine in order to incentivize the country's officials to investigate his political rival, Joe Biden, and his son, would you support or oppose impeachment?
Strongly support 49%
Somewhat support 8%
Somewhat oppose 9%
Strongly oppose 18%
Don’t know 16%
posted by box at 5:24 AM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
Somewhat oppose 9%
Strongly oppose 18%
There's that number again...
posted by acb at 6:03 AM on October 28, 2019 [22 favorites]
Strongly oppose 18%
There's that number again...
posted by acb at 6:03 AM on October 28, 2019 [22 favorites]
Sen. Johnson, ally of Trump and Ukraine, surfaces in crucial episodes in the saga (Elise Viebeck and Dalton Bennett, WaPo)
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:36 AM on October 28, 2019 [9 favorites]
Sen. Ron Johnson [R-WI] met in July with a former Ukrainian diplomat who has circulated unproven claims that Ukrainian officials assisted Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, a previously unreported contact that underscores the GOP senator’s involvement in the unfolding narrative that triggered the impeachment inquiry of President Trump.The Ukraine Clown Posse gains another member.
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:36 AM on October 28, 2019 [9 favorites]
‘It feels like a horror movie’: Republicans feel anxious and adrift defending Trump (Robert Costa and Philip Rucker, WaPo)
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:45 AM on October 28, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:45 AM on October 28, 2019 [5 favorites]
‘It feels like a horror movie’
Welcome to the freakin’ club.
posted by darkstar at 7:10 AM on October 28, 2019 [45 favorites]
Welcome to the freakin’ club.
posted by darkstar at 7:10 AM on October 28, 2019 [45 favorites]
“At some point, McConnell is going to have to perform triage to save the majority,” said Rick Wilson, a longtime GOP consultant and Trump critic. “How the Senate Republicans handle everything is all going to come down to how threatened Mitch feels and how worried he is about losing Colorado, North Carolina and a few others states. And if Trump’s numbers keep dropping, that decision is going to come sooner than later for him.”
posted by xammerboy at 7:25 AM on October 28, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 7:25 AM on October 28, 2019 [5 favorites]
ZeusHumms: ‘It feels like a horror movie’: Republicans feel anxious and adrift defending Trump (Robert Costa and Philip Rucker, WaPo)
Two SCOTUS picks and a growing list of federal judges, many of whom have little qualifications beyond holding extremist views, even for conservatives (Politico, Oct. 2017), who are also predominantly (relatively) young, white males, to lifetime appointments.
Backing out of northern Syria, bombing our own bases so Turkey (or Daesh) can't use them (comment in MeFi Syria and Turkey thread) and opening the door for Turkish genocide.
Family separations to deter migrants, while cutting U.S. aid as farmers struggle with drought (NPR, September 30, 2019).
But now GOP senators are lamenting their plight? Profiles of hand-wringing and brow-mopping serve to make Republican senators look like the wronged party, when they're standing in the way of progress against Trump.
The internal conflict is "when do we stop backing Trump?" Fuck 'em. The time to stand up to Trump, and serve as one third of that critical balance of powers, was back in January 2017, and any time up to now.
Instead, members of the GOP wanted to get arrested barging into a secure meeting where GOP members were present and participating (if only to push their conspiracy theories -- as quoted by katra: “The witnesses are like, ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about,’ which makes sense, because it’s totally made up,” an official said.) And again GOP representatives push conspiracy theories defending Trump in a hearing on election security (Mother Jones, October 23, 2019).
Really sounds like a party at war with itself.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:36 AM on October 28, 2019 [39 favorites]
In hushed conversations over the past week, GOP senators lamented that the fast-expanding probe is fraying their party, which remains completely in Trump’s grip. They voiced exasperation at the expectation that they defend the president against the troublesome picture that has been painted, with neither convincing arguments from the White House nor confidence that something worse won’t soon be discovered.Wait, what? The GOP is "completely in Trump's grip"? Bullshit. They're not victims here. They're only sad now that they might be held accountable for supporting Trump.
Two SCOTUS picks and a growing list of federal judges, many of whom have little qualifications beyond holding extremist views, even for conservatives (Politico, Oct. 2017), who are also predominantly (relatively) young, white males, to lifetime appointments.
Backing out of northern Syria, bombing our own bases so Turkey (or Daesh) can't use them (comment in MeFi Syria and Turkey thread) and opening the door for Turkish genocide.
Family separations to deter migrants, while cutting U.S. aid as farmers struggle with drought (NPR, September 30, 2019).
But now GOP senators are lamenting their plight? Profiles of hand-wringing and brow-mopping serve to make Republican senators look like the wronged party, when they're standing in the way of progress against Trump.
The internal conflict is "when do we stop backing Trump?" Fuck 'em. The time to stand up to Trump, and serve as one third of that critical balance of powers, was back in January 2017, and any time up to now.
Instead, members of the GOP wanted to get arrested barging into a secure meeting where GOP members were present and participating (if only to push their conspiracy theories -- as quoted by katra: “The witnesses are like, ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about,’ which makes sense, because it’s totally made up,” an official said.) And again GOP representatives push conspiracy theories defending Trump in a hearing on election security (Mother Jones, October 23, 2019).
Really sounds like a party at war with itself.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:36 AM on October 28, 2019 [39 favorites]
Republicans aren't flailing or desperate: Their attack on impeachment is strategic — and might work (Heather Digby Parton, Salon)
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:54 AM on October 28, 2019 [9 favorites]
Republican attacks on impeachment "process" have a clear goal in mind: Senate acquittal, followed by re-electionSeems to the same playbook they've been running for years.
Trump and his henchmen are running the same game [that they ran with Mueller's Russia investigation] with the impeachment inquiry into Ukraine. They're denigrating the witnesses, attacking the investigation as a partisan witch hunt, and saying that Trump's phone call with the Ukrainian president was "perfect" over and over again. It is apparent that they expect the president to be impeached in the House, but they will acquit him in the Senate — not on the merits of the case, but because the process was supposedly illegitimate.
The point is to rally their white working-class voters by stoking their rage and resentment, and trying to convince what remains of their white college-educated vote to stay the course.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:54 AM on October 28, 2019 [9 favorites]
Im surprised nobody brought up Trey Gowdy’s appearance on Face the Nation. This is a defense test-run and, imho, it has some issues.
First, he tries to establish his “I’m A Reasonable Guy!” bonafides by saying closed-door investigations are 100% good. Of course, he immediately pivots to criticizing “all of the leaking” and says “Mueller never leaked”.
He really tries to characterize Trump’s actions “trying to get to the bottom of what happened in 2016” and “stopping corruption “. I’m sure the GOP has focus-grouped what lines resonate with voters and those two points are the closest they can get to an honest defense.
It’s a bad-faith dodge, of course; Democrats need to kill that BS before it spreads. They need to point out how rooting out corruption actually works and show how Trump did the opposite. They need to call out the GOP for their selective calls for openness when they think it suits their purposes and how they defend secrecy when the facts are not on their side.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 8:56 AM on October 28, 2019 [7 favorites]
First, he tries to establish his “I’m A Reasonable Guy!” bonafides by saying closed-door investigations are 100% good. Of course, he immediately pivots to criticizing “all of the leaking” and says “Mueller never leaked”.
He really tries to characterize Trump’s actions “trying to get to the bottom of what happened in 2016” and “stopping corruption “. I’m sure the GOP has focus-grouped what lines resonate with voters and those two points are the closest they can get to an honest defense.
It’s a bad-faith dodge, of course; Democrats need to kill that BS before it spreads. They need to point out how rooting out corruption actually works and show how Trump did the opposite. They need to call out the GOP for their selective calls for openness when they think it suits their purposes and how they defend secrecy when the facts are not on their side.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 8:56 AM on October 28, 2019 [7 favorites]
Charles Kupperman, who is not a government employee and yet is still taking orders from Donald Trump to ignore a subpoena, failed to appear for his deposition today. As a private citizen, Kupperman is under no legal obligation to follow Trump's instructions. This is Kupperman's own decision to defy congress, not Trump's.
posted by JackFlash at 9:17 AM on October 28, 2019 [27 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 9:17 AM on October 28, 2019 [27 favorites]
Dear Democrats,
You get the Capitol Police to retrieve Kupperman, you sit him down, you open up the hearing to cameras, and you make that bastard take the 5th in front of the entire god damned country.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 10:48 AM on October 28, 2019 [33 favorites]
You get the Capitol Police to retrieve Kupperman, you sit him down, you open up the hearing to cameras, and you make that bastard take the 5th in front of the entire god damned country.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 10:48 AM on October 28, 2019 [33 favorites]
Bolton Deputy Wants Court Ruling Before He Talks In Trump Impeachment Inquiry (Franco Ordoñez, Mara Liasson and Claudia Grisales for NPR, October 28, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 10:49 AM on October 28, 2019 [12 favorites]
Investigators in the impeachment inquiry of President Trump hoped to talk to Charles Kupperman on Monday. But the former White House official failed to show up.For context: From 2001 to 2010, Kupperman was on the board of directors for the Center for Security Policy, a far-right Washington, D.C.-based think tank (Wikipedia x2). He's not just a random (former) government official. He's playing his part in delaying impeachment investigations into Trump and Co.
As they gather evidence behind closed doors, House investigators had been expected to press Kupperman to corroborate key elements of a top U.S. diplomat's account that Trump built a shadow foreign policy team around his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to pressure the Ukrainian president to investigate a political rival — and that Trump held up U.S. military aid for Ukraine as leverage.
But Kupperman, who had been the top aide to then-national security adviser John Bolton, filed a lawsuit on Friday describing himself as caught between two competing orders. He wants a court ruling on whether he should comply with the House subpoena to testify — or comply with a White House order to stay away because the nature of his job as adviser means he is exempt from the congressional order.
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., on Monday rejected what he called a ploy by Kupperman and the White House to play for time and keep Kupperman from appearing. But Schiff also said House Democrats don't intend to wait on this being resolved in court and they're prepared to move ahead with their impeachment inquiry.
"The lawsuit that Dr. Kupperman filed in district court has no basis in law ... we expect the court will make short shrift of that argument. Nonetheless, we move forward," Schiff told reporters.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:49 AM on October 28, 2019 [12 favorites]
Several New Trump Corruption Stories Ramp Up Pressure to Impeach (David Atkins, Washington Monthly)
[…] In many ways, it’s easier for a writer to focus on the Democratic side of politics these days because the disagreements within the left are much more interesting and open to interpretation. But Trump? His story is somehow, at the same time, engrossing and shocking. Yet it is also depressingly dull—like watching the initial stages of a trial against a dumb, reckless mafia don. Did he do the bad thing? Yes. Oh look. Here’s another bad thing. Oh look again, another witness pointing out another crime. […]posted by ZeusHumms at 11:01 AM on October 28, 2019 [25 favorites]
The country deserves some accountability here. When an openly corrupt and criminal cabal has overtaken the federal government, simply refusing to re-elect them is not enough. There must be justice, both while they’re in office and afterward as need be. It’s a cold, boring take. But it’s the right one and the only one that matters.
Pelosi is bringing a vote to the floor this week to affirm the impeachment investigation. The whole thing is great and worth a read but here's how it ends:
We are taking this step to eliminate any doubt as to whether the Trump Administration may withhold documents, prevent witness testimony, disregard duly authorized subpoenas, or continue obstructing the House of Representatives.posted by octothorpe at 12:54 PM on October 28, 2019 [46 favorites]
Nobody is above the law.
best regards,
Nancy
I've always thought this impeachment resolution was bullshit because even if they vote for it, Trump and the Republicans come back with "well they didn't authorize dodecile secret subpoena privileges so we're still going to ignore it".
Then said Trump/Republicans proceed to wreck up the place more while the Democrats engage in procedure.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:16 PM on October 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
Then said Trump/Republicans proceed to wreck up the place more while the Democrats engage in procedure.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:16 PM on October 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
Lamborn (R-CO5, so. fucking. maga) is stubbornly hanging on to process arguments. here's an excerpt of his response to my scif-bullshit-letter:
posted by j_curiouser at 1:22 PM on October 28, 2019 [3 favorites]
The American people deserve transparency in the impeachment inquiry process. Currently there is no regard for the rules and the entire process is happening in secret behind closed doors. 75 percent of the voting Members of Congress can't attend the committee hearings, can't have access to the documents, and can't even read the transcripts of the hearings. The Democrats should not be keeping vital information hidden from Members of Congress who will be expected to vote on impeachment.So. Whatevs. I can't seem to muster the energy to rebut that hollow hypocritical shit - all R rules from 2015. Capped with an unsupported 'leaks' assertion.
As your Representative, I will continue to support a fair and open process in the impeachment inquiry. Members of Congress shouldn't have to learn about what occurs in these proceedings by reading Democrat leaks in the liberal media.
posted by j_curiouser at 1:22 PM on October 28, 2019 [3 favorites]
Pelosi is bringing a vote to the floor this week to affirm the impeachment investigation.
I don't know if this is a good idea or not, conceding a bogus argument to Trump. I expect the Trump attorneys to argue that the investigation has to start all over from scratch and new subpoenas issued because everything from before is invalid.
posted by JackFlash at 1:27 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
I don't know if this is a good idea or not, conceding a bogus argument to Trump. I expect the Trump attorneys to argue that the investigation has to start all over from scratch and new subpoenas issued because everything from before is invalid.
posted by JackFlash at 1:27 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
I get the concern on whether or not this plays into the GOPs hands, but Pelosi knows what she's doing. For one, there's the obvious matter of affirming that this is indeed a full-fledged impeachment inquiry approved by the House. But another side benefit is that it's going to make a bunch of GOP reps go on the record now about whether or not they support an inquiry. Those in safe districts will vote against it. What about GOP reps in swing districts? They have to choose between appeasing the base for a primary or giving plenty of campaign fodder to a Dem challenger. There are certain things that GOP congresscritters don't want. One of those things is the transparency they claim to be asking for, because the facts that come out aren't gonna be pretty for them. Another of those things is having to firmly declare for the record what side you're on regarding impeachment. And when the House formally approves the investigation, that's going to move public sentiment as well.
posted by azpenguin at 1:45 PM on October 28, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by azpenguin at 1:45 PM on October 28, 2019 [11 favorites]
75 percent of the voting Members of Congress can't attend the committee hearings, can't have access to the documents, and can't even read the transcripts of the hearings.
So, his argument is they shouldn't have committees at all anymore? Because that's how committees work - a smaller group does the work and the research then brings their finding back to the full body.
posted by dnash at 1:46 PM on October 28, 2019 [17 favorites]
So, his argument is they shouldn't have committees at all anymore? Because that's how committees work - a smaller group does the work and the research then brings their finding back to the full body.
posted by dnash at 1:46 PM on October 28, 2019 [17 favorites]
Oh look, a dumbshit!
The American people deserve transparency in the impeachment inquiry process. Currently there is no regard for the rules and the entire process is happening in secret behind closed doors.
Why only transparency for this? Is you saying that you only like transparency when it's something you don't like, or that threatens your power? Where do you draw the line?
75 percent of the voting Members of Congress can't attend the committee hearings, can't have access to the documents, and can't even read the transcripts of the hearings.
Which is what every sixth grader learns how Congress works.
The Democrats should not be keeping vital information hidden from Members of Congress who will be expected to vote on impeachment.
jerkoffmotion.gif
posted by rhizome at 1:48 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
The American people deserve transparency in the impeachment inquiry process. Currently there is no regard for the rules and the entire process is happening in secret behind closed doors.
Why only transparency for this? Is you saying that you only like transparency when it's something you don't like, or that threatens your power? Where do you draw the line?
75 percent of the voting Members of Congress can't attend the committee hearings, can't have access to the documents, and can't even read the transcripts of the hearings.
Which is what every sixth grader learns how Congress works.
The Democrats should not be keeping vital information hidden from Members of Congress who will be expected to vote on impeachment.
jerkoffmotion.gif
posted by rhizome at 1:48 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
This sounds like the hearings might be televised: "This resolution establishes the procedure for hearings that are open to the American people."
But this part is bullshit: "...and sets forth due process rights for the President and his Counsel." The due process rights for the president are in the trial in the Senate.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:52 PM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
But this part is bullshit: "...and sets forth due process rights for the President and his Counsel." The due process rights for the president are in the trial in the Senate.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:52 PM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
Perhaps you can help your representative learn about the three-step process of impeachment and the role of the articles of impeachment.
posted by Sublimity at 1:53 PM on October 28, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Sublimity at 1:53 PM on October 28, 2019 [3 favorites]
...and sets forth due process rights for the President and his Counsel."
To me this feels like a dig at the fact that the president's attorneys keep needing to exercise their own due-process rights.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:55 PM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
To me this feels like a dig at the fact that the president's attorneys keep needing to exercise their own due-process rights.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:55 PM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
um. at literally ANY point in her current tenure as speaker has Nancy Pelosi even ONCE been out maneuvered by these knuckleheads? or has she calmly yet stylishly wiped the floor with them every time they've come to a direct challenge? like she brought a fucking designer coat back to market because she wore it while kicking Trump's ass. I just...
are people REALLY supposing that this gang of fucking morons is outsmarting Nancy "I will cut you with a smile" Pelosi?
I get that people don't like her policy positions, such as they are, or such as they imagine them to be, but her job in this environment is not policy, it's inside baseball political traps and shit. like is the weird woman-in-power derangement such that people honest to fucking god think that Trump -- the dumbest, most gleefully ignorant utter vacancy to ever hold any office, ever -- is outsmarting her?
posted by schadenfrau at 1:55 PM on October 28, 2019 [48 favorites]
are people REALLY supposing that this gang of fucking morons is outsmarting Nancy "I will cut you with a smile" Pelosi?
I get that people don't like her policy positions, such as they are, or such as they imagine them to be, but her job in this environment is not policy, it's inside baseball political traps and shit. like is the weird woman-in-power derangement such that people honest to fucking god think that Trump -- the dumbest, most gleefully ignorant utter vacancy to ever hold any office, ever -- is outsmarting her?
posted by schadenfrau at 1:55 PM on October 28, 2019 [48 favorites]
Nobody in the reality-based community thinks Trump is outsmarting Pelosi. But sometimes it feels like we're watching, I dunno, Kitty Pryde fighting the Blob. She's phasing this way and that, and he's just standing there laughing, and maybe she's using the right strategy but we can't see it, and all we want is for Storm to bust in and zap him with a million volts, but it's not happening...
X-Men metaphors, man. See what these people have done to me?
posted by Faint of Butt at 2:04 PM on October 28, 2019 [17 favorites]
X-Men metaphors, man. See what these people have done to me?
posted by Faint of Butt at 2:04 PM on October 28, 2019 [17 favorites]
like is the weird woman-in-power derangement such that people honest to fucking god think that Trump -- the dumbest, most gleefully ignorant utter vacancy to ever hold any office, ever -- is outsmarting her?
Three years ago I comfortably believed in all kinds of confident pronouncements of this type about Hillary Clinton. Regardless of whether you're right to be so confident, I think it's not so unreasonable to be a little more nervous these days. (Also, everyone, please please please please please don't start arguing about Hillary just because I mentioned her name)
posted by J.K. Seazer at 2:08 PM on October 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
Three years ago I comfortably believed in all kinds of confident pronouncements of this type about Hillary Clinton. Regardless of whether you're right to be so confident, I think it's not so unreasonable to be a little more nervous these days. (Also, everyone, please please please please please don't start arguing about Hillary just because I mentioned her name)
posted by J.K. Seazer at 2:08 PM on October 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
I like that X-Men metaphor. Also, I'm going to assume that Storm represents either Stormy Daniels or Kamala Harris here. Either would work, but for totally different reasons.
posted by Too-Ticky at 2:13 PM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Too-Ticky at 2:13 PM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
I find it deeply weird that people are now arguing about the need to keep the impeachment hearings secret and that Trump and his team are the ones advocating for openness.
I fully expect a little legal/political/rhetorical jujitsu where Trump's highly selective thrust for openness is only momentarily defended against and then is suddenly used to pry out things he doesn't want out in the open.
posted by srboisvert at 2:13 PM on October 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
I fully expect a little legal/political/rhetorical jujitsu where Trump's highly selective thrust for openness is only momentarily defended against and then is suddenly used to pry out things he doesn't want out in the open.
posted by srboisvert at 2:13 PM on October 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
I hope that Pelosi has some political jujitsu worked out. My fear is Trump has spent the last several weeks complaining about the shit on the tip of her nose and the moment she goes to wipe it off, he’s going to start screaming about the shit on her hands.
And yes, we all know that there isn’t any shit on Nancy Pelosi anywhere but Trump gaslights and bullies until you have no choice but to acknowledge the reality he creates and the moment you do that he has you and everything is fucked.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:24 PM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
And yes, we all know that there isn’t any shit on Nancy Pelosi anywhere but Trump gaslights and bullies until you have no choice but to acknowledge the reality he creates and the moment you do that he has you and everything is fucked.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:24 PM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
I hate superhero movies. But I am gleefully watching Nancy Pelosi, in that aforementioned red cape, systematically fight her way into the gorgon, er, moron's lair. I am confident the slaying will happen soon.
posted by PhineasGage at 2:24 PM on October 28, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 2:24 PM on October 28, 2019 [4 favorites]
I find it deeply weird that people are now arguing about the need to keep the impeachment hearings secret and that Trump and his team are the ones advocating for openness.
No, we are arguing that Trump shouldn’t have any say in how the House chooses to conduct their business.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:26 PM on October 28, 2019 [9 favorites]
No, we are arguing that Trump shouldn’t have any say in how the House chooses to conduct their business.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:26 PM on October 28, 2019 [9 favorites]
Nancy's got him begging for an impeachment vote, am I right? Note that she has also adroitly stolen the headlines back.
posted by Sublimity at 2:26 PM on October 28, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Sublimity at 2:26 PM on October 28, 2019 [4 favorites]
The problem with writing to your GOP reps is that they're not responding in good faith.
Don't spin your wheels arguing against points the person that presented them doesn't even believe. There's no one for you to convince of anything that way. Just because you see Dem publically treat this bullshit like it's said in good faith doesn't mean you have to.
posted by VTX at 2:28 PM on October 28, 2019 [18 favorites]
The American people deserve transparency in the impeachment inquiry process. Currently there is no regard for the rules and the entire process is happening in secret behind closed doors. 75 percent of the voting Members of Congress can't attend the committee hearings, can't have access to the documents, and can't even read the transcripts of the hearings. The Democrats should not be keeping vital information hidden from Members of Congress who will be expected to vote on impeachment.It's fair to assume that if you wrote back a response that treats those statements as things actually believed by Mr. Lamborn you're wasting your time. He already knows. Your goal isn't to "educate" him so that he'll see reason. Your only goal with any response should be to call this out for the bullshit it is. Provide at least one data point that tells Mr. Lamborn's staff that you see him, you see his bad-faith for what it is and it has failed. Basically whatever data might make that rep afraid of losing your job, be representative of that data.
As your Representative, I will continue to support a fair and open process in the impeachment inquiry. Members of Congress shouldn't have to learn about what occurs in these proceedings by reading Democrat leaks in the liberal media.
Don't spin your wheels arguing against points the person that presented them doesn't even believe. There's no one for you to convince of anything that way. Just because you see Dem publically treat this bullshit like it's said in good faith doesn't mean you have to.
posted by VTX at 2:28 PM on October 28, 2019 [18 favorites]
Seriously, Pelosi may not be who many of us want as the leader of the party for all kinds of reasons, some of which are (much, so much) better than others, but under the current circumstances you could hardly ask for anyone better. Almost on that "poorly coded simulation/hack writers" irony level.
posted by snuffleupagus at 2:29 PM on October 28, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by snuffleupagus at 2:29 PM on October 28, 2019 [5 favorites]
Seriously, Pelosi is a mother of five. She knows how to handle kids with temper tantrums.
Biden? Trump would say, "May I play with a flamethrower on the freeway? and Biden would be all, "What does your mother say?"
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 2:50 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
Biden? Trump would say, "May I play with a flamethrower on the freeway? and Biden would be all, "What does your mother say?"
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 2:50 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
The Blob is actually a good metaphor for this nonsense because he can't just be punched out or shoved away, you have to rip out the entire chunk of land he's standing on (his....base, if you will) and dispose of it along with him.
Also, I forget who wrote this on Twitter, but the advantage of taking this vote now, right after the court ruling that they don't have to, is that it comes from a strong legal position -- they can say that rather than opening an impeachment inquiry, this sets the terms for continuing via public hearings the entirely valid and legally confirmed inquiry that they've been running through depositions and subpoenas already.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 2:57 PM on October 28, 2019 [10 favorites]
Also, I forget who wrote this on Twitter, but the advantage of taking this vote now, right after the court ruling that they don't have to, is that it comes from a strong legal position -- they can say that rather than opening an impeachment inquiry, this sets the terms for continuing via public hearings the entirely valid and legally confirmed inquiry that they've been running through depositions and subpoenas already.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 2:57 PM on October 28, 2019 [10 favorites]
I wouldn't put too much weight on the effect of the booing.
It may hurt him more than you think: Trump, like other populist leaders, relies on his momentum for support. That's been his strategy since he started campaigning for the Republican nomination, where he did his best to stick to spectacle instead of competing on policy or debating skills. And even now, after nearly three years in office, it's notorious that instead of engaging with crises he just creates controversy as a distraction. As far as supporters are concerned it doesn't matter if the talking heads are criticising Trump: they've been taught to dismiss intellectuals' opinions, so the only thing they're left with is that their President is in the news. This is different: it's a mass event where their popular President has been comprehensively shown to be unpopular.
Being booed at one game might not change the narrative, but he's probably going to be a lot more cautious about similar unscripted appearances. If there are other mass events at which he's expected to appear, but doesn't, it may be a narrative in itself.
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:09 PM on October 28, 2019 [34 favorites]
It may hurt him more than you think: Trump, like other populist leaders, relies on his momentum for support. That's been his strategy since he started campaigning for the Republican nomination, where he did his best to stick to spectacle instead of competing on policy or debating skills. And even now, after nearly three years in office, it's notorious that instead of engaging with crises he just creates controversy as a distraction. As far as supporters are concerned it doesn't matter if the talking heads are criticising Trump: they've been taught to dismiss intellectuals' opinions, so the only thing they're left with is that their President is in the news. This is different: it's a mass event where their popular President has been comprehensively shown to be unpopular.
Being booed at one game might not change the narrative, but he's probably going to be a lot more cautious about similar unscripted appearances. If there are other mass events at which he's expected to appear, but doesn't, it may be a narrative in itself.
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:09 PM on October 28, 2019 [34 favorites]
RE: impeachment inquiry vote - I just found this bit on CNN.com live update page (so no link because it'll disappear soon) -
posted by soundguy99 at 3:57 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
"Democratic sources say the new resolution in the impeachment inquiry is necessary to set forth the exact procedures to transfer evidence from the House Intelligence Committee over to the House Judiciary Committee, and to detail the procedures for holding public hearings in their inquiry.So it seems there's a bit of a boring dotting the i's and crossing the t's reason for doing this in addition to any supposed pushback against Republican whining.
It is not officially a vote to authorize the inquiry — although they will argue that the White House will have no grounds to resist their subpoenas after this vote establishes the procedures as they head into the next steps."
posted by soundguy99 at 3:57 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
I doubt he believes the booing happened. His mind can’t process it, so it never did. They loved him. Their response to him was incredible. Etc.
posted by argybarg at 3:59 PM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by argybarg at 3:59 PM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
I find it deeply weird that people are now arguing about the need to keep the impeachment hearings secret and that Trump and his team are the ones advocating for openness.
Look, this guy has mishandled all manner of classified material. I'm willing to let them attempt to keep the country safe by not further disclosing things that shouldn't necessarily be disclosed while they investigate.
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 4:19 PM on October 28, 2019 [3 favorites]
Look, this guy has mishandled all manner of classified material. I'm willing to let them attempt to keep the country safe by not further disclosing things that shouldn't necessarily be disclosed while they investigate.
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 4:19 PM on October 28, 2019 [3 favorites]
I doubt he believes the booing happened.
Trump Mortified After World Series Crowd Starts Booing, Chanting ‘Lock Him Up’ At Melania
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 5:34 PM on October 28, 2019 [23 favorites]
Trump Mortified After World Series Crowd Starts Booing, Chanting ‘Lock Him Up’ At Melania
WASHINGTON—As a chorus of jeers began to fill Nationals Park during Game Five of the World Series, President Donald Trump was reportedly mortified Sunday after the crowd started chanting “Lock him up!” at first lady Melania Trump. “Why would they do that? It’s so mean,” said Trump, adding that when they stood up in their box seats to wave, the crowd began viciously booing Melania, an act he claimed was extremely disrespectful to the office of the first lady, especially since he was pretty sure she hadn’t done anything illegal. “Listen, there are plenty of things about Melania that I don’t like. I’ve definitely thought about replacing her. Heck, I got caught up in the chant for a little bit there too. But she should be able to attend a baseball game in peace. Someone even pulled out a sign that said ‘Impeach Trump,’ which is silly, because I don’t think she can be impeached. Overall, we were incredibly embarrassed for Melania, but she was able to put on a brave face. I went over to console her and she didn’t seem bothered by it at all.” At press time, Trump kicked himself for being foolish after realizing that the crowd was probably booing Senator David Perdue (R-GA) for his unpopular agricultural policies.(yes, it's The Onion)
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 5:34 PM on October 28, 2019 [23 favorites]
I find it deeply weird that people are now arguing about the need to keep the impeachment hearings secret and that Trump and his team are the ones advocating for openness.
These are legal proceedings where getting the truth from witnesses depends on them not knowing what the witnesses before them testified. It's standard procedure, kind of like a cop getting stories from each witness or suspect separately.
posted by xammerboy at 5:48 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
These are legal proceedings where getting the truth from witnesses depends on them not knowing what the witnesses before them testified. It's standard procedure, kind of like a cop getting stories from each witness or suspect separately.
posted by xammerboy at 5:48 PM on October 28, 2019 [6 favorites]
It may hurt him more than you think
If you watch the gif of him figuring it out you can see it hurt him in what remains of his soul
I watched it on loop and could feel my heart getting bigger
It is great
posted by schadenfrau at 5:55 PM on October 28, 2019 [51 favorites]
If you watch the gif of him figuring it out you can see it hurt him in what remains of his soul
I watched it on loop and could feel my heart getting bigger
It is great
posted by schadenfrau at 5:55 PM on October 28, 2019 [51 favorites]
I watched it on loop and could feel my heart getting bigger
It is great
posted by schadenfrau at 5:55 on 10/29
Eponysterical
posted by bardophile at 5:59 PM on October 28, 2019 [47 favorites]
So it seems there's a bit of a boring dotting the i's and crossing the t's reason for doing this in addition to any supposed pushback against Republican whining.
Keep in mind that Trump has packed the courts, including the Supreme Court. What is of utmost importance, and which I think points to Pelosi as one of the best Democrats to be running this show, is that the entire process must boil down to political questions. If every conclusion is purely political, like impeachment itself, the courts won't (shouldn't) touch it. It will be "non-justiciable."
I imagine one of Barr's jobs (if not Miller/Bannon/etc.) is to try to push the impeachment process into questions of law. This is why Republicans are crying about everything in terms of due process, "it's not illegal," and other concepts of criminal trials. If Pelosi goes "you better believe it's illegal," Barr will run/waddle to the courts complaining that Pelosi is biasing the impeachment unfairly, that she's practicing law without a license, or drifting out of her lane regardless. I'll have to look into this angle more, but as you can see I believe this might be where the ultimate battle lines are drawn.
So this is the existential threat to Trump: that the Senate will be the only thing he can influence to keep him in office (where they might not anyway). The House can hand the (political) charges up the ladder, where the Senate tries the whole kit and kaboodle and Trump has to grovel to them to keep his ego in the catbird seat. Which he won't do, but there will be something weird he does, and has to do, to survive. No man is an island and whatnot, and he is a poor excuse for a tyrant. A puppet I'll give you, but I don't think he has what it takes to be a true dictator.
posted by rhizome at 6:07 PM on October 28, 2019 [7 favorites]
Keep in mind that Trump has packed the courts, including the Supreme Court. What is of utmost importance, and which I think points to Pelosi as one of the best Democrats to be running this show, is that the entire process must boil down to political questions. If every conclusion is purely political, like impeachment itself, the courts won't (shouldn't) touch it. It will be "non-justiciable."
I imagine one of Barr's jobs (if not Miller/Bannon/etc.) is to try to push the impeachment process into questions of law. This is why Republicans are crying about everything in terms of due process, "it's not illegal," and other concepts of criminal trials. If Pelosi goes "you better believe it's illegal," Barr will run/waddle to the courts complaining that Pelosi is biasing the impeachment unfairly, that she's practicing law without a license, or drifting out of her lane regardless. I'll have to look into this angle more, but as you can see I believe this might be where the ultimate battle lines are drawn.
So this is the existential threat to Trump: that the Senate will be the only thing he can influence to keep him in office (where they might not anyway). The House can hand the (political) charges up the ladder, where the Senate tries the whole kit and kaboodle and Trump has to grovel to them to keep his ego in the catbird seat. Which he won't do, but there will be something weird he does, and has to do, to survive. No man is an island and whatnot, and he is a poor excuse for a tyrant. A puppet I'll give you, but I don't think he has what it takes to be a true dictator.
posted by rhizome at 6:07 PM on October 28, 2019 [7 favorites]
The intercept (fwiw) is reporting that Trump wanted Zelensky to announce an investigation of the Bidens on CNN.
According to Taylor, a career foreign service official who has served four Republican and two Democratic presidents. Donald Trump extorted a promise from his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, to appear on American television and announce during a CNN interview, that he was opening criminal investigations on Joe Biden’s family and other Democrats.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 6:16 PM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
According to Taylor, a career foreign service official who has served four Republican and two Democratic presidents. Donald Trump extorted a promise from his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, to appear on American television and announce during a CNN interview, that he was opening criminal investigations on Joe Biden’s family and other Democrats.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 6:16 PM on October 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
Army Officer Who Heard Trump’s Ukraine Call Reported Concerns (NYT)
A White House national security official who is a decorated Iraq war veteran plans to tell House impeachment investigators on Tuesday that he heard President Trump appeal to Ukraine’s president to investigate one of his leading political rivals, a request the aide considered so damaging to American interests that he reported it to a superior.posted by katra at 6:42 PM on October 28, 2019 [19 favorites]
Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman of the Army, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, twice registered internal objections about how Mr. Trump and his inner circle were treating Ukraine, out of what he called a “sense of duty,” he plans to tell the inquiry, according to a draft of his opening statement obtained by The New York Times.
He will be the first White House official to testify who listened in on the July 25 telephone call between Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine that is at the center of the impeachment inquiry, in which Mr. Trump asked Mr. Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
“I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine,” Colonel Vindman said in his statement. “I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained.” [...] “This would all undermine U.S. national security,” Colonel Vindman added, referring to Mr. Trump’s comments in the call.
The intercept (fwiw) is reporting that Trump wanted Zelensky to announce an investigation of the Bidens on CNN.
If Trump just tweeted that Ukraine was investigating the Bidens, knowing full well that they weren't, the "liberal" media would have amplified his message for a week going "Who knows if it's true? Could be!" even if Ukraine vehemently denied it, before just accepting it as fact. But he had to do things the stupid way.
posted by jason_steakums at 6:53 PM on October 28, 2019 [13 favorites]
If Trump just tweeted that Ukraine was investigating the Bidens, knowing full well that they weren't, the "liberal" media would have amplified his message for a week going "Who knows if it's true? Could be!" even if Ukraine vehemently denied it, before just accepting it as fact. But he had to do things the stupid way.
posted by jason_steakums at 6:53 PM on October 28, 2019 [13 favorites]
Gonna say I called it..
One of the most striking moments of 1989 was when Nicolae Ceausescu of Romania realized that his number was up. He was speaking to a large crowd when suddenly he hears boos and shouting. His look of bewilderment is palpable. I like to think Trump will have a similar moment one day. The action starts at about 2' 30" in this YouTube clip. posted by vac2003 at 4:09 PM on January 22, 2017 [24 favorites +] [!]posted by vac2003 at 7:11 PM on October 28, 2019 [37 favorites]
The Republicans quoted in the WaPo article Republicans feel anxious and adrift defending Trump are very consciously keeping on-message:
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:24 PM on October 28, 2019 [26 favorites]
“I’m a juror and I’m comfortable not speaking,” Sen. James E. Risch (R-Idaho) said.I wish the paper had queried this, because they're not jurors. The role of these representatives is more legislative than judicial: they're being asked to do what they think is best for the country, not what comports with some formal notion of justice as applied to Trump's behaviour. There's no “due process” in the sense that we usually understand it, either. The idea that due process exists under impeachment is actually very dangerous, because the remedy for a breach of due process at law is an appeal. There's no “appeal” from impeachment, except revolt.
“I’d be a juror, so I have no comment,” Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) said.
“I don’t need a strategy for impeachment because I may be a juror someday,” Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) said.
“To be honest, I don’t follow any of it because that’s not due process,” Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) said.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:24 PM on October 28, 2019 [26 favorites]
> Gonna say I called it..
I like a good victory lap as much as the next MeFite, but let's not be popping any champagne based on the fact that some baseball fans made POTUS feel momentarily uncomfortable. His number will be up when he's wearing it on an orange jumpsuit.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:49 PM on October 28, 2019 [19 favorites]
I like a good victory lap as much as the next MeFite, but let's not be popping any champagne based on the fact that some baseball fans made POTUS feel momentarily uncomfortable. His number will be up when he's wearing it on an orange jumpsuit.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:49 PM on October 28, 2019 [19 favorites]
Nunes Aide Is Leaking the Ukraine Whistleblower’s Name, Sources Say
A top aide to Rep. Devin Nunes has been providing conservative politicians and journalists with information—and misinformation—about the anonymous whistleblower who triggered the biggest crisis of Donald Trump’s presidency, two knowledgeable sources tell The Daily Beast.posted by kirkaracha at 8:04 PM on October 28, 2019 [13 favorites]
Derek Harvey, who works for Nunes, the ranking Republican on the House intelligence committee, has provided notes for House Republicans identifying the whistleblower’s name ahead of the high-profile depositions of Trump administration appointees and civil servants in the impeachment inquiry. The purpose of the notes, one source said, is to get the whistleblower’s name into the record of the proceedings, which committee chairman Adam Schiff has pledged to eventually release. In other words: it’s an attempt to out the anonymous official who helped trigger the impeachment inquiry.
TPM has scored a copy of Vindman’s opening statement. It is, as they say, a spicy meatball.
One exerpt:
posted by murphy slaw at 8:19 PM on October 28, 2019 [41 favorites]
One exerpt:
On July 10, 2019, Oleksandr Danylyuk, the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council for Ukraine, visited Washington, D.C. for a meeting with National Security Advisor Bolton. Ambassadors Volker and Sondland also attended, along with Energy Secretary Rick Perry.Sondland is in deep shit.
The meeting proceeded well until the Ukrainians broached the subject of a meeting between the two presidents. The Ukrainians saw this meeting as critically important in order to solidify the support of their most important international partner. Amb. Sondland started to speak about Ukraine delivering specific investigations in order to secure the meeting with the President, at which time Ambassador Bolton cut the meeting short.
Following this meeting, there was a scheduled debriefing during which Amb. Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma. I stated to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push. Dr. Hill then entered the room and asserted to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate.
posted by murphy slaw at 8:19 PM on October 28, 2019 [41 favorites]
That’s the second staffer of Nunes who has leaked info to damage investigations. And we all remember Nunes running to the White House at night with secret info. Traitors, the lot of them. Maybe not in the legal, constitutional sense, but in deed and intent.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 8:22 PM on October 28, 2019 [29 favorites]
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 8:22 PM on October 28, 2019 [29 favorites]
Yeah, it's time to call this treason. The word crimes doesn't cover what these people have been up to. If you don't like the word treason for technical reasons, explain to me how we are not at war with ISIS. Over the last few years, this war has ramped up, not down. We've dropped more bombs on Afghanistan since Trump than we did during Bush or Obama's presidencies. Tell me Trump hasn't provided comfort and aid to our enemy.
posted by xammerboy at 8:58 PM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 8:58 PM on October 28, 2019 [8 favorites]
Folks, the constitution has very specific requirements for treason:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
As outrageous as some of this conduct is, it is not treason and calling it such does nothing to advance an impeachment case against Trump.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 10:38 PM on October 28, 2019 [9 favorites]
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
As outrageous as some of this conduct is, it is not treason and calling it such does nothing to advance an impeachment case against Trump.
posted by Big Al 8000 at 10:38 PM on October 28, 2019 [9 favorites]
You know, vis-à-vis treason - Pelosi kinda sorta nailed it when she said “All roads with you (Trump) lead to Putin.” I mean, it looks and walks and sounds like a duck: I find it perfectly plausible that he see’s his relationship with Putin more important than the defense of the Constitution - of course even accepting that Trump’s principle allegiance, after himself, is to Putin leaves in question whether Russia/Putin is an ‘enemy‘ or simply a ‘competitor.’
posted by From Bklyn at 12:42 AM on October 29, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by From Bklyn at 12:42 AM on October 29, 2019 [13 favorites]
Five myths about treason, Washington Post – Opinions, Carlton F.W. Larson, February 17, 2017:
posted by cenoxo at 4:42 AM on October 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
President Trump promised to do things differently, but the resignation of a national security adviser under a cloud of suspicion of treason was novel even by Trump standards. The political (and social media) landscape is now littered with accusations of treason, not just against Trump officials but against all kinds of other actors as well — Hillary Clinton, Mitch McConnell, even the state of California. Treason is an ancient concept shrouded in misconceptions. Here are a few of the most common.Reasons why in the article....
- MYTH NO. 1 - Disloyalty or policies that harm the United States are treason.
- MYTH NO. 2 - Aiding Russia is treason against the United States.
- MYTH NO. 3 - Leaking classified material or handling it sloppily is treason.
- MYTH NO. 4 - Only U.S. citizens can commit treason against the U.S.
- MYTH NO. 5 - Very few Americans have committed treason.
posted by cenoxo at 4:42 AM on October 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
Dear GOP, Some Scary Advice on How to Survive Your Impeachment Nightmare (Politico)
posted by Faint of Butt at 4:45 AM on October 29, 2019
posted by Faint of Butt at 4:45 AM on October 29, 2019
I mean, it would be great advice ... for a party that gave a shit about legacy or how history will view them. For the GOP, though, power and money in the short term (even at the cost of long-term credibility) are all they give a shit about, so I'm not really sure what the author of the article thinks they're going to do with his advice aside from maybe wipe their asses with it.
posted by tocts at 5:23 AM on October 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by tocts at 5:23 AM on October 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
Trump btw has started referring to Zelensky as 'the New Russian president'
So . . straight up Putin propaganda out of our president's mouth now.
posted by Harry Caul at 5:33 AM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
So . . straight up Putin propaganda out of our president's mouth now.
posted by Harry Caul at 5:33 AM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
straight up Putin propaganda
Also, it is _deeply_ offensive to Ukrainians to be referred to as "Russians". So, whatever friend he thought he had in Zelensky just got pissed to the wind.
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 5:45 AM on October 29, 2019 [27 favorites]
Also, it is _deeply_ offensive to Ukrainians to be referred to as "Russians". So, whatever friend he thought he had in Zelensky just got pissed to the wind.
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 5:45 AM on October 29, 2019 [27 favorites]
Sean Duffy on CNN on Army Lt. Col. Vindman: "It seems very clear that he is incredibly concerned about Ukrainian defense. I don't know that he's concerned about American policy ... we all have an affinity to our homeland where we came from ... he has an affinity for the Ukraine."Well there's the strategy for Vindman. Dual loyalty. There are no depths too deep for this administration and its cronies to plumb.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:29 AM on October 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
Wanting the people of Ukraine to determine their own government without interference from Russia used to be a wholly uncontroversial position, until Donald Trump came on and made that one thing they changed about the 2016 Republican Party platform.
posted by Gelatin at 6:40 AM on October 29, 2019 [14 favorites]
posted by Gelatin at 6:40 AM on October 29, 2019 [14 favorites]
it is _deeply_ offensive to Ukrainians to be referred to as "Russians". So, whatever friend he thought he had in Zelensky just got pissed to the wind.
Zelensky will likely assume Trump is just a typical pig-ignorant American (it's also deeply offensive to Scots and Welsh to be referred to as "English", yet most Americans don't seem to know that "England" is not "the UK").
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 6:41 AM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Zelensky will likely assume Trump is just a typical pig-ignorant American (it's also deeply offensive to Scots and Welsh to be referred to as "English", yet most Americans don't seem to know that "England" is not "the UK").
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 6:41 AM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Dear GOP, Some Scary Advice on How to Survive Your Impeachment Nightmare (Politico)
"Imagine six months of Giuliani butt-dials."
posted by kirkaracha at 6:42 AM on October 29, 2019
"Imagine six months of Giuliani butt-dials."
posted by kirkaracha at 6:42 AM on October 29, 2019
Republicans move the impeachment goal posts after Pelosi announces the vote they'd demanded (Laura Clawson, Daily Kos)
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:46 AM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
If Pelosi is cutting off one of their key process arguments against impeachment, well … they’re going to start just as furiously lobbing slightly different process arguments. Emphasis on slightly.It's suggested that the word 'tainted' will be heavily used to describe the impeachment.
“Pelosi let Schiff hold secret hearings and leak misleading info to attack @realDonaldTrump for weeks. Now she wants a vote to ‘formalize’ a process that’s already tainted. Dems aren't trying to change their Soviet-style impeachment process, they're formally endorsing it,” whined House Minority Whip Steve Scalise.
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:46 AM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
It's suggested that the word 'tainted' will be heavily used to describe the impeachment.
It's suggested that the word 'tainted' should be heavily used to describe the entirety of Trump's presidency.
posted by Gelatin at 6:57 AM on October 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
It's suggested that the word 'tainted' should be heavily used to describe the entirety of Trump's presidency.
posted by Gelatin at 6:57 AM on October 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
I fail to see how Trump's actions don't meet this criteria. I would like this debate to be publicly waged by Democrats.
Regardless, the dictionary definition is simply giving comfort to one's enemy. The word exists for a reason, which is that "crime" alone doesn't fully describe why Trump's actions are so awful.
There's nothing stopping Democrats from getting in front of cameras and saying Trump has committed treason. Certainly they would be right in the dictionary definition of the word, and I'm not at all sure they are wrong technically.
Let the Republicans argue that we are technically not at war in Afghanistan against ISIS. Put them on the defensive for once, and force them to do the technical hairsplitting.
posted by xammerboy at 7:06 AM on October 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
I fail to see how Trump's actions don't meet this criteria. I would like this debate to be publicly waged by Democrats.
Regardless, the dictionary definition is simply giving comfort to one's enemy. The word exists for a reason, which is that "crime" alone doesn't fully describe why Trump's actions are so awful.
There's nothing stopping Democrats from getting in front of cameras and saying Trump has committed treason. Certainly they would be right in the dictionary definition of the word, and I'm not at all sure they are wrong technically.
Let the Republicans argue that we are technically not at war in Afghanistan against ISIS. Put them on the defensive for once, and force them to do the technical hairsplitting.
posted by xammerboy at 7:06 AM on October 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
It's suggested that the word 'tainted'
That list of words might be the smartest thing Newt Gingrich ever did.
posted by box at 7:11 AM on October 29, 2019 [6 favorites]
That list of words might be the smartest thing Newt Gingrich ever did.
posted by box at 7:11 AM on October 29, 2019 [6 favorites]
“Pelosi let Schiff hold secret hearings and leak misleading info to attack @realDonaldTrump for weeks. Now she wants a vote to ‘formalize’ a process that’s already tainted. Dems aren't trying to change their Soviet-style impeachment process, they're formally endorsing it,” whined House Minority Whip Steve Scalise.A blind man in Jersey saw that one coming.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:30 AM on October 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Well there's the strategy for Vindman. Dual loyalty. There are no depths too deep for this administration and its cronies to plumb.
Oh, it will probably get much worse.
Rafael Shimunov:
Oh, it will probably get much worse.
Rafael Shimunov:
Fox News cult starts antisemitic hidden loyalty "unamerican" smear campaign against White House's own Ukraine expert (and now witness) who was a Jewish child refugee from Ukraine. I probably don't agree with Alexander Vindman's world view on most things, but me and people like me aren't going to sit back as Fox News continues anti-semitism and as the Jewish right continues to cover for them because they share ethnonationalist ideas. At the same time, their cult dad Trump is promoting another smear of the "shifty" Jew.Matt Ford:
This isn't an accident you all.
ME: I'm still hesitant to compare the Trump era's social and political fissures to the Dreyfus affair's impact on the Third Republicposted by zombieflanders at 7:31 AM on October 29, 2019 [27 favorites]
FOX NEWS: Check out the dual loyalty of this Jewish veteran
McCARTHY: "Even if you ask the American public from poll, even if you ask scholars -- nothing in that phone call is impeachable.[CITATION FUCKING NEEDED]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:35 AM on October 29, 2019 [8 favorites]
ZeusHumms: Dems aren't trying to change their Soviet-style impeachment process
Out with the old: Soviet
In with the new: Russian
How The Relationship Between Trump And His Spy Chiefs Soured (Mary Louise Kelly for NPR, October 29, 2019)
In short: Trump has more allegiance with Russia than U.S. intelligence. "I don't think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC," then-candidate Donald Trump said, referring to the Democratic National Committee. "I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK?" he said.
Intelligence community: It was Russia. (NPR, January 5, 2017)
GOP: Ukraine set up Trump!
Nope. Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III documented in great detail a top-down effort, initiated by Russian President Vladimir Putin, to illegally hack and release information in a deliberate attempt to meddle in the presidential election on behalf of Trump. (Glenn Kessler for the Washington Post, Oct. 8, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 7:38 AM on October 29, 2019 [9 favorites]
Out with the old: Soviet
In with the new: Russian
How The Relationship Between Trump And His Spy Chiefs Soured (Mary Louise Kelly for NPR, October 29, 2019)
In short: Trump has more allegiance with Russia than U.S. intelligence. "I don't think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC," then-candidate Donald Trump said, referring to the Democratic National Committee. "I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK?" he said.
Intelligence community: It was Russia. (NPR, January 5, 2017)
GOP: Ukraine set up Trump!
Nope. Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III documented in great detail a top-down effort, initiated by Russian President Vladimir Putin, to illegally hack and release information in a deliberate attempt to meddle in the presidential election on behalf of Trump. (Glenn Kessler for the Washington Post, Oct. 8, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 7:38 AM on October 29, 2019 [9 favorites]
Well there's the strategy for Vindman. Dual loyalty.
Alexander Vindman and his twin brother Yevgeny appeared in a Ken Burns documentary as ten year olds in 1985, they told their story of fleeing the Soviet Union. That documentary was part of Burn's America series, that episode was titled "The Statue of Liberty".
The fundamentally un-American attacks on Alexander Vindman (WaPo):
Alexander Vindman and his twin brother Yevgeny appeared in a Ken Burns documentary as ten year olds in 1985, they told their story of fleeing the Soviet Union. That documentary was part of Burn's America series, that episode was titled "The Statue of Liberty".
The fundamentally un-American attacks on Alexander Vindman (WaPo):
Theirs is, in the abstract, the quintessential American story. Migrants who arrived from the former Soviet Union at age 3 who’ve since dedicated their lives to serving their new country. The Vindmans’ experience is a manifestation of the poem at the base of the statue: They are part of the impoverished, huddled masses seeking the chance to breathe free. They did so, deeply.posted by peeedro at 7:48 AM on October 29, 2019 [29 favorites]
Impeachment Does Not ‘Overturn’ an Election
The founders were extremely clear about the importance of dealing with the abuse of executive power.
NYTimes Opinion by Stephen I. Vladeck
The founders were extremely clear about the importance of dealing with the abuse of executive power.
NYTimes Opinion by Stephen I. Vladeck
As House Democrats ramp up their impeachment investigation into President Trump, an increasingly vocal charge from the president’s supporters (and the White House) is that the House is attempting to “overturn” the results of the 2016 election.posted by mumimor at 8:09 AM on October 29, 2019 [6 favorites]
The charge is that impeaching and removing an elected president is illegitimate because it is anti-democratic — because the person the voters (or, at least in this case, the Electoral College) chose ends up out of office. This argument is silly — impeachment is in the Constitution as a way of dealing with the abuse of executive power.
But to fully understand why the charge is ludicrous, it may help to go back 219 years — to the origins of a constitutional provision that receives virtually no attention in contemporary discourse, the 12th Amendment.
As “Hamilton” fans (and plenty of others) know, the election of 1800, in which President John Adams ran against his vice president and political rival, Thomas Jefferson, revealed a serious flaw in how the Constitution structured presidential elections.
Let the Republicans argue that we are technically not at war in Afghanistan against ISIS. Put them on the defensive for once, and force them to do the technical hairsplitting.
“Christ, we can’t get away with calling him a pig-fucker,” the campaign manager protested. “Nobody’s going to believe a thing like that.”posted by kirkaracha at 8:10 AM on October 29, 2019 [13 favorites]
“I know,” Johnson replied. “But let’s make the sonofabitch deny it.”
@JoaquinCastrotx: Based on all the testimony so far, I believe that Ambassador Gordon Sondland committed perjury.
posted by mcstayinskool at 8:17 AM on October 29, 2019 [24 favorites]
posted by mcstayinskool at 8:17 AM on October 29, 2019 [24 favorites]
an increasingly vocal charge from the president’s supporters (and the White House) is that the House is attempting to “overturn” the results of the 2016 election.
But they're trying to overturn the results of the 2018 election, which gave the Democrats control of the House of Representatives and put them in position to impeach the president.Ceterum autem censeo Trump delenda est
posted by kirkaracha at 8:29 AM on October 29, 2019 [15 favorites]
But they're trying to overturn the results of the 2018 election, which gave the Democrats control of the House of Representatives and put them in position to impeach the president.Ceterum autem censeo Trump delenda est
posted by kirkaracha at 8:29 AM on October 29, 2019 [15 favorites]
The charge is that impeaching and removing an elected president is illegitimate because it is anti-democratic
Funny how the people who are most likely to remind you that "the United States is a republic, not a democracy" are the ones complaining about impeachment being undemocratic.
(The US is a republic and a democracy - or at least it's supposed to be. Those are not mutually exclusive things.)
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:45 AM on October 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
Funny how the people who are most likely to remind you that "the United States is a republic, not a democracy" are the ones complaining about impeachment being undemocratic.
(The US is a republic and a democracy - or at least it's supposed to be. Those are not mutually exclusive things.)
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:45 AM on October 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
>Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
xammerboy >> I fail to see how Trump's actions don't meet this criteria. I would like this debate to be publicly waged by Democrats. Regardless, the dictionary definition is simply giving comfort to one's enemy. The word exists for a reason, which is that "crime" alone doesn't fully describe why Trump's actions are so awful.
From the WaPo article Five myths about treason cited above:
posted by cenoxo at 8:47 AM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
xammerboy >> I fail to see how Trump's actions don't meet this criteria. I would like this debate to be publicly waged by Democrats. Regardless, the dictionary definition is simply giving comfort to one's enemy. The word exists for a reason, which is that "crime" alone doesn't fully describe why Trump's actions are so awful.
From the WaPo article Five myths about treason cited above:
MYTH NO. 2IANAL, but legal definitions are greater than definitions of individual words. Hence courts, judges, attorneys, and our whole convoluted legal system.
Aiding Russia is treason against the United States.
Stephen Colbert’s recent segment “Michael Flynn’s White House Tenure: It’s Funny ’Cause It’s Treason” was but one of many accusations of treason hurled against Flynn and other White House associates because of their proven or alleged ties to Russia. “Consider the evidence that Trump is a traitor,” exhorted an essay in Salon. It is, in fact, treasonable to aid the “enemies” of the United States.
But enemies are defined very precisely under American treason law. An enemy is a nation or an organization with which the United States is in a declared or open war. Nations with whom we are formally at peace, such as Russia, are not enemies. (Indeed, a treason prosecution naming Russia as an enemy would be tantamount to a declaration of war.) Russia is a strategic adversary whose interests are frequently at odds with those of the United States, but for purposes of treason law it is no different than Canada or France or even the American Red Cross. The details of the alleged connections between Russia and Trump officials are therefore irrelevant to treason law.
posted by cenoxo at 8:47 AM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
Apparently smearing a decorated veteran and civil servant is a bridge too far for Liz Cheney:
posted by murphy slaw at 8:48 AM on October 29, 2019 [16 favorites]
After complaining about Democrats’ handling of the investigation during a House Republican leadership presser, Cheney switched tracks.Crack in the dam or empty gesture? I dunno. Glad someone on the R side said anything at all about this nativist, antisemitic bullshit at least.
“Now I also want to say a word about something else that’s been going on over the course of the last several hours and last night which I think is also shameful,” she said. “And that is questioning the patriotism, questioning the dedication to country, of people like Mr. Vindman, Lt. Col. Vindman, who will be coming today, and others who have testified.”
The Republican lawmaker urged for Vindman’s critics to “show that we are better than that as a nation.”
“We’re talking about decorated veterans who have served this nation, who’ve put their lives on the line, and it is shameful to question their patriotism, their love of this nation, and we should not be involved in that process,” she continued.
posted by murphy slaw at 8:48 AM on October 29, 2019 [16 favorites]
Crack in the dam or empty gesture?
You know the answer to that. Liz Cheney -- whose literal existence is owed to the draft rules changing from "married men are exempt" to "married men with children are exempt" -- does not actually care in the slightest bit about anyone who has ever worn a uniform, except as far as displaying such will get her slightly more votes than not displaying it.
Her only "principle" at this point is "Let's look like we're listening to this person before we smear him."
posted by Etrigan at 9:02 AM on October 29, 2019 [9 favorites]
You know the answer to that. Liz Cheney -- whose literal existence is owed to the draft rules changing from "married men are exempt" to "married men with children are exempt" -- does not actually care in the slightest bit about anyone who has ever worn a uniform, except as far as displaying such will get her slightly more votes than not displaying it.
Her only "principle" at this point is "Let's look like we're listening to this person before we smear him."
posted by Etrigan at 9:02 AM on October 29, 2019 [9 favorites]
Forget treason. Why don’t we go after the whole crowd of republicans as unregistered foreign agents? Starting with the top.
posted by njohnson23 at 9:06 AM on October 29, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by njohnson23 at 9:06 AM on October 29, 2019 [9 favorites]
Groundless “Un-American” smears are usually accompanied by much flag-waving and USA! chants, but remember that “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.” – Samuel Johnson, 1775.
See also McCarthyism (WP).
posted by cenoxo at 9:18 AM on October 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
See also McCarthyism (WP).
posted by cenoxo at 9:18 AM on October 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
That might be relevant if this administration weren't demonstrably compromised by Russia.
posted by Tabitha Someday at 9:24 AM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Tabitha Someday at 9:24 AM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
How about espionage?
Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document...or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted...the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive itposted by kirkaracha at 9:28 AM on October 29, 2019 [15 favorites]
Liz Cheney -- whose literal existence is owed to the draft rules
Nobody is responsible for the circumstances of their birth.
posted by hat_eater at 9:30 AM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
Nobody is responsible for the circumstances of their birth.
posted by hat_eater at 9:30 AM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
Nobody is responsible for the circumstances of their birth.
They are absolutely responsible for how they wield the power that comes from it.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:33 AM on October 29, 2019 [13 favorites]
They are absolutely responsible for how they wield the power that comes from it.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:33 AM on October 29, 2019 [13 favorites]
Two quibbles on the treason requires the enemy be someone the US is at war with point:
- There's a not unreasonable argument to be made that there is open and ongoing 'cyberwar'. A horrible term, but it is certainly more than the sort of espionage that occurred during the cold war - particularly when it involves election interference.
- I believe xammerboy already made this point, but with this last behavior in Syria, there's an argument to be made about him having given aid and comfort to ISIS/Daesh for personal reasons (not just for poor strategy reasons, which are generally off the table.) Misused, out-dated AUMFs aside, that's a whole lot more like the sort of "Enemy" treason requires.
Mod note: If folks want to continue on the "what's the definition of treason" thing, at this point please make a separate post for it. Thanks.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:58 AM on October 29, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:58 AM on October 29, 2019 [16 favorites]
NYT: Impeachment investigators are quietly lining up more witnesses.
Even as they prepare to move their case into public view, Democrats at the helm of the impeachment inquiry continued on Tuesday to add names to the queue of administration officials they are calling for private depositions.Ukrainian officials will not testify in U.S. impeachment inquiry: foreign minister (Reuters)
The most high-profile among them was Robert Blair, a top national security adviser to Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Mr. Blair listened in on the July phone call between Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on Mr. Mulvaney’s behalf, but did not raise concerns about what he heard at the time. Mr. Blair is also likely to have information about deliberations within the White House over the decision to suspend $391 million in security aid allocated for Ukraine.
Ukrainian officials will not testify in the U.S. Congress in the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump because Kiev does not want to get involved in the internal affairs of another country, Ukraine’s foreign minister said on Tuesday. [...] Prystaiko said relations between Kiev and Washington had not changed since the start of the impeachment row and that it was normal for the two countries to use formal and informal channels to conduct diplomacy.posted by katra at 10:24 AM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
“There are channels that are specially separated from the official ones, but this does not mean that the official ones don’t know what is happening,” he said. He also said Ukraine needed to receive official requests from the United States in order to open investigations.
Asked whether Ukraine had received such a request to investigate Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company where Biden’s son Hunter used to be a board member, he said that question should go to the General Prosecutor’s office.
In response to "Nunes Aide Is Leaking the Ukraine Whistleblower’s Name, Sources Say"
Devin Nunes' office has been planting lies about the whistleblower in transcripts of House testimony (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos)
Devin Nunes' office has been planting lies about the whistleblower in transcripts of House testimony (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos)
The inside scoop on the whistleblower is coming from Nunes aide Derek Harvey and includes a supposed name and supposed background information on the whistleblower. Harvey is working with Republican staffers and congressmen involved in the impeachment inquiry to see that the name is used by Republicans asking question in closed-door hearings. Again and again, they’ve been asking witnesses appearing to give testimony about the name that Nunes staff has provided—for the sole purpose of getting that name into the Congressional Record. And why do that? So that when the House makes the transcript of the testimony public, it will also be releasing the name of the whistleblower.posted by ZeusHumms at 11:18 AM on October 29, 2019 [18 favorites]
This is actually one of the reasons that Republicans have been pushing for the release of transcripts, especially specific transcripts, such as that of former White House adviser Fiona Hill. Once those transcripts are in public view, Republicans can point at the name and help generate talk and speculation about the whistleblower in public without ever revealing the whistleblower in the narrowest, strictest technical sense.
So Republicans’ theory of the proper way to handle whistleblower information is to have one of the top aides of the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee set up a dispatch center, sending the name and background information of the whistleblower in all directions. And then other Republicans work to plant that name in the Congressional Record, where it can’t help but come to light. In other words, a conspiracy. One that ends with Republicans snickering so hard at the idea that there is supposed to be protection for whistleblowers.
“There are channels that are specially separated from the official ones, but this does not mean that the official ones don’t know what is happening,”.
Ouch burn.
posted by srboisvert at 11:22 AM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
Ouch burn.
posted by srboisvert at 11:22 AM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
Nunes and his staffers behind bars is one of my minimum metrics for justice having been served when this rolling shitshow is finally over.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 11:23 AM on October 29, 2019 [22 favorites]
posted by C'est la D.C. at 11:23 AM on October 29, 2019 [22 favorites]
In other words, a conspiracy. One that ends with Republicans snickering so hard at the idea that there is supposed to be protection for whistleblowers.
As Frank Wilhoit pointed out, “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Snickering at the idea of whistleblower protection is an open declaration of intent to be corrupt.
Nunes and his staffers behind bars is one of my minimum metrics for justice having been served when this rolling shitshow is finally over.
I hope smarter people than me can figure a way around the Speech and Debate clause.
posted by Gelatin at 11:29 AM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
As Frank Wilhoit pointed out, “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Snickering at the idea of whistleblower protection is an open declaration of intent to be corrupt.
Nunes and his staffers behind bars is one of my minimum metrics for justice having been served when this rolling shitshow is finally over.
I hope smarter people than me can figure a way around the Speech and Debate clause.
posted by Gelatin at 11:29 AM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
Revealing the identity of the whistleblower now? That's a mighty nice new door you're putting on the barn.
The administration already released a partial transcript that confirmed the whistleblower's account and "an overwhelming percentage of the whistleblower’s complaint in Ukrainegate has been confirmed by U.S. government documents, witness statements, and independent investigative reports."
posted by kirkaracha at 11:31 AM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
The administration already released a partial transcript that confirmed the whistleblower's account and "an overwhelming percentage of the whistleblower’s complaint in Ukrainegate has been confirmed by U.S. government documents, witness statements, and independent investigative reports."
posted by kirkaracha at 11:31 AM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
The issue is more the death threats the whistle blower will start to receive and the chilling effect it may have on others considering coming forward.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 11:34 AM on October 29, 2019 [37 favorites]
posted by C'est la D.C. at 11:34 AM on October 29, 2019 [37 favorites]
That's a mighty nice new door you're putting on the barn.
The point, I imagine, is for the whistleblower to get exposed to enough harassment that a future whistleblower is discouraged from coming forward.
posted by Slothrup at 11:34 AM on October 29, 2019 [20 favorites]
The point, I imagine, is for the whistleblower to get exposed to enough harassment that a future whistleblower is discouraged from coming forward.
posted by Slothrup at 11:34 AM on October 29, 2019 [20 favorites]
WaPo: 1:30 p.m.: Several GOP senators push back on criticism of Vindman
“I don’t at all question his patriotism,” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said. “I respect his service. He’s a Purple Heart and I think it’d be a mistake to attack his patriotism.”'He's a patriot': Republicans defend key impeachment witness from attacks (Politico)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) called such criticism “misplaced.” “This man is a decorated America serviceman, and I have full confidence in him as an individual and his patriotism,” Romney said.
Asked about criticizing Vindman, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) replied, “This is the career military officer with a Purple Heart? I’m sure he’s doing his best to serve his country.”
Asked about joining those attacks, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said "I'm not going to do it and I would encourage others not to."posted by katra at 11:45 AM on October 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
Sens. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and James Lankford (R-Okla.) also said they had no reason to question the character of Vindman, while Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.), one of the president's closest allies, said he would not comment on the matter.
The point, I imagine, is for the whistleblower to get exposed to enough harassment that a future whistleblower is discouraged from coming forward.
And/or find something, anything, that can be used to discredit the whistleblower -- he/she voted for a Democrat once!!!!1! -- to give Republicans something to talk about other than the fact that the substance of the whistleblower complain has been independently confirmed, not least by the summary Trump had released.
Note that this effort means the Republicans seem to be banking overtly on an ad hominem strategy, notwithstanding the fallacy is taken among people of good faith as an admission one doesn't actually have a rebuttal. The sad thing is, rather than point out that objective fact, the so-called "liberal media" will likely run Republican smears of the whistleblower practically uncritically in the name of "balance."
posted by Gelatin at 11:46 AM on October 29, 2019 [10 favorites]
And/or find something, anything, that can be used to discredit the whistleblower -- he/she voted for a Democrat once!!!!1! -- to give Republicans something to talk about other than the fact that the substance of the whistleblower complain has been independently confirmed, not least by the summary Trump had released.
Note that this effort means the Republicans seem to be banking overtly on an ad hominem strategy, notwithstanding the fallacy is taken among people of good faith as an admission one doesn't actually have a rebuttal. The sad thing is, rather than point out that objective fact, the so-called "liberal media" will likely run Republican smears of the whistleblower practically uncritically in the name of "balance."
posted by Gelatin at 11:46 AM on October 29, 2019 [10 favorites]
Senate Democrats get a bite at impeachment apple (Politico)
Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan is due before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday to be vetted as the next U.S. ambassador to Russia. But a good chunk of his nomination hearing is sure to focus on U.S. policy toward Ukraine, a subject animating the House-led impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.posted by katra at 11:59 AM on October 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
Senate Democratic aides say Sullivan can expect questions about what role Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, played in shaping Ukraine policy. Democrats will want more details on why Trump demanded the early removal of Marie Yovanovitch, the veteran diplomat serving as the U.S. ambassador in Ukraine. They’ll also want to know what, if anything, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo did to rein in Giuliani and other outside actors – as well as Trump – as they sought to pressure Ukraine’s government to investigate former vice president Joe Biden, a Trump political rival.
The hearing also offers an opportunity for Senate Democrats to question the administration’s overall Russia policy, which critics say has been warped by Trump’s unusual affinity for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
[...] As the No. 2 official at the State Department, Sullivan has a broad purview and is frequently copied on communications involving Pompeo.
[...] At his hearing Wednesday, Sullivan is likely to also face some questions about alleged political retaliation against career staffers at the State Department, Senate Democratic aides said.
Here's the resolution setting terms for public hearings.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:14 PM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:14 PM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
katra: Ukrainian officials will not testify in the U.S. Congress in the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump because Kiev does not want to get involved in the internal affairs of another country, Ukraine’s foreign minister said on Tuesday.
Hah, zing.
katra: WaPo: 1:30 p.m.: Several GOP senators push back on criticism of Vindman
"He's a good patriot, but he's wrong." [my summary, not an actual quote.] House GOP Leader Defends Trump, Says Expert 'Is Wrong' That Ukraine Call Was Improper (Brian Naylor for NPR, October 29, 2019)
McCarthy: out of step with Americans (but a staunch Trump man).
posted by filthy light thief at 12:30 PM on October 29, 2019 [12 favorites]
Hah, zing.
katra: WaPo: 1:30 p.m.: Several GOP senators push back on criticism of Vindman
"He's a good patriot, but he's wrong." [my summary, not an actual quote.] House GOP Leader Defends Trump, Says Expert 'Is Wrong' That Ukraine Call Was Improper (Brian Naylor for NPR, October 29, 2019)
"Nothing in that phone call is impeachable," Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said. McCarthy said he did not question Lt. Col. Andrew Vindman's service, but said, "People have different philosophical beliefs."You got that -- the president has a right to withhold aid from foreign government, until they investigate a private U.S. citizen. But good news, while the rest of the latest NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll (PDF) can make you question what people see in the country, by a 68% to 28% margin, though, Americans said it is not acceptable for a president to ask a foreign country's leader to help investigate a potential political opponent.
...
"The president has a right," the Republican leader said. "It's an open case. It wasn't about something in the future. It was about something that transpired."
McCarthy: out of step with Americans (but a staunch Trump man).
posted by filthy light thief at 12:30 PM on October 29, 2019 [12 favorites]
Revealing the identity of the whistleblower now? That's a mighty nice new door you're putting on the barn.
The administration already released a partial transcript that confirmed the whistleblower's account and "an overwhelming percentage of the whistleblower’s complaint in Ukrainegate has been confirmed by U.S. government documents, witness statements, and independent investigative reports."
What it really means is that there are a lot more barns.
posted by srboisvert at 12:37 PM on October 29, 2019
The administration already released a partial transcript that confirmed the whistleblower's account and "an overwhelming percentage of the whistleblower’s complaint in Ukrainegate has been confirmed by U.S. government documents, witness statements, and independent investigative reports."
What it really means is that there are a lot more barns.
posted by srboisvert at 12:37 PM on October 29, 2019
And revenge. Inasmuch as this comes from Trump I suspect it's mostly about revenge.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:38 PM on October 29, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:38 PM on October 29, 2019 [12 favorites]
Why Democrats Are Moving Quickly With Impeachment (Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux, 538)
Finishing the impeachment process before primary season begins helps to keep impeachment from turning into an election issue, especially one where the "voters get to decide".
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:42 PM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Finishing the impeachment process before primary season begins helps to keep impeachment from turning into an election issue, especially one where the "voters get to decide".
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:42 PM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
That FiveThirtyEight piece has very little in the way of compelling evidence that the primary calendar is what's causing them to move quickly. I see one lawmaker saying the vote *could* come by Thanksgiving and... that's about it? The rest reads to me as a bunch of unfounded speculation. Of course the Democrats are considering the politics of a political process, but the idea that they're rushing because they want it to be over has no basis in fact, as far as I can tell.
posted by tonycpsu at 12:48 PM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by tonycpsu at 12:48 PM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
That one mention is the first I've heard anything from Democrats about a vote this year. Mitch McConnell said he wanted it wrapped up before the holidays, for obvious reasons. A couple of months of hearings works to the Democrats' favor IMO.
The point, I imagine, is for the whistleblower to get exposed to enough harassment that a future whistleblower is discouraged from coming forward.
I can see that, but we've already got Republican military veterans and Trump appointees testifying.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:58 PM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
The point, I imagine, is for the whistleblower to get exposed to enough harassment that a future whistleblower is discouraged from coming forward.
I can see that, but we've already got Republican military veterans and Trump appointees testifying.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:58 PM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
WaPo: 2:50 p.m.: McConnell on Vindman: ‘I’m not going to question the patriotism of any of the people who are coming forward’
“Look, I’m not going to question the patriotism of any of the people who are coming forward,” McConnell said. “The action is in the House now. We’ll see whether they can, A, meet due process standards, fundamental due process standards, and then see what they do.”posted by katra at 1:39 PM on October 29, 2019
Asked about Vindman’s concerns about Trump’s actions, McConnell replied: “I’m not going to comment on the merits going forward.”
But the threat is still there, and this won't be the last time someone has information that they'd like to share anonymously on potential misdeeds by Republicans. In other words, there will be more whistleblowers against the GOP, and Democrats, so for Republicans to try and make this whistleblower's identity known also threatens future actions and individuals. In short: challenge a Republican, expect lots of public push-back, potentially endangering you and your family.
Shouting match erupts in Vindman deposition as Democrats accuse Republicans of trying to out whistleblower (Manu Raju, Jeremy Herb, Lauren Fox and Phil Mattingly for CNN, October 29, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 1:40 PM on October 29, 2019 [15 favorites]
Shouting match erupts in Vindman deposition as Democrats accuse Republicans of trying to out whistleblower (Manu Raju, Jeremy Herb, Lauren Fox and Phil Mattingly for CNN, October 29, 2019)
Democrats and Republicans got into a shouting match behind closed doors on Tuesday while interviewing a witness in the impeachment investigation, with Democrats accusing Republicans of trying to out the anonymous whistleblower who sparked the impeachment inquiry, according to five sources from both parties.That's not how you protect whistleblowers, and as others have noted, this person is far from alone. (Also, it's good to know where you stand, anonymous Republican, when it comes to the president's impeachment proceedings. My personal take is that Trump is trying to take down the rule of law, presidential and political norms, and about a hundred other things, but that's just me.)
...
"What the Republicans are trying to do in there, very clearly in their questioning, is try to front-door or backdoor Lt. Col. Vindman into revealing who the whistleblower is, even though in his testimony, he said he didn't know," said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Florida Democrat. "They are trying to, through the back door and through process of elimination by their questions, they are attempting to get him to reveal that, and they have been unsuccessful."
But Meadows pushed back on the Democratic accusations.
"How can we out someone when we don't know he is," Meadows told reporters Tuesday afternoon.
...
One GOP lawmaker, however, who asked not to be named given that the depositions are happening behind closed doors, did not push back that Republicans are trying to figure out who the whistleblower is in the depositions.
"I think we would like to know — with whistleblower protections in mind — we would like to hear from the whistleblower and we would also like to know who the whistleblower talked to," the GOP lawmaker said. "We got one guy who is trying to bring down the President of the United States and we cannot even hear from that person."
posted by filthy light thief at 1:40 PM on October 29, 2019 [15 favorites]
Trump Attorneys Assert Immunity From Broad Sweep of Law (WSJ)
An extensive review of correspondence, court documents, legal opinions and public statements from lawyers representing Mr. Trump shows the president’s attorneys have consistently pushed to put him beyond the reach of any other institution in federal, state or local government—immune to civil lawsuits, judicial orders, criminal investigations or congressional probes. [...]posted by katra at 2:15 PM on October 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
Some of the claims are contradictory: Mr. Trump’s personal attorneys have argued he can be held accountable only by Congress, while his White House lawyers fought efforts to hold him accountable in Congress. [...] To some extent, Mr. Trump’s lawyers are just doing their job: taking aggressive, legal positions in the best interests of the client, and hoping for the best. Lawyers for previous presidents have made similarly aggressive claims about powers and immunities to defend the president personally or the long-term authority of the office.
But scholars of presidential power say what is different about the Trump administration is its unwillingness to acknowledge the legitimacy and interests of other institutions.
“Mr. Trump has taken the position that the [Constitution’s] Article II powers of the president give him absolute authority. What makes his case different is that he is not even recognizing the legitimacy of countervailing powers” such as Congress, said Mark Rozell, a dean at George Mason University. “He is deeming them as politically motivated and not legitimate in their inquiries and therefore to be obstructed at every turn.” [...]
Richard Nixon sparked a major legal battle over his refusal to turn over tapes of Oval Office conversations to prosecutors and Congress. But he also offered numerous compromises, such as turning over transcripts, because he and his attorneys recognized that Congress and prosecutors had legitimate interests in accessing the materials as part of their inquiries.
Let’s say I call the local police to anonymously report the drug house down the street. Now imagine the drug dealer’s buddies going door to door asking who snitched.
Is what the GOP doing that different?
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:19 PM on October 29, 2019 [33 favorites]
Is what the GOP doing that different?
posted by Big Al 8000 at 2:19 PM on October 29, 2019 [33 favorites]
Even if the Republicans don't manage to identify this whistleblower, other potential whistleblowers are paying attention and learning how hard the GOP will work to identify and destroy the person in their effort to suppress or undermine the message. What they're doing is already having a pour encourager les autres chilling effect. It's pre-emptive obstruction of justice.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 2:37 PM on October 29, 2019 [25 favorites]
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 2:37 PM on October 29, 2019 [25 favorites]
NSC official's testimony appears to contradict Rick Perry Ukraine claims (Politico)
Vindman said in his remarks that after he raised his objections, Fiona Hill, who was a Trump adviser on Russia at the time, entered the room and told Sondland his statements were inappropriate.Army officer's impeachment testimony is a quandary for Republicans (Guardian)
According to NBC News, Hill told House investigators that she entered the room as Perry was leaving. That account was confirmed to POLITICO.
That timeline would put Perry in the [July 10 meeting] when Vindman raised his objections about Sondland's request that Ukrainian officials investigate the Bidens — which Perry has repeatedly denied.
"Not once, as God is my witness, not once was a Biden name — not the former vice president, not his son — ever mentioned," Perry told the CBN News on Oct. 7. He repeated those denials in a Fox News radio interview last week.
A DOE spokesperson said Perry stands by his earlier statement but did not comment on the July 10 meeting.
As news of Vindman’s testimony leaked out of the deposition room, it emerged that he had kept his own set of notes about the 25 July call between Trump and Zelenskiy, in which Trump asked for a “favor” and repeatedly brought up Biden, a leading Democratic candidate in the 2020 election. It was just one more piece of evidence in a mounting pile in which each layer seems to exactly confirm the one beneath it.posted by katra at 3:34 PM on October 29, 2019 [22 favorites]
"Oops."
posted by kirkaracha at 3:45 PM on October 29, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 3:45 PM on October 29, 2019 [10 favorites]
“Why, yes, I am taking notes on a criminal conspiracy.”
posted by notoriety public at 3:54 PM on October 29, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by notoriety public at 3:54 PM on October 29, 2019 [19 favorites]
Nicole Wallace SLTW eviscerates some talking heads. Wait for it.
posted by j_curiouser at 4:00 PM on October 29, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by j_curiouser at 4:00 PM on October 29, 2019 [19 favorites]
MSNBC anchors are allowed to say "chickenshit" now? (Not complaining)
posted by wabbittwax at 4:06 PM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by wabbittwax at 4:06 PM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
I dunno...a lot of us were probly thinking it before she said it. I'm ok with dropping pretense and fake "collegial-respect".
posted by j_curiouser at 4:19 PM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by j_curiouser at 4:19 PM on October 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
had seen some of those statements reported, but hadn't, myself, seen the persons making them on the television until "wait for it" (and "eviscerated") enticed me. appreciating your sharing of the link, j_curiouser, the payoff, for me, did not merit exposure to duffy/yoo/ingraham's faces & voices (& insulting, infuriating positioning as though they are authorities). i did click it three or four times, though, to ... refine my critique.
posted by 20 year lurk at 4:51 PM on October 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by 20 year lurk at 4:51 PM on October 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
"Not once, as God is my witness, not once was a Biden name — not the former vice president, not his son — ever mentioned," Perry told the CBN News on Oct. 7. He repeated those denials in a Fox News radio interview last week.
Essentially meaningless. It could have been a phrase like "investigate corruption" that was previously understood to mean the Bidens.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:12 PM on October 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Essentially meaningless. It could have been a phrase like "investigate corruption" that was previously understood to mean the Bidens.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:12 PM on October 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Finishing the impeachment process before primary season begins helps to keep impeachment from turning into an election issue, especially one where the "voters get to decide".
I'd like to mention to everyone that there is a state-wide election in the Commonwealth of Virginia one week from today.
Imagine what happens if Republicans are soundly defeated? What kind of spin does that put on the impeachment?
I would like to encourage those who can to go help achieve that result. Ms. Dewd is headed down there to canvass. I will be texting.
I think this is a very important election.
posted by MtDewd at 5:34 PM on October 29, 2019 [38 favorites]
I'd like to mention to everyone that there is a state-wide election in the Commonwealth of Virginia one week from today.
Imagine what happens if Republicans are soundly defeated? What kind of spin does that put on the impeachment?
I would like to encourage those who can to go help achieve that result. Ms. Dewd is headed down there to canvass. I will be texting.
I think this is a very important election.
posted by MtDewd at 5:34 PM on October 29, 2019 [38 favorites]
Essentially meaningless. It could have been a phrase like "investigate corruption" that was previously understood to mean the Bidens.
Republicans, whether through ignorance or some bizarre denial, are still treating the phone call as the issue. We're long past that at this point. Everything else that's come out over the course of the investigation shows Ukraine knew what Trump wanted at the same time the aid was being withheld. The phone call is only one piece of evidence among many.
posted by downtohisturtles at 6:08 PM on October 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
Republicans, whether through ignorance or some bizarre denial, are still treating the phone call as the issue. We're long past that at this point. Everything else that's come out over the course of the investigation shows Ukraine knew what Trump wanted at the same time the aid was being withheld. The phone call is only one piece of evidence among many.
posted by downtohisturtles at 6:08 PM on October 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
Essentially meaningless. It could have been a phrase like "investigate corruption" that was previously understood to mean the Bidens.
"And don't forget about the thing with you-know-who."
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:09 PM on October 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
"And don't forget about the thing with you-know-who."
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:09 PM on October 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Sounds like those ellipses in the official White House "transcript" of the Ukraine phone call were doing a lot of work.
Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, told House impeachment investigators on Tuesday that the White House transcript of a July call between President Trump and Ukraine’s president omitted crucial words and phrases, and that his attempts to restore them failed, according to three people familiar with the testimony.posted by kirkaracha at 6:17 PM on October 29, 2019 [27 favorites]
The omissions, Colonel Vindman said, included Mr. Trump’s assertion that there were recordings of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. discussing Ukraine corruption, and an explicit mention by Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, of Burisma Holdings, the energy company whose board employed Mr. Biden’s son Hunter.
Once again, the defense of Trump is that he just don't talk too good, what with the words and syntax
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:19 PM on October 29, 2019
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:19 PM on October 29, 2019
The following article is helpful for anyone, anywhere who must communicate in any way, at any time with The Donald. It has simple instructions and colorful illustrations for quick comprehension, and can be read online in a few minutes. There's no cluttered, boring, hardcopy report (or book) to have McDonald's burgers, fries, and shakes spilled on.
How to Deal With a Compulsive Liar, WikiHow, Co-authored by wikiHow Staff, Updated: April 26, 2019.
posted by cenoxo at 8:14 PM on October 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
How to Deal With a Compulsive Liar, WikiHow, Co-authored by wikiHow Staff, Updated: April 26, 2019.
posted by cenoxo at 8:14 PM on October 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
I noticed that article opens with "If you want to keep them in your life (and you have every right not to)..."
posted by ryanrs at 8:43 PM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by ryanrs at 8:43 PM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
I think we need to replace ellipses in anything Trump voluntarily releases with a
posted by benzenedream at 8:49 PM on October 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
{crooked_shit} placeholder.posted by benzenedream at 8:49 PM on October 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
Two volatile meetings at the White House have become central to the impeachment inquiry (WaPo)
The Ukrainian officials arrived at the White House on July 10 hoping to cement their country’s relationship with the United States, solidifying support the Trump administration seemed reluctant to extend for reasons they didn’t fully understand. [...]posted by katra at 8:55 PM on October 29, 2019 [19 favorites]
The West Wing meetings on July 10 increasingly appear to mark the moment of detonation of the Ukraine crisis inside the White House, though by then Bolton, Vindman, then-White House Russia adviser Fiona Hill and others had become suspicious that Trump was pursuing a secret agenda.
[...] Sondland turned the conversation away from ongoing corruption probes to reviving specific investigations that were important to Trump, according to testimony from Hill and Vindman. Although the remark was cryptic, they understood Sondland to be reflecting Trump’s desire to see Ukraine train its investigative resources on an energy company, Burisma, that had hired Hunter Biden, the former vice president’s son, to serve as a board member for about five years.
Bolton was so alarmed by the exchange that he ended the meeting abruptly and ordered those gathered out of his office, officials said. As the group filed out, Sondland instructed the Ukrainians to follow him to the Ward Room, a space in the basement of the West Wing used for meetings by national security officials. After huddling briefly with Hill, Bolton instructed her to follow the group downstairs and monitor Sondland. [...]
Vindman said that Sondland used the downstairs meeting to press for “investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens and Burisma.” Vindman said he then confronted Sondland, saying that “his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the [National Security Council] was going to get involved in or push.”
Hill then returned upstairs to relay what she had witnessed to Bolton, who exploded, saying, “I am not part of whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up.”
Vindman's testimony indicates that two weeks before Trump's phone call, the White House had already made very clear to Ukraine in a meeting at the White House that there was an explicit quid pro quo. So it puts to rest the Republican claim that there can't be a quid pro quo if the Ukrainians didn't know the reason aid was being held up.
Vindman also tried to correct the partial transcript of the Trump phone call, which he was a witness to, to include the following:
Trump said to Zelenskiy: "Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.” Trump's claim of course is a lie but it is a pretty clearly a quid pro quo involving a political opponent. And Vindman was overruled to prevent including it in the official record. This indicates that they knew there was a crime and they were intent on hiding the fact.
And of course, Sondland has a lot of explain' to do.
posted by JackFlash at 9:26 PM on October 29, 2019 [16 favorites]
Vindman also tried to correct the partial transcript of the Trump phone call, which he was a witness to, to include the following:
Trump said to Zelenskiy: "Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.” Trump's claim of course is a lie but it is a pretty clearly a quid pro quo involving a political opponent. And Vindman was overruled to prevent including it in the official record. This indicates that they knew there was a crime and they were intent on hiding the fact.
And of course, Sondland has a lot of explain' to do.
posted by JackFlash at 9:26 PM on October 29, 2019 [16 favorites]
Bolton's no paragon of virtue, but he had experience working in the White House. I think that experience was the crucial difference that led to him being the only one to recognize this insanity as criminally wrong.
Plus, the mustache. There are responsibilities that come with owning a sheriff style mustache.
posted by xammerboy at 9:28 PM on October 29, 2019 [20 favorites]
Plus, the mustache. There are responsibilities that come with owning a sheriff style mustache.
posted by xammerboy at 9:28 PM on October 29, 2019 [20 favorites]
I think that experience was the crucial difference that led to him being the only one to recognize this insanity as criminally wrong.
No, it's just as simple as that Bolton hates the Russians, not the Ukrainians. I don't think the corruption bothers him. It's that the corrupt objective wasn't to his taste.
posted by JackFlash at 9:32 PM on October 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
No, it's just as simple as that Bolton hates the Russians, not the Ukrainians. I don't think the corruption bothers him. It's that the corrupt objective wasn't to his taste.
posted by JackFlash at 9:32 PM on October 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
No, it's just as simple as that Bolton hates the Russians, not the Ukrainians. I don't think the corruption bothers him. It's that the corrupt objective wasn't to his taste.
If that moustachey bastard's favored corruption leads to the expunging of this rat king we call the Trump presidency, I'll take it.
posted by saysthis at 10:01 PM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
If that moustachey bastard's favored corruption leads to the expunging of this rat king we call the Trump presidency, I'll take it.
posted by saysthis at 10:01 PM on October 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Just don't get your hopes up too much. Beyond the Russians, if there is one thing Bolton hates more than Muslims, it's Democrats who like Muslims. He is not inclined to help Democrats in any way.
posted by JackFlash at 10:17 PM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 10:17 PM on October 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
And Vindman was overruled to prevent including it in the official record. This indicates that they knew there was a crime and they were intent on hiding the fact.
The whistleblower complain said the White House hid the transcript of the call in a secure system normally used for classified material (an abuse of the classification process). This fact also indicates that they knew there was a crime and they were intent on hiding the fact.
And apparently, they were able to whisk that record into the classified system so quickly because they'd done that sort of thing before. Who knows what other dirt they're trying to hide by this abusive process.
posted by Gelatin at 2:26 AM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
The whistleblower complain said the White House hid the transcript of the call in a secure system normally used for classified material (an abuse of the classification process). This fact also indicates that they knew there was a crime and they were intent on hiding the fact.
And apparently, they were able to whisk that record into the classified system so quickly because they'd done that sort of thing before. Who knows what other dirt they're trying to hide by this abusive process.
posted by Gelatin at 2:26 AM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
On Pod Save America they said abusing the classification process in this way was also a crime. They didn't really go into it, but I found that interesting, and I haven't heard a lot about that.
posted by xammerboy at 6:20 AM on October 30, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 6:20 AM on October 30, 2019 [6 favorites]
On Pod Save America they said abusing the classification process in this way was also a crime. They didn't really go into it, but I found that interesting, and I haven't heard a lot about that.
I don't know if it's a crime exactly, but it's a violation of Federal regulation to misuse the classification system in order to cover up wrongdoing.
Also, the fact that the Administration is engaging in a cover-up could be an impeachable offense all on its own.
Democrats need to point out that all this rules lawyering about "fairness" and "due process" -- which is nowhere in the Constitution, as the House has the sole authority of impeachment -- is pretty much because Republicans can't defend Trump on the merits, and they know it. They need to point it out because the so-called "liberal media" won't do it for them, even though it's an objective fact -- if the Republicans could defend the President on the merits, they would do so.
posted by Gelatin at 6:53 AM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
I don't know if it's a crime exactly, but it's a violation of Federal regulation to misuse the classification system in order to cover up wrongdoing.
(d) Information shall not be classified in order to conceal inefficiency, violations of law, or administrative error; to prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency; to restrain competition; or to prevent or delay release of information that does not require protection in the interest of national security. Information that has been declassified and released to the public under proper authority may not be reclassified.
Also, the fact that the Administration is engaging in a cover-up could be an impeachable offense all on its own.
Democrats need to point out that all this rules lawyering about "fairness" and "due process" -- which is nowhere in the Constitution, as the House has the sole authority of impeachment -- is pretty much because Republicans can't defend Trump on the merits, and they know it. They need to point it out because the so-called "liberal media" won't do it for them, even though it's an objective fact -- if the Republicans could defend the President on the merits, they would do so.
posted by Gelatin at 6:53 AM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
How can GOP senators serve as impeachment jurors when they're implicated in Trump's misdeeds? (Sophia Tesfaye, Salon)
Ron Johnson and Marsha Blackburn are tied to Russian money and Trump's conspiracy theories. They're not aloneposted by ZeusHumms at 7:04 AM on October 30, 2019 [27 favorites]
State Department Officials To Testify Giuliani Was Seen As 'Obstacle' On Ukraine (Bobby Allyn for NPR, October 30, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 7:05 AM on October 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
Christopher Anderson, a career foreign service officer in the State Department, will tell House impeachment investigators on Wednesday that President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani stood in the way of the White House strengthening ties with Ukraine, according to a copy of Anderson's opening statement obtained by NPR.READ: Ukraine Specialist Catherine Croft's Written Testimony In Impeachment Inquiry (Brandon Carter for NPR, October 30, 2019)
Anderson, who spent five years working on Washington-Kyiv relations, will describe a meeting he had with former national security adviser John Bolton on the topic of having senior White House officials engage more with Ukraine. In it, Bolton noted a possible hitch.
"He cautioned that Mr. Giuliani was a key voice with the President on Ukraine which could be an obstacle to increased White House engagement," Anderson will tell the House committees, according to his prepared remarks.
Catherine Croft, a State Department employee who previously worked on Ukraine issues for the National Security Council, is testifying in the House impeachment inquiry on Wednesday.Another busy day of more people corroborating prior stories.
Croft is among the witnesses called to give depositions behind closed doors in the ongoing investigation into the Trump administration's Ukraine policy and President Trump's July call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.
"During my time at the NSC, I received multiple calls from lobbyist Robert Livingston, who told me that Ambassador Yovanovitch should be fired. He characterized Ambassador Yovanovitch as an 'Obama holdover' and associated with George Soros," Croft says in her opening statement, obtained by NPR. "It was not clear to me at the time—or now—at whose direction or at whose expense Mr. Livingston was seeking the removal of Ambassador Yovanovitch.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:05 AM on October 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
WSJ: "Democrats after Col. Vindman’s hearing called the GOP attempt to ferret out details on the whistleblower potentially dangerous. While the identity of the person remains publicly unknown, the legal team representing him has received multiple death threats that have led to at least one law-enforcement investigation, according to people close to the legal team, as well as other abusive communications."
posted by katra at 7:10 AM on October 30, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by katra at 7:10 AM on October 30, 2019 [13 favorites]
How can GOP senators serve as impeachment jurors when they're implicated in Trump's misdeeds?
Republicans: "He's supposed to be tried by a jury of his peers so the question should be whether Democrats can be jurors"
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:41 AM on October 30, 2019 [5 favorites]
Republicans: "He's supposed to be tried by a jury of his peers so the question should be whether Democrats can be jurors"
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:41 AM on October 30, 2019 [5 favorites]
Republicans: "He's supposed to be tried by a jury of his peers so the question should be whether Democrats can be jurors"
Following this to a logical conclusion, the only jurors can be Republicans who have been credibly accused or convicted of abuse of power, misconduct, or crimes. Which seems totally fair!
posted by Nat "King" Cole Porter Wagoner at 7:46 AM on October 30, 2019 [5 favorites]
Following this to a logical conclusion, the only jurors can be Republicans who have been credibly accused or convicted of abuse of power, misconduct, or crimes. Which seems totally fair!
posted by Nat "King" Cole Porter Wagoner at 7:46 AM on October 30, 2019 [5 favorites]
Schumer warns Trump may shut down the government over impeachment — The Senate minority leader said he is 'increasingly worried' Trump will seek a diversion, Politico, Burgess Everett, 10/29/2019ald (maybe), "Nice government we've got here: it would be a shame if the Democrats let something happen to it."
posted by cenoxo at 8:12 AM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
It's a nightmare scenario for Washington: a government shutdown smack in the middle of the House's impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump.The Don
And Chuck Schumer says he's "increasingly worried" that it might come to fruition. As he and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell battle over government funding, the Senate minority leader said on Tuesday that he's fretting that Trump will balk at a short-term spending bill during the Democratic effort to oust him from office.
"I'm increasingly worried that President Trump will want to shut down the government again because of impeachment," Schumer told reporters. "He always likes to create diversions. I hope and pray he won’t want to cause another government shutdown because it might be a diversion away from impeachment."
Republicans have insisted the government will not shut down, but that was also their position in December when Trump kicked off the longest government shutdown in history over Democrats' refusal to fund his border wall. Without action, the government will shut down Nov. 22.
...
posted by cenoxo at 8:12 AM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
tbh it's hard to imagine a timeline where that shutdown doesn't happen
posted by ryanrs at 8:15 AM on October 30, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by ryanrs at 8:15 AM on October 30, 2019 [16 favorites]
"During my time at the NSC, I received multiple calls from lobbyist Robert Livingston, who told me that Ambassador Yovanovitch should be fired. He characterized Ambassador Yovanovitch as an 'Obama holdover' and associated with George Soros"
Livingston goes way back to when he was a congressman from Louisiana from the 1970s through the 1990s. He is most famous, perhaps, for his resignation the day before the Clinton impeachment started. He had been designated to replace Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House. Turns out that even as he was giving sanctimonious speeches about the behavior of Clinton, he was engaging in multiple extra-marital affairs of his own.
It was quite a day. All at the same time, Dan Burton, Henry Hyde, Newt Gingrich, Bob Livingston and Helen Chenowith, all of who had been excoriating Clinton for months, all admitted to affairs of their own.
Haven't heard Livingston's name for years. Good to know he's still out there, as slimy as ever, pitching George Soros conspiracies.
posted by JackFlash at 8:19 AM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
Livingston goes way back to when he was a congressman from Louisiana from the 1970s through the 1990s. He is most famous, perhaps, for his resignation the day before the Clinton impeachment started. He had been designated to replace Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House. Turns out that even as he was giving sanctimonious speeches about the behavior of Clinton, he was engaging in multiple extra-marital affairs of his own.
It was quite a day. All at the same time, Dan Burton, Henry Hyde, Newt Gingrich, Bob Livingston and Helen Chenowith, all of who had been excoriating Clinton for months, all admitted to affairs of their own.
Haven't heard Livingston's name for years. Good to know he's still out there, as slimy as ever, pitching George Soros conspiracies.
posted by JackFlash at 8:19 AM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
Doesn't a potential shutdown just hurt him in the long run? The impeachment won't go away, and like last time, won't he just cave after a couple of weeks of shutdown? Is this a brier rabbit plea or there really a danger here?
posted by os tuberoes at 8:25 AM on October 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by os tuberoes at 8:25 AM on October 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
Doesn't a potential shutdown just hurt him in the long run? The impeachment won't go away, and like last time, won't he just cave after a couple of weeks of shutdown? Is this a brier rabbit plea or there really a danger here?
That's how I read Schumer's comment. "Oh please Mr. President do anything other than shut down the government!"
posted by Preserver at 8:34 AM on October 30, 2019 [9 favorites]
That's how I read Schumer's comment. "Oh please Mr. President do anything other than shut down the government!"
posted by Preserver at 8:34 AM on October 30, 2019 [9 favorites]
Doesn't a potential shutdown just hurt him in the long run?
Honestly, that's my take on it. Some of his lowest approval rating/highest disapproval ratings came during the last shutdown, which could be framed, if you squint at it hard enough, a difference of opinion around priorities. If the next shutdown is framed as "I can't work with Democrats while they are impeaching me--drop it, and we'll talk," I honestly thing all but his most ardent supporters will balk at it.
posted by MrGuilt at 8:35 AM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
Honestly, that's my take on it. Some of his lowest approval rating/highest disapproval ratings came during the last shutdown, which could be framed, if you squint at it hard enough, a difference of opinion around priorities. If the next shutdown is framed as "I can't work with Democrats while they are impeaching me--drop it, and we'll talk," I honestly thing all but his most ardent supporters will balk at it.
posted by MrGuilt at 8:35 AM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
Former G.O.P. Lawmaker Pressed for Ambassador’s Ouster, Diplomat Will Say (NYT)
Mark J. MacDougall, a lawyer for both witnesses, planned to tell investigators for the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight and Reform Committees that neither Ms. Croft nor Mr. Anderson is the anonymous whistle-blower whose complaint about Mr. Trump’s actions toward Ukraine helped prompt the impeachment inquiry. But in a statement of his own, he will say that neither witness would be willing to answer questions they believe may be meant to identify the whistle-blower.posted by katra at 8:51 AM on October 30, 2019 [9 favorites]
“To the extent we reasonably conclude that any questions directed to Mr. Anderson this afternoon are intended to assist anyone in establishing the identity of the whistle-blower, we will make the necessary objections and will give the witness appropriate instructions,” Mr. MacDougall planned to say. His decision to offer such introductory remarks was unusual, and reflected the extent to which accounts of Republican questioning related to the activity of the whistle-blower has spooked potential witnesses.
Testimony from career diplomats to outline Trump’s dark view of Ukraine (WaPo)
The State Department officials, Catherine Croft and Christopher Anderson, said their optimistic view of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky clashed with a darker outlook of the new government held by Trump and an informal channel of actors linked to the president’s attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani.posted by katra at 8:57 AM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
Anderson, a career Foreign Service officer, will detail efforts when U.S. officials tried to demonstrate support for Ukraine only to be batted down by the White House, including after Russian forces attacked and seized Ukrainian military vessels in the Sea of Azov in 2018. [...]
“While my colleagues at the State Department quickly prepared a statement condemning Russia for its escalation, senior officials in the White House blocked it from being issued,” Anderson was set to testify.
Croft, who worked on Ukraine issues at the White House and the State Department, said that “throughout” her time in the Trump administration she heard the president “describe Ukraine as a corrupt country,” both “directly and indirectly.”
Nominee John Sullivan dancing as fast as he can around the obvious facts with this impeachment inquiry going on before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee , Live
posted by Harry Caul at 8:57 AM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 8:57 AM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
Senate Democrats question Russia ambassador pick about Ukraine, impeachment (WaPo)
Going to the heart of the impeachment inquiry, he was asked whether it was “ever appropriate for the president to use his office to solicit investigations into his domestic political opponents.”posted by katra at 8:59 AM on October 30, 2019 [3 favorites]
Sullivan said: “I don’t think that would be in accord with our values.”
I can’t imagine worse optics than a government shutdown during Thanksgiving and potentially Hanukkah and Christmas, as the government is conducting an impeachment inquiry on the President. A real-life The Grinch.
posted by sallybrown at 9:00 AM on October 30, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by sallybrown at 9:00 AM on October 30, 2019 [3 favorites]
In a hypothetical government shutdown, would any part of the impeachment inquiry be halted, pending further funding?
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:02 AM on October 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:02 AM on October 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
A shutdown won't stop impeachment. It will force impeachment unless Trump backs down. And if he does back down, then that shows weakness and impeachment continues, just with people more pissed off at him.
I'm not worried that a shutdown will help Trump. I'm worried about all the people who are going to be hurt by it.
posted by ryanrs at 9:06 AM on October 30, 2019 [24 favorites]
I'm not worried that a shutdown will help Trump. I'm worried about all the people who are going to be hurt by it.
posted by ryanrs at 9:06 AM on October 30, 2019 [24 favorites]
WaPo: 10 a.m.: Schumer seeks protection of Vindman after Tuesday’s testimony
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) is calling on the Army to provide Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who testified Tuesday in the impeachment inquiry, the same protections as whistleblowers.posted by katra at 9:09 AM on October 30, 2019 [14 favorites]
In a letter, Schumer also asked Army leaders that Vindman be “protected from reprisal for testifying before Congress.” [...] Schumer noted that in the hours since Vindman’s testimony, he has been “vilified by individuals in the media and elsewhere.”
“Although he has served our country for more than 20 years and is a recipient of the Purple Heart after being injured while serving in Iraq, he has been called a variety of derogatory terms and some have even gone so far as to call him a spy and question his loyalty to the United States.” [...]
He asked Army leaders for a briefing on what actions the Army is taking to ensure Vindman and others are being protected.
In a hypothetical government shutdown, would any part of the impeachment inquiry be halted, pending further funding?
It would not impact Congress or Congressional employees, I believe, but to the extent executive branch employees are involved in the inquiry and those people are furloughed, it might make things a little tougher. I can’t imagine it would create big hurdles, but I wonder if POTUS’ team could try to designate as non-essential employees who are potential witnesses or document custodians, and argue they can’t appear before committees or produce docs because they’re prevented from serving in their official roles? Hijinks like that, maybe.
posted by sallybrown at 9:21 AM on October 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
It would not impact Congress or Congressional employees, I believe, but to the extent executive branch employees are involved in the inquiry and those people are furloughed, it might make things a little tougher. I can’t imagine it would create big hurdles, but I wonder if POTUS’ team could try to designate as non-essential employees who are potential witnesses or document custodians, and argue they can’t appear before committees or produce docs because they’re prevented from serving in their official roles? Hijinks like that, maybe.
posted by sallybrown at 9:21 AM on October 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
Senate Democrats question Russia ambassador pick about Ukraine, impeachment
Sullivan has effectively disqualified himself for the ambassador position he seeks. He has admitted that the sliming of Yovanovitch was wrong. And he has also admitted that he did nothing to stand up for what was right.
But Republicans have 53 votes, so wev.
posted by JackFlash at 9:21 AM on October 30, 2019 [6 favorites]
Sullivan has effectively disqualified himself for the ambassador position he seeks. He has admitted that the sliming of Yovanovitch was wrong. And he has also admitted that he did nothing to stand up for what was right.
But Republicans have 53 votes, so wev.
posted by JackFlash at 9:21 AM on October 30, 2019 [6 favorites]
Top State Department official breaks with Trump over Ukraine phone call (Politico)
But Sullivan also frequently reverted to what Menendez criticized as a “see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil” approach, basically admitting that he was unaware of much of what was happening involving Ukraine policy. [...]posted by katra at 9:33 AM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
Yovanovitch was the victim of a drumbeat of allegations led by allies of Trump, according to documents turned over to Congress by the State Department inspector general. Sullivan said he was aware of the smear campaign and believed that Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, was involved. He also said he was looped in when the State Department was given a packet of material that appeared to be aimed at denigrating Yovanovitch. “It didn’t provide to me a basis for taking action against our ambassador,” said Sullivan of the packet, which Giuliani is suspected of helping put together.
Sullivan said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had tried to find out exactly why Trump was unhappy with Yovanovitch, but that after several months, the reason — which Sullivan said he was never told — became irrelevant because it was clear the president wanted her out. [...]
Sullivan is a relatively well-regarded figure on Capitol Hill, and his nomination to serve as the U.S. envoy in Moscow is expected to make it through the Senate.
Doesn't a potential shutdown just hurt him in the long run? The impeachment won't go away, and like last time, won't he just cave after a couple of weeks of shutdown? Is this a brier rabbit plea or there really a danger here?
I think we can and should talk about this without making casual references to the notoriously racist Song of the South. There are lots of other ways to discuss what Schumer might be doing. When he pleads to avoid a shutdown, he may be baiting Trump, employing reverse psychology, playing a gambit, feigning weakness, etc.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 9:41 AM on October 30, 2019 [6 favorites]
I think we can and should talk about this without making casual references to the notoriously racist Song of the South. There are lots of other ways to discuss what Schumer might be doing. When he pleads to avoid a shutdown, he may be baiting Trump, employing reverse psychology, playing a gambit, feigning weakness, etc.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 9:41 AM on October 30, 2019 [6 favorites]
I don't want to get off on a tangent, but Br'er Rabbit and the briar-patch story are both way older than Song of the South.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:48 AM on October 30, 2019 [41 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:48 AM on October 30, 2019 [41 favorites]
Mod note: Yeah, public service announcement, we've had a few people point out that references to the briar patch/Br'er Rabbit/Uncle Remus [wiki link, but depicts 19th century racism] are a very, very loaded thing. Those references bring a lot of ugly history with them that you may not be intending, but that you're bringing up for many readers -- so they're better avoided. An alternative would be to say "reverse psychology".
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:52 AM on October 30, 2019 [37 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:52 AM on October 30, 2019 [37 favorites]
Unravelling Rudolph Giuliani’s labyrinthine ties to Ukraine (Guardian)
The following account is based on interviews with associates of Giuliani and his business partners in Ukraine, prosecutors familiar with his attempts to gather information about the Bidens, and officials and politicians concerned about the flamboyant former mayor.posted by katra at 10:03 AM on October 30, 2019 [5 favorites]
The Guardian’s reporting shows that Giuliani boasted of his ties to Trump to gain access to high-ranking prosecutors and officials while his associates used the Giuliani name to bolster their reputations and legitimise dubious business ventures.
“He announced that he was a lawyer for the president of the United States, that he was working for Donald Trump, there was nothing to hide,” said Andrii Telizhenko, a former Ukrainian embassy official who met with Giuliani in the US over burgers and cigars.
[...] For many Ukrainians, Giuliani was seen as a bridge into exclusive political and decision-making circles that could review US policy toward Ukraine. “Giuliani was not searching for us, we were searching for him,” Telizhenko, the former Ukrainian embassy employee, said of how Ukrainians concerned about political pressure in the country sought out Giuliani. Giuliani “knew the names, who was connected to who. He’s the filter in all this situation ... He might be the top expert on Ukraine in the United States”.
Mod note: House Judiciary Committee, Impeachment Inquiry Protections for the President PDF compares the current inquiry with the Nixon and Clinton impeachment inquiries.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 10:52 AM on October 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 10:52 AM on October 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
For many Ukrainians, Giuliani was seen as a bridge into exclusive political and decision-making circles that could review US policy toward Ukraine. “Giuliani was not searching for us, we were searching for him,” Telizhenko, the former Ukrainian embassy employee, said of how Ukrainians concerned about political pressure in the country sought out Giuliani. Giuliani “knew the names, who was connected to who. He’s the filter in all this situation ... He might be the top expert on Ukraine in the United States”.
Here's a fun question you can try asking any skeptics in your life: why do the President of the United States and his top personal agent care so much about Ukraine, of all places? Ukraine is not a major ally of the United States, nor is it a global political, economic, or military power. The United States also does not have any major interests or entanglements in Ukraine, like large troop deployments. At the same time, there are several other international issues that have been ongoing for months or years, such as the Syrian conflict or the Japan-South Korea trade war, where serious diplomatic engagement could conceivably benefit American prosperity and global standing. But instead, the President is putting enormous pressure on, for some reason, Ukraine, to find damaging evidence about a political rival, at the same time that his so-called "personal lawyer" is running around hobnobbing with Ukrainian politicians and businessmen despite the very real legal challenges that are mounting for his supposed client. At this point, you don't even need to argue that Trump would have to be controlled by Putin in order to spend this much time and energy on Ukraine, as anyone with such pervasive interests in Ukraine literally cannot help but be influenced by Russian policy in the region.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 11:17 AM on October 30, 2019 [44 favorites]
Here's a fun question you can try asking any skeptics in your life: why do the President of the United States and his top personal agent care so much about Ukraine, of all places? Ukraine is not a major ally of the United States, nor is it a global political, economic, or military power. The United States also does not have any major interests or entanglements in Ukraine, like large troop deployments. At the same time, there are several other international issues that have been ongoing for months or years, such as the Syrian conflict or the Japan-South Korea trade war, where serious diplomatic engagement could conceivably benefit American prosperity and global standing. But instead, the President is putting enormous pressure on, for some reason, Ukraine, to find damaging evidence about a political rival, at the same time that his so-called "personal lawyer" is running around hobnobbing with Ukrainian politicians and businessmen despite the very real legal challenges that are mounting for his supposed client. At this point, you don't even need to argue that Trump would have to be controlled by Putin in order to spend this much time and energy on Ukraine, as anyone with such pervasive interests in Ukraine literally cannot help but be influenced by Russian policy in the region.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 11:17 AM on October 30, 2019 [44 favorites]
At this point, Trump's platform is exactly the same as the goals that Manafort and Flynn got payola for.
posted by benzenedream at 11:31 AM on October 30, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by benzenedream at 11:31 AM on October 30, 2019 [8 favorites]
Is Trump just too dumb to do crimes? Here's why that defense won't fly (Amanda Marcotte, Salon)
The ugly truth is that Trump was clearly going to get away with this Ukraine crime, if not for the whistleblower. […]posted by ZeusHumms at 1:19 PM on October 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
Trump is, no doubt, pretty dumb. He seems to sincerely believe that he cleverly disguised his obvious threats made to Zelensky during that famous July 25 phone call. He was legitimately surprised that Washington baseball fans booed him when he showed his face at a World Series game. He is notoriously bad at reading.
But here's what Trump is good at: leveraging his power and privilege in order to get away with crimes. The man nearly convinced mainstream sources like CNN and the New York Times to elevate a smear job against Joe Biden, concocted through illegal means, into the news cycle. He has escaped justice for clear-cut criminal misconduct several before. And it won't be until November of 2020 that we'll know for sure whether he's been able to wriggle away from any accountability yet again.
Giuliani “knew the names, who was connected to who. He’s the filter in all this situation ... He might be the top expert on Ukraine in the United States”.
If you reduce the whole country to a very small number of politicians and oligarchs, filtered through a for-profit and Russian-tinted lens, that may be true!
(That's what countries basically are, right?)
posted by trig at 1:20 PM on October 30, 2019 [3 favorites]
If you reduce the whole country to a very small number of politicians and oligarchs, filtered through a for-profit and Russian-tinted lens, that may be true!
(That's what countries basically are, right?)
posted by trig at 1:20 PM on October 30, 2019 [3 favorites]
Is Trump just too dumb to do crimes? Here's why that defense won't fly
Well, there's the millions of times Trump insists into microphones in front of multiple witnesses that he's extremely intelligent, competent, presidential, and knowledgeable about the system. Nobody believes him, natch, but he can't have it both ways.
Also, I just can't see him ever allowing that defense to go forward. No way his ego could withstand it.
posted by Rykey at 1:35 PM on October 30, 2019 [3 favorites]
Well, there's the millions of times Trump insists into microphones in front of multiple witnesses that he's extremely intelligent, competent, presidential, and knowledgeable about the system. Nobody believes him, natch, but he can't have it both ways.
Also, I just can't see him ever allowing that defense to go forward. No way his ego could withstand it.
posted by Rykey at 1:35 PM on October 30, 2019 [3 favorites]
House Democrats ask John Bolton to testify in Trump impeachment probe on Nov. 7
posted by Harry Caul at 1:36 PM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by Harry Caul at 1:36 PM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
Whether he's too stupid or actually evil is irrelevant. We're not talking about whether he can remain a bag boy at Safeway. We're talking about the most important job in the world and both answers means he's clearly unsuited for it.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:55 PM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:55 PM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
You clowns believed our demand for an impeachment vote, and now the joke is on you (Alexandra Petri, WaPo)
How I laugh at the House Democrats! They should be ashamed of themselves for believing (as naive children believe) that we meant anything we said! Oh, what a laugh! Put on your cap and bells! Yes, you are the source of my mirth, and I laugh into the face of you, ho ho! Dingle dingle! That is me, doing an onomatopoeic rendition of the sounds that your folly makes!posted by Johnny Wallflower at 2:16 PM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
I’m sorry, I just can’t — I can’t get over it. You thought our words had meaning. The joke is on you.
We said we wanted a full House vote to proceed with impeachment, and you thought we weren’t just saying it. You thought our words meant something.
We said it with a straight face. And you, you clowns, you took us at our word. Oh my — *snort* I’m sorry, no, this is just — I can’t. You actually thought we were serious! You actually thought we wanted a vote! That we had actual procedural objections to what was going on, and — *louder snort* I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m getting it together — you agreed to a procedural vote, thinking it was going to assuage those concerns! But all assuaging us does is make an ass out of U! I can’t remember how the “aging” fits in there, but it does.
She really puts a fine point on the fact that nobody takes those kind of objections as sincere. I doubt anyone making or repeating those objections even fools themselves into believing it. It's just a torrent of lies trying to preserve some face for themselves and for the millions who have already decided to believe anything.
posted by lostburner at 2:43 PM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by lostburner at 2:43 PM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
NPR: Trump's Russia Director To Leave National Security Council Amid Impeachment Inquiry
"Tim Morrison, the top Russia official on President Trump's National Security Council, who is scheduled to testify in the impeachment inquiry on Thursday, is expected to leave his White House post imminently, three sources familiar with the plan told NPR."
posted by scaryblackdeath at 2:58 PM on October 30, 2019 [9 favorites]
"Tim Morrison, the top Russia official on President Trump's National Security Council, who is scheduled to testify in the impeachment inquiry on Thursday, is expected to leave his White House post imminently, three sources familiar with the plan told NPR."
posted by scaryblackdeath at 2:58 PM on October 30, 2019 [9 favorites]
The Strategic Underpinning—and the Limits—of the Republican ‘Due Process’ Defense of Donald Trump (Bob Bauer, Lawfare)
The objective of the argument is to press for a case for “due process” that would seem reasonable—who, after all, opposes “due process”?—while potentially prolonging the impeachment debate and making it harder for the House to hold a vote before Thanksgiving. The longer the fight goes on, the deeper the case moves into the presidential election cycle, and, then, the stronger is a Republican case that the “people should decide.” [...]posted by katra at 3:24 PM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
While this procedural argument serves the interest in diverting attention from substance, and pushing this conflict as deeply as possible into the election cycle, Republicans may looking to seize another opportunity that buying time might open up: the pending Department of Justice inquiries into alleged intelligence community and law enforcement misconduct in 2016 motivated by bias against the Trump candidacy. [...] This will be their chance to contain damage from Ukraine revelations, while lumping it together with many other House investigations [...] On this Trump theory of the case, the Democratic quest for impeachment was inevitable: nothing less than a refusal to accept the results of the election and, as Trump has said, “a takedown of the Republican Party.” [...]
In key respects, the Republican strategy of alleging a corrupted constitutional process bears remarkable similarities to the Democratic Clinton impeachment defense. [...] The Clinton lawyers argued effectively that Ken Starr’s aggressive investigation was part of a wider right-wing conspiracy to “get” Bill Clinton. [...] What followed was an impeachment process in which Starr was the House majority’s only “fact” witness in the impeachment hearings: It relied entirely on the record he compiled in his investigation, and Congress conducted no depositions or other fact-finding of its own. [...]
The structure of this defense may well have contributed to the wide public support that Clinton enjoyed by the time the Senate took up the articles. [...] The Republicans face significant obstacles in pursuing this same strategy. One is that the Clinton case was at the core about personal, not official, behavior, and there was no serious contention that his relationship with Lewinsky corruptly influenced his official conduct. The merits still matter. Another is the positive public perception of how Clinton was performing. The politics also matter.
And, finally, the president’s supporters must reckon with an impulsive and poorly organized defense by a president who has relied, among other counsel, on the likes of Rudy Giuliani. [...] The Republicans have one heavy burden to carry, which may in the end catch up to them: Donald Trump, and all that comes with him—the ignorance about the matters within his official responsibility, his inability to distinguish the legal from the illegal, his habitual disregard for even basic norms and for rudimentary standards of truth-telling, and the obsessional and crudely self-referential tweeting and personal commentary. This is where the politics and law of impeachment may eventually converge. Enough Republican senators may conclude that Trump should not be president and that, in defending him, they are putting themselves and their party at fatal political risk.
NPR: Trump's Russia Director To Leave National Security Council Amid Impeachment Inquiry
Every headline about Trump these days should carry those last three words. ”Trump Awards Medal to Dog Amid Impeachment Inquiry” “Trump Botches Halloween Party Amid Impeachment Inquiry” “Trump Demands More Wall Amid Impeachment Inquiry”
posted by Etrigan at 3:26 PM on October 30, 2019 [22 favorites]
Every headline about Trump these days should carry those last three words. ”Trump Awards Medal to Dog Amid Impeachment Inquiry” “Trump Botches Halloween Party Amid Impeachment Inquiry” “Trump Demands More Wall Amid Impeachment Inquiry”
posted by Etrigan at 3:26 PM on October 30, 2019 [22 favorites]
Did someone say "Trump Awards Medal to Dog Amid Impeachment Inquiry"?
posted by kirkaracha at 3:32 PM on October 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
In a somber White House ceremony in July 2017, President Trump draped the Medal of Honor around the neck of James McCloughan. He was credited with saving the lives of 10 men in a brutal, days-long battle in Vietnam, and Trump told the former Army medic that “we are in awe of your actions and your bravery.”Ceterum autem censeo Trump delenda est
On Wednesday, Trump posted a photo of that moment with McCloughan’s image replaced by that of a dog.
posted by kirkaracha at 3:32 PM on October 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
I mean, the same day Trump awards the Medal of Honor to a Green Beret, he tweets out a doctored photo of a dog replacing a previous honoree. It shows exactly how serious Trump takes the honor.
posted by kirkaracha at 3:43 PM on October 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 3:43 PM on October 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
Nancy Pelosi’s Predictions for Impeachment (Ronald Brownstein, Atlantic)
“In saying that he wasn’t going to send the military assistance to Ukraine, who benefits from that? The Russians. Then … he did what he did in Syria—who benefits from that? Putin. What he said earlier about NATO—who benefits from that? Putin,” she said. “That’s what I was saying the other day [in the meeting]: ‘All roads lead to Putin.’” She added, ominously if vaguely: “There is something wrong here about this Putin thing—there’s something wrong.”posted by ZeusHumms at 4:52 PM on October 30, 2019 [26 favorites]
I cut in, asking Pelosi exactly what she was implying about Trump. The exchange was striking enough to recount in detail.
Brownstein: “He’s called you a traitor. He’s said that you and [Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam] Schiff are guilty of treason. Is he guilty of treason? Is he undermining American national-security interests in the interest of serving a foreign leader?”
Pelosi: “Well, we’ll see. But what I’ll say is this: I don’t know if he’s guilty of treason. But I do know that he projects. Everything that he says—‘She’s in meltdown’ means that he’s in meltdown. Everything that he says, understand that he’s projecting his own recognizable [weakness].”
Brownstein: “But when you say, ‘All roads lead to Putin,’ what does that mean? Does that mean that you believe he is acting at the behest of Putin? Do you think he is trying to advance Putin’s interest?”
Pelosi: “I don’t know. All I know is the three things I mentioned in the room [with Trump], plus [a] fourth, the obstruction of our election … He is absolving Putin of any responsibility there … It’s just curious … I said early on: ‘What is it that the Russians have on the president—politically, personally, or financially?’”
Brownstein: “But just to be clear, do you think there is reason to question his loyalty to the United States?”
Pelosi: “I’m not going to that place.”
Trump: OK. I'm a puppet. I'm a puppet.
posted by kirkaracha at 5:04 PM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 5:04 PM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
The Latest: Bolton won’t testify without subpoena (AP)
8:10 p.m.posted by katra at 5:45 PM on October 30, 2019 [6 favorites]
Former National Security Adviser John Bolton is not agreeing to a voluntarily interview in the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.
The House committees leading the impeachment investigation have asked Bolton to appear behind closed doors next week. But Bolton’s lawyer, Charles Cooper, says Bolton will not appear without a subpoena.
Democrats have issued subpoenas to several other witnesses who ended up testifying.
Bolton will not appear without a subpoena.
STMFA.
posted by mrgoat at 5:54 PM on October 30, 2019 [31 favorites]
STMFA.
posted by mrgoat at 5:54 PM on October 30, 2019 [31 favorites]
Bolton will not appear without a subpoena.
You can't really make much of this. It may or may not be a "friendly" subpoena. Several of the government witnesses who have already testified have been willing to testify but not without the cover of a "friendly" subpoena to protect them from potential objections from the White House.
You will have to wait and see how Bolton responds to the subpoena and whether he testifies cooperatively or not.
posted by JackFlash at 6:07 PM on October 30, 2019 [7 favorites]
You can't really make much of this. It may or may not be a "friendly" subpoena. Several of the government witnesses who have already testified have been willing to testify but not without the cover of a "friendly" subpoena to protect them from potential objections from the White House.
You will have to wait and see how Bolton responds to the subpoena and whether he testifies cooperatively or not.
posted by JackFlash at 6:07 PM on October 30, 2019 [7 favorites]
If he was going to defy a subpoena, I have to think he would have just said “I won’t testify” and not said anything about a subpoena.
posted by saturday_morning at 7:02 PM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by saturday_morning at 7:02 PM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
John Bolton Is Summoned to Testify in Trump Impeachment Inquiry (NYT)
If Mr. Bolton is subpoenaed, his lawyer, Charles J. Cooper, is likely to ask a federal judge to determine whether his client needs to comply.WaPo: 3:35 p.m.: Judge sets Kupperman hearing for Thursday
Mr. Cooper, who also represents Mr. Bolton’s former White House deputy, advised the deputy, Charles M. Kupperman, not to comply with a subpoena to appear this week after the White House intervened.
A federal judge has scheduled for 4 p.m. Thursday a hearing on the case of former Trump national security aide Charles Kupperman, who has sued asking the courts to decide whether he must comply with Congress’s subpoena or a White House order not to testify in an impeachment inquiry.posted by katra at 7:11 PM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
The hearing had initially been set for 3 p.m. The Department of Justice asked to move it to Friday because of a conflict with the hearing about the testimony of former White House counsel Donald McGahn. But U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon agreed only to move the hearing by one hour.
What kind of fucking lawyer tells their client not to comply with a subpoena?
The crying on the inside kind, I guess.
posted by kirkaracha at 7:37 PM on October 30, 2019 [6 favorites]
The crying on the inside kind, I guess.
posted by kirkaracha at 7:37 PM on October 30, 2019 [6 favorites]
Fmr. NSA advisor John Bolton's lawyer says he would accept a subpoena from House. The thinking is that Bolton wants political cover, but is essentially looking to cooperate.
posted by xammerboy at 7:45 PM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by xammerboy at 7:45 PM on October 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
Kupperman claims to have received an order from the White House not to testify, even though he is no longer an employee of the government.
It is not clear whether Bolton has received the same order from the White House. He also is no longer a government employee.
In any case, both Bolton and Kupperman have the same lawyer. Does that mean both clients will be using the same legal strategy regarding subpoenas? Who knows? We will have to wait and see.
Thursday's court hearing in the Kupperman case should be interesting.
posted by JackFlash at 7:57 PM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
It is not clear whether Bolton has received the same order from the White House. He also is no longer a government employee.
In any case, both Bolton and Kupperman have the same lawyer. Does that mean both clients will be using the same legal strategy regarding subpoenas? Who knows? We will have to wait and see.
Thursday's court hearing in the Kupperman case should be interesting.
posted by JackFlash at 7:57 PM on October 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
White House lawyer moved transcript of Trump call to classified server after Ukraine adviser raised alarms (WaPo)
Moments after President Trump ended his phone call with Ukraine’s president on July 25, an unsettled national security aide rushed to the office of White House lawyer John Eisenberg. [...] Vindman told Eisenberg, the White House’s legal adviser on national security issues, that what the president did was wrong, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.posted by katra at 7:58 PM on October 30, 2019 [12 favorites]
Scribbling notes on a yellow legal pad, Eisenberg proposed a step that other officials have said is at odds with long-standing White House protocol: moving a transcript of the call to a highly classified server and restricting access to it, according to two people familiar with Vindman’s account. [...]
House impeachment investigators on Wednesday evening announced they have asked Eisenberg and a fellow White House lawyer, Mike Ellis, to testify Monday. [...] Vindman’s account marks the first known instance in which a witness before the impeachment inquiry has provided a firsthand account linking Eisenberg to the decision to move the problematic transcript to a highly classified server.
Republicans will have to face the truth on impeachment eventually (Karen Tumulty, WaPo Opinion)
Asked whether all of that is sufficient fodder for articles of impeachment against the president, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) earlier this week told a group of columnists: “There’s no question about that, right? We’ve had enough for a very long time. No, I think we have enough. But as long as there’s corroboration, we might as well get some more.”posted by katra at 8:37 PM on October 30, 2019 [7 favorites]
The bigger challenge, she suggested, may be deciding what not to include. [...] “How much drama can the American people handle?” Pelosi asked. “Where does the law of diminishing returns set in? Where is the value added not worth the time?”
Still, the speaker appears to be in no hurry to wrap this all up, even though an election year looms. “We will take as long as the truth insists,” she said. “And that will be its own agenda.”
The truth. Eventually, that is what Republicans will have to face.
Bolton is an attorney himself (Yale alum), and one of the many gov't gigs in his staggeringly long career was "Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legislative Affairs, Department of Justice" in the '80s. He was never going to appear without a subpoena being issued.
posted by Iris Gambol at 9:03 PM on October 30, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Iris Gambol at 9:03 PM on October 30, 2019 [8 favorites]
Eisenberg proposed a step...moving a transcript of the call to a highly classified server and restricting access to it
I wonder who *actually* moved it. Cuz if there's an audit log that shows which sysad, tech, or analyst 'moved' it - well you can ask them who directed that task. And then ask that dude. And so on. And they may even have had to use a two-man rule, if it was JWICS...which is purely speculative on my part.
posted by j_curiouser at 9:44 PM on October 30, 2019 [5 favorites]
I wonder who *actually* moved it. Cuz if there's an audit log that shows which sysad, tech, or analyst 'moved' it - well you can ask them who directed that task. And then ask that dude. And so on. And they may even have had to use a two-man rule, if it was JWICS...which is purely speculative on my part.
posted by j_curiouser at 9:44 PM on October 30, 2019 [5 favorites]
The truth. Eventually, that is what Republicans will have to face.
Will they? The Republicans left seem quite happy to huff and huff on the bag of paint that is Fox News. They keep saying "read the transcript" even though the transcript makes Trump look guilty as sin. I'll eat my god damned left shoe if even one person who says "read the transcript" has actually read it, comprehended it, and still honestly believes that it exonerates Trump.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:29 AM on October 31, 2019 [9 favorites]
Will they? The Republicans left seem quite happy to huff and huff on the bag of paint that is Fox News. They keep saying "read the transcript" even though the transcript makes Trump look guilty as sin. I'll eat my god damned left shoe if even one person who says "read the transcript" has actually read it, comprehended it, and still honestly believes that it exonerates Trump.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:29 AM on October 31, 2019 [9 favorites]
Actually just said by Donald Trump Jr: "I wish my name was Hunter Biden. I could go abroad and make millions off my father's presidency. I'd be a really rich guy"
The people who have this hooked directly to their veins will eventually have to face the truth?
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:34 AM on October 31, 2019 [34 favorites]
The people who have this hooked directly to their veins will eventually have to face the truth?
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 5:34 AM on October 31, 2019 [34 favorites]
I'll eat my god damned left shoe if even one person who says "read the transcript" has actually read it, comprehended it, and still honestly believes that it exonerates Trump.
No, but the right wing media is telling them that it exonerates Trump, rather than confirming much of the substance of the whistleblower report. Even if a Republican makes a good faith effort -- ha, ha -- to read the report, they're predisposed to interpret the document as exonerating Trump -- "no quid pro quo!" -- rather than being the self-incrimination it is.
Of course, the fact that White House officials acted in great hase to abused the classification system to hide the call's readout shows that they knew it was evidence of wrongdoing, but "balanced" reporting does not require pointing to such obvious conclusions.
posted by Gelatin at 5:42 AM on October 31, 2019
No, but the right wing media is telling them that it exonerates Trump, rather than confirming much of the substance of the whistleblower report. Even if a Republican makes a good faith effort -- ha, ha -- to read the report, they're predisposed to interpret the document as exonerating Trump -- "no quid pro quo!" -- rather than being the self-incrimination it is.
Of course, the fact that White House officials acted in great hase to abused the classification system to hide the call's readout shows that they knew it was evidence of wrongdoing, but "balanced" reporting does not require pointing to such obvious conclusions.
posted by Gelatin at 5:42 AM on October 31, 2019
Actually just said by Donald Trump Jr: "I wish my name was Hunter Biden. I could go abroad and make millions off my father's presidency. I'd be a really rich guy"
To be completely fair, this sounds ever so slightly less bad in the full context. He follows up with, "...but because my name is Trump, if I took one point five *dollars* from China... their heads would explode."
So he's not oblivious of his gross profiteering off of his father's name. He's just upset that all the mean people get mad at him for doing it.
Not that that's much better. But now we can be more honestly derisive.
posted by jammer at 5:45 AM on October 31, 2019 [6 favorites]
To be completely fair, this sounds ever so slightly less bad in the full context. He follows up with, "...but because my name is Trump, if I took one point five *dollars* from China... their heads would explode."
So he's not oblivious of his gross profiteering off of his father's name. He's just upset that all the mean people get mad at him for doing it.
Not that that's much better. But now we can be more honestly derisive.
posted by jammer at 5:45 AM on October 31, 2019 [6 favorites]
Actually just said by Donald Trump Jr: "I wish my name was Hunter Biden. I could go abroad and make millions off my father's presidency. I'd be a really rich guy"
Make you a deal, Junior: Your dad leaves office, and you can profit off of whatever value the name "Trump" still has for the rest of your life.
posted by Gelatin at 5:49 AM on October 31, 2019 [2 favorites]
Make you a deal, Junior: Your dad leaves office, and you can profit off of whatever value the name "Trump" still has for the rest of your life.
posted by Gelatin at 5:49 AM on October 31, 2019 [2 favorites]
A little ways down in that Twitter thread: DJT Jr wishes he was Hunter Biden, because then he'd know he has a father that actually loves him. Ouch!
posted by Nat "King" Cole Porter Wagoner at 6:10 AM on October 31, 2019 [21 favorites]
posted by Nat "King" Cole Porter Wagoner at 6:10 AM on October 31, 2019 [21 favorites]
The truth. Eventually, that is what Republicans will have to face.
I'm pretty sure they've been facing this since the 2016 convention. Admitting the truth they're facing? that will never happen. Their power is based on the stance that they have an endorsed power. They will never give up the stance, that's who they are. That's why so many of them love love love Trump, he never admits weakness, defeat, ignorance, incompetence.
posted by Harry Caul at 6:11 AM on October 31, 2019 [7 favorites]
I'm pretty sure they've been facing this since the 2016 convention. Admitting the truth they're facing? that will never happen. Their power is based on the stance that they have an endorsed power. They will never give up the stance, that's who they are. That's why so many of them love love love Trump, he never admits weakness, defeat, ignorance, incompetence.
posted by Harry Caul at 6:11 AM on October 31, 2019 [7 favorites]
"He's no Mr. Nice Guy, but sometimes it takes a Donald Trump to change Washington."
posted by kirkaracha at 6:53 AM on October 31, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by kirkaracha at 6:53 AM on October 31, 2019 [1 favorite]
Just goes to show you how wrong Orwell was. He expected some sizable resistance to the party telling you to ignore your own eyes and ears.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:53 AM on October 31, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 6:53 AM on October 31, 2019 [6 favorites]
Just goes to show you how wrong Orwell was. He expected some sizable resistance to the party telling you to ignore your own eyes and ears.
you mean like the millions -- literally millions -- of people who have gotten involved in political activism since 2016? all the marches, the campaigns, the organizing? the revival of union and organized labor? the waves of women who have come forward about sexual abuse? the ongoing protests against police brutality? the birth of an American antifascist movement?
the unprecedented nation-wide mobilization of the good (or at least not deliberately evil) in the desperate hope of beating back fascism and climate catastrophe?
the grass roots advocacy and relentless investigative work that has now produced an impeachment that is steadily gaining momentum and popularity?
does this not count as sizable resistance, for some reason?
Of course those who still call themselves Republicans are full on fascist. There are gonna be some fascists. This weird fatalism that ignores everyone else is not even a little bit accurate.
posted by schadenfrau at 7:08 AM on October 31, 2019 [62 favorites]
you mean like the millions -- literally millions -- of people who have gotten involved in political activism since 2016? all the marches, the campaigns, the organizing? the revival of union and organized labor? the waves of women who have come forward about sexual abuse? the ongoing protests against police brutality? the birth of an American antifascist movement?
the unprecedented nation-wide mobilization of the good (or at least not deliberately evil) in the desperate hope of beating back fascism and climate catastrophe?
the grass roots advocacy and relentless investigative work that has now produced an impeachment that is steadily gaining momentum and popularity?
does this not count as sizable resistance, for some reason?
Of course those who still call themselves Republicans are full on fascist. There are gonna be some fascists. This weird fatalism that ignores everyone else is not even a little bit accurate.
posted by schadenfrau at 7:08 AM on October 31, 2019 [62 favorites]
does this not count as sizable resistance, for some reason?
No because they're not a member of the party in question.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:09 AM on October 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
No because they're not a member of the party in question.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:09 AM on October 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
Anyone else remember that Muellerween was two years ago when Manafort was indicted? I have aged a decade since.
posted by fluttering hellfire at 7:11 AM on October 31, 2019 [21 favorites]
posted by fluttering hellfire at 7:11 AM on October 31, 2019 [21 favorites]
Anyone else remember that Muellerween was two years ago when Manafort was indicted?
I still remember Halloween 2016, the day we first heard about potential Russian interference in the election (almost immediately shot down by the NYT in a splashy article later shown to be untrue).
posted by sallybrown at 7:19 AM on October 31, 2019 [14 favorites]
I still remember Halloween 2016, the day we first heard about potential Russian interference in the election (almost immediately shot down by the NYT in a splashy article later shown to be untrue).
posted by sallybrown at 7:19 AM on October 31, 2019 [14 favorites]
As Impeachment Inquiry Moves Into Open Phase, Here's What To Expect Next (Deirdre Walsh for NPR, October 31, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 7:36 AM on October 31, 2019 [3 favorites]
The resolution designates House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., as the point person to preside over any public hearings.There's more in the article that I skipped over.
"The American people will hear firsthand about the President's misconduct," Schiff said in a statement on Monday, but he has not indicated which witnesses he would call.
Schiff and the top Republican on the panel, Devin Nunes, R-Calif., are the two lawmakers who would lead the questioning in hearings — but they can yield to their staff counsels. The bulk of the questioning during closed-door depositions conducted to date has been done by Democratic and Republican committee lawyers.
Republicans can request witnesses to appear at the open hearings and can request that subpoenas be approved, but those need to be approved by the majority.
Democrats have said they would like William Taylor to testify in open session. He is the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, and he gave a detailed account of the parallel foreign policy effort led by Rudy Giuliani, the president's personal attorney, to leverage military assistance for investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.
The resolution directs the Intelligence Committee to issue a report on its findings and recommendations and send the report to the House Judiciary Committee, which will consider any potential articles of impeachment. It also has to be publicly released. The report will be made in consultation with the House Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees — the two other panels that have been participating in the witness interviews so far.
It is also up to Schiff to publicly release any transcripts of closed-door testimony — potentially removing or blocking sensitive information.
...
Once the Judiciary Committee completes its hearings and votes on any articles of impeachment, its report would go to the full House for a vote.
There is no timeline for these next steps in the House, but Democratic leaders have indicated that they would like to wrap up the process before the end of the year.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:36 AM on October 31, 2019 [3 favorites]
Democrats on the committee need also to emphasize the number of subpoenas and document requests the Trump administration has refused. Far from presenting a coherent defense, the Trump Administration is stonewalling, and it's entirely fair to presume that 1) they're covering up wrongdoing and b) that the cover-up itself is an impeachable offense.
posted by Gelatin at 7:41 AM on October 31, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by Gelatin at 7:41 AM on October 31, 2019 [13 favorites]
Actually just said by Donald Trump Jr: "I wish my name was Hunter Biden. I could go abroad and make millions off my father's presidency. I'd be a really rich guy"
A.R. Moxon refers to this idiocy in a great thread about how conservatives, in their guts, believe that anything they have was earned, and anything those people have was stolen from or bestowed by the true earners. "It's how you can tell who they consider "them" and who they don't."
posted by Etrigan at 7:58 AM on October 31, 2019 [21 favorites]
A.R. Moxon refers to this idiocy in a great thread about how conservatives, in their guts, believe that anything they have was earned, and anything those people have was stolen from or bestowed by the true earners. "It's how you can tell who they consider "them" and who they don't."
posted by Etrigan at 7:58 AM on October 31, 2019 [21 favorites]
White House official expected to confirm diplomat’s account that Trump appeared to seek quid pro quo (WaPo)
Morrison is expected to tell impeachment investigators on Thursday that the account offered by Ambassador William B. Taylor Jr., is accurate, particularly that Morrison alerted him to the president’s and his deputies’ push to withhold security aid and a meeting with the Ukrainian president until Ukraine announced an investigation of the Bidens and 2016 election interference, the person said on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive discussions. [...]posted by katra at 8:20 AM on October 31, 2019 [7 favorites]
Morrison also is expected to tell lawmakers that he spoke with Taylor again on Sept. 7 to share a “sinking feeling” about a worrisome conversation between Trump and Sondland, said the person. Morrison will say that, during that conversation, Trump said he wasn’t seeking a “quid pro quo” but went on to insist that Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky had to publicly announce he was opening investigations of Biden and 2016 election interference. [...]
Morrison’s testimony could take away an often cited Republican complaint that many of the accounts from U.S. officials describing a quid pro quo are second hand.
I wish my name was Hunter Biden. I could go abroad and make millions off my father's presidency. I'd be a really rich guy
See also:
See also:
Joe Biden is correct on one point: Hunter Biden would never have an office in the White House because he’s proven that his only qualification is being the son of Joe Biden.posted by kirkaracha at 8:26 AM on October 31, 2019 [1 favorite]
A divided House passes resolution on impeachment inquiry, setting stage for televised hearings and release of witness testimony (Karoun Demirjian, Rachael Bade and Elise Viebeck; WaPo)
BREAKING: A divided House has passed an impeachment inquiry resolution, setting the stage for televised hearings and the release of witness testimony.posted by ZeusHumms at 8:34 AM on October 31, 2019 [10 favorites]
The resolution, passed on a near party-line vote, outlines the next steps in the impeachment inquiry of President Trump. Trump and Republicans had complained about the closed-door proceedings, now in their sixth week. Democrats have said the testimony shows the president used military aid to Ukraine as leverage to force the country to investigate his political rivals.
House Democrats adopt rules for public impeachment proceedings -- Procedures set up public hearings in Intelligence panel, deliberations on articles in Judiciary (Lindsey McPherson for Rollcall, Oct. 31, 2019)
posted by filthy light thief at 8:38 AM on October 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
In a rare move for the speaker showing the seriousness of the vote, Nancy Pelosi presided over the chamber as the House adopted the resolution, 232-196.WTF, Van Drew and Peterson?
Two Democrats, Reps. Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota and Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, voted “no.” Van Drew has said that while Trump’s behavior has been “distasteful” and makes him “feel uncomfortable,” he doesn’t believe the president has committed any impeachable offenses.
Independent Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, who left the Republican Party because of what he said was the GOP's unwillingness to acknowledge that Trump has committed impeachable offenses, voted with Democrats in favor of the resolution.
Republicans opposed the measure in part because most of them do not think the president should be impeached. But even a few GOP members who have not shut down the possibility of supporting impeachment have panned the Democrats’ process as unfair and do not believe the procedures Democrats have put forth will change that dynamic.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:38 AM on October 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
And for some blow-by-blow reporting: House passes impeachment probe resolution: Live updates (John Parkinson and Stephanie Ebbs for ABC News, Oct 31, 2019)
“We now have a full-fledged impeachment committee in the basement of the Capitol,” Nunes said. “Think about that, America.”
I'm thinking this is a great thing, but perhaps they should be in a room with windows. What were you thinking, Devin?
posted by filthy light thief at 8:43 AM on October 31, 2019 [5 favorites]
“We now have a full-fledged impeachment committee in the basement of the Capitol,” Nunes said. “Think about that, America.”
I'm thinking this is a great thing, but perhaps they should be in a room with windows. What were you thinking, Devin?
posted by filthy light thief at 8:43 AM on October 31, 2019 [5 favorites]
WTF, Van Drew and Peterson?
MN-07 I understand. Trump beat Hillary by 30 points. He's representing his district.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:44 AM on October 31, 2019 [5 favorites]
MN-07 I understand. Trump beat Hillary by 30 points. He's representing his district.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:44 AM on October 31, 2019 [5 favorites]
Republicans opposed the measure in part because most of them do not think the president should be impeached. But even a few GOP members who have not shut down the possibility of supporting impeachment have panned the Democrats’ process as unfair and do not believe the procedures Democrats have put forth will change that dynamic.
In other words, the Republicans know that since Trump is flagrantly guilty -- by his own admission and his behavior in public -- of the charges against him, their only defense is to call the process "unfair," not matter what it is. Pelosi holding a vote -- and more importantly, making key procedural concessions to Republicans -- won't change anything.
What will, though, is public testimony and getting the story of Trump's impeachable actions on the record, on TV, and in front of voters. The weight of the narrative may crush the Republicans feeble "process is unfair" narrative and possibly make it so obviously lame that even the so-called "liberal media" may make note of it (on this last: naaaaah.)
But even where we are, public opinion is turning against Trump, and he's resorting to openly paying off Senators with campaign money to shore up his position -- an action that the hearings ought to talk about as well. Memo to Democrats: Refer to Trump's campaign cash as a "slush fund." You're welcome.
posted by Gelatin at 8:46 AM on October 31, 2019 [7 favorites]
In other words, the Republicans know that since Trump is flagrantly guilty -- by his own admission and his behavior in public -- of the charges against him, their only defense is to call the process "unfair," not matter what it is. Pelosi holding a vote -- and more importantly, making key procedural concessions to Republicans -- won't change anything.
What will, though, is public testimony and getting the story of Trump's impeachable actions on the record, on TV, and in front of voters. The weight of the narrative may crush the Republicans feeble "process is unfair" narrative and possibly make it so obviously lame that even the so-called "liberal media" may make note of it (on this last: naaaaah.)
But even where we are, public opinion is turning against Trump, and he's resorting to openly paying off Senators with campaign money to shore up his position -- an action that the hearings ought to talk about as well. Memo to Democrats: Refer to Trump's campaign cash as a "slush fund." You're welcome.
posted by Gelatin at 8:46 AM on October 31, 2019 [7 favorites]
Nunes Accuses Schiff Of Leading A Cult, Claims Media Are His ‘Followers’ (Nicole Lafond, TPM)
Literally.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:55 AM on October 31, 2019 [2 favorites]
Literally.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:55 AM on October 31, 2019 [2 favorites]
Quote from article on Nunes nuttery:
The remarks were so outrageous, it moved Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) to speak out against the cult comparison, a remarkable gesture given Speier’s documented hesitancy to speak about her history. While working as a staffer for Rep. Leo Ryan (D-CA), she accompanied the congressman on a fact-finding mission to the Jim Jones Peoples Temple cult in Guyana. Ryan was assassinated and Speier was shot five times during the infamous Jonestown Massacre that left more than 900 people dead in an act of mass murder-suicide.posted by ZeusHumms at 8:57 AM on October 31, 2019 [99 favorites]
@RepSpeier:Devin Nunes calling the Intelligence Committee’s fact-finding mission a cult is dispicable. I know about cults. Cults are led by maniacal narcissists who expect complete adoration and relinquishment of independent thought. I suggest Mr. Nunes look elsewhere.
Every Republican in the House of Representatives is now on record as being OK with the president of the United States trying to coerce foreign governments into interfering in a presidential election.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:32 AM on October 31, 2019 [26 favorites]
posted by kirkaracha at 9:32 AM on October 31, 2019 [26 favorites]
Every Republican in the House of Representatives is now on record as being OK with the president of the United States trying to coerce foreign governments into interfering in a presidential election.
...which, let's not forget (and Democrats should point out), is actually much worse than what the Mueller probe was about, kind of half-assedly going along with the Russians' interfering in the election, as a private citizen.
posted by Gelatin at 9:38 AM on October 31, 2019 [11 favorites]
...which, let's not forget (and Democrats should point out), is actually much worse than what the Mueller probe was about, kind of half-assedly going along with the Russians' interfering in the election, as a private citizen.
posted by Gelatin at 9:38 AM on October 31, 2019 [11 favorites]
(Oh, and covering that up, too.)
posted by Gelatin at 9:39 AM on October 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Gelatin at 9:39 AM on October 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
New FPP: Seriously, ITMFA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
posted by katra at 11:26 AM on October 31, 2019 [20 favorites]
New FPP: Seriously, ITMFA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
posted by katra at 11:26 AM on October 31, 2019 [20 favorites]
Ian Milhiser, Vox: The most important part of the Democrats’ impeachment resolution — The Mueller hearing was a debacle for Democrats. The new impeachment rules show that they’ve learned their lesson.
The most significant provision in the resolution exempts the Intelligence Committee’s impeachment hearings from a rule that ordinarily limits questioning of witnesses to five minutes per committee member. Though the resolution leaves the five-minute rule in place for most members, it allows Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff to extend his own question time to as much as 45 minutes, so long as he gives equal time to Republican Ranking Member Devin Nunes.posted by tonycpsu at 11:31 AM on October 31, 2019 [8 favorites]
These are important changes because they will allow Schiff and the team of lawyers working for him to focus their time on the impeachment hearings and to spend significant amounts of time asking probing questions during those hearings. The new rules help ensure that the hearing will not be a disjointed process, constantly jumping from one questioner to the next, without giving anyone time to build a coherent narrative. [...]
In the typical hearing, members of Congress each spend five minutes — and only five minutes — questioning a witness or panel of witnesses. Question time ordinarily alternates between Democrats and Republicans.
This process generates a number of easily foreseeable problems. It is inevitable that some members will be more effective questioners than others, but the five-minute rule allows witnesses to filibuster particularly effective questioners until that member’s time runs out. The five-minute rule also means that members do not have enough time to conduct deep, probing inquiries or to ask a long series of follow-up questions that could uncover answers a witness would rather keep hidden. [...]
In effect, the new rules may bifurcate the hearings between the extended question time enjoyed by Schiff and Nunes and the more limited question time devoted to other members. And the latter part of the hearings could prove just as unenlightening as any other Congressional hearing.
New FPP: Seriously, ITMFA
Really? Why not something like, I don't know, “I'm not orange, I'm peach”?
posted by acb at 1:44 PM on October 31, 2019 [3 favorites]
Really? Why not something like, I don't know, “I'm not orange, I'm peach”?
posted by acb at 1:44 PM on October 31, 2019 [3 favorites]
Be the punny change you wish to see, acb.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 3:14 PM on October 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 3:14 PM on October 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
[oops]
posted by lostburner at 4:53 PM on October 31, 2019
posted by lostburner at 4:53 PM on October 31, 2019
« Older Selection Isn't A Box, And Text Goes In All The... | Working Harder and Harder To Earn Less and Less Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments