The Commentariat -- January 22, 2020

Late Morning/Afternoon Update:

Here's the New York Times' liveblog of today's impeachment trial (or "trial"). The Guardian's liveblog (which covers a range of stuff) is here. For instance (@11:35), Trump said of the service members injured by Iranian rockets that they "'had headaches and a couple of other things' which he deemed 'not very serious'." ~~~

~~~ Here's part of one NYT entry: "Mr. Trump fired off so many Twitter messages as his fate was being debated on the Senate floor that he set a record for any single day in his presidency. As of 4:45 p.m., he had posted or reposted 132 messages on Twitter, surpassing the previous record of 123 set in December, as he defended himself and lashed out at the House managers. Most of the messages were retweets of messages from allies and supporters assailing Mr. Schiff and others prosecuting the case."

Peter Baker of the New York Times: "After a marathon debate about how to conduct the impeachment trial, the Senate will formally move into the oral arguments phase of the proceeding on Wednesday as the House managers open their case to convict President Trump and remove him from office.... The trial convenes at 1 p.m. Eastern and will last through the afternoon and into the evening. If the managers divide their total of 24 allotted hours evenly over three days, the arguments could go until 9 p.m. or later depending on breaks." Emphasis original.

Lamest Excuse Yet. Sonam Sheth of Business Insider: "... Donald Trump said on Wednesday that he's opposed to the former national security adviser, John Bolton, testifying in his impeachment trial because 'it's a national security problem.... He knows some of my thoughts,' Trump told reporters. 'He knows what I think about leaders. What happens if he reveals how I feel about another leader and it's not positive ... it would make the job a lot harder.' Trump's statement, however, underscores why Democrats believe Bolton's testimony is crucial: he 'knows some of' Trump's thoughts." Mrs. McC: There's nothing stopping Bolton from sharing "some of Trump's thoughts" in another venue; say, in a paid lecture or in a book. Although Trump himself does release classified information without giving it a thought, often at the expense of national security, Bolton is an old hand in the national security field and knows how to answer questions without compromising U.S. security. ~~~

It's almost as if he's obsessing over something he doesn't understand at all. -- Mrs. Bea McCrabbie ~~~

~~~ ** Wait, Wait! It Gets Way Worse: Trump Boasts about Obstruction of Congress. Dan Spinelli of Mother Jones: "'We're doing very well,' [Trump] told reporters before leaving the World Economic Forum in Davos, later adding, 'Honestly, we have all the material. They don't have the material.'... 'The second article of impeachment was for obstruction of Congress: covering up witnesses and documents from the American people,' tweeted Rep. Val Demings (D-Fla.), one of the House impeachment managers prosecuting the case. 'This morning the President not only confessed to it, he bragged about it.'" ~~~

~~~ As always, he says the quiet part out loud. -- Justin Hendrix, in a tweet

I did get to see some of it. It's a hoax. It's a total hoax. I think the team was really good. The facts are all on our side. -- Donald Trump, on the impeachment trial, in an interview ~~~

~~~ What Facts? Joe Concha of the Hill: "'Fox News Sunday' anchor Chris Wallace on Tuesday said that he would 'not be especially pleased' if he were President Trump watching the White House defense of him in the opening round of the Senate impeachment trial.... 'They are basically saying, there's nothing to see here, all of this is bogus, while the House managers are taking every second of their one hour to make whatever case they want to make,' [Wallace said].... 'And this is being watched by millions of people on the three cable channels, I don't know why you wouldn't take the time and every second you have to make an argument on behalf of the president.'"

"Driving Miss Trump." Your Taxpayer Dollars at Work. Justin Rohnlich of Quartz: "Vehicles rented by the US Secret Service to shuttle Ivanka Trump ... around Davos will add another $34,000 to the cost of the administration's two-day trip to this year's World Economic Forum, helping nudge the total price tag past $4 million."

Jonathan O'Connell of the Washington Post: "D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine sued President Trump's inaugural committee and business Wednesday, alleging that the committee violated its nonprofit status by spending more than $1 million to book a ballroom at Trump's D.C. hotel that its staff knew was overpriced and that it barely used. During the lead-up to Trump's January 2017 inauguration, the committee booked the hotel ballroom for $175,000 a day, plus more than $300,000 in food and beverage costs, over the objections of its own event planner. The committee was formed to organize the events around the inauguration, but Racine alleges it instead 'abandoned this purpose and violated District law when it wasted approximately $1 million of charitable funds in overpayment for the use of event space at the Trump hotel.... These charges were unreasonable and improperly served to enrich' Trump's business, the complaint reads. He alleges that Trump and his daughter, Ivanka Trump, were likely aware of the charges, based on documents Racine subpoenaed from the committee and the Trump Organization."

This Is So-o-o Stupid. Rebecca Klar of the Hill: "Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) is suing Hillary Clinton for defamation over the former secretary of State's remarks on a podcast characterizing the Democratic presidential candidate as a Russian asset. Gabbard filed the defamation lawsuit Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Gabbard's lawyers allege that Clinton's comments have 'smeared' Gabbard's 'political and personal reputation.'... The lawsuit claims that Clinton is a 'cutthroat politician' and 'sought retribution' for Gabbard endorsing Clinton's 2016 Democratic primary opponent, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Gabbard is now facing Sanders in the crowded 2020 Democratic primary."

Rebecca Falconer of Axios: "[United Nations] is calling for an 'immediate investigation' by the United States and other countries into the hacking of [Jeff] Bezos' phone, which experts said may have been part of 'an effort to influence, if not silence, The Washington Post's reporting on Saudi Arabia." Mrs. McC: Yeah, I'm sure the Trump/Barr DOJ will get right on that. Related stories linked below. ~~~

     ~~~ A Hill report is here.

~~~~~~~~~~

Senate Republicans Come Down Hard on the Wrong Side of History

If the Senate votes to deprive itself of witnesses and documents, the opening statements will be the end of the trial.... If the Senate votes to deprive itself of witnesses and documents, the opening statements will be the end of the trial. --Rep. Adam Schiff ~~~

~~~ Nicholas Fandos of the New York Times: "A divided Senate began the impeachment trial of President Trump on Tuesday in utter acrimony, as Republicans blocked Democrats' efforts to subpoena witnesses and documents related to Ukraine and moderate Republicans forced last-minute changes to rules that had been tailored to the president's wishes. In a series of party-line votes punctuating 12 hours of debate, Senate Republicans turned back every attempt by Democrats to subpoena documents from the White House, State Department and other agencies, as well as testimony from White House officials that could shed light on the core charges against Mr. Trump.... Democrats, who came armed with slick digital slides and video clips to drive home their arguments, spent hours detailing the factual record compiled by the House investigation and cataloging the witnesses and thousands of pages of highly relevant documents Mr. Trump had succeeded in withholding. Senators facing such a grave decision as removing a president, they argued, have a responsibility to try to push all the facts to light.... Mr. Trump's lawyers replayed many of his most frequent and personal grievances, accusing Democrats in only slightly more lawyerly terms of conducting a political search-and-destroy mission."

Mrs. Bea McCrabbie: Tuesday was a day for Americans to see three true things: all the President*'s men are incompetent and dishonest; all the Senate Republicans are craven & corrupt; Democratic Houses members, who arguably hold less "important" jobs than the aforementioned, danced rings around the President*'s lying, unprepared, sometimes-incoherent & off-topic representatives. As I wrote yesterday of the first of the eleven amendments Democratic senators introduced,

"... Adam Schiff did a masterful job of meticulously outlining why it would be out of sync with precedent and irresponsible for the Senate to disallow witnesses & docs. Pat Cipollone made a stupid, content-free, 3-minute speech in favor of McConnell's rules, and Jay Seculow made a longer, but not a lot better, argument about something. Seculow's remarks were riddled with misrepresentations & flat-out lies. But these are Trump's guys.... Schiff [then rebutted] whatever that was Seculow was talking about, and point[ed] out that whatever that was had nothing whatsoever to do with the rules, which were supposed to be the subject of his discourse. He also called out both Trump lawyers for some of the lies they told.... And the best man will lose -- altho the House managers have already had a minor win -- see Mitch's changes, as noted below by NYT reporters." ~~~

~~~ As Jonathan Alter said on MSNBC: The difference in competence between the two sides of the arguments was painfully obvious. There are two reasons for this: (1) the fish rots from the head, and Donald Trump can't get/doesn't want competent, truthful representation; and (2) Trump has no case. (Paraphrase) ~~~

~~~ Jordain Carney of the Hill: "House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) criticized Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday over setting the stage for a 'rigged' impeachment trial for president Trump. Schiff, the lead impeachment manager on the House team, zeroed in on a provision in the rules resolution that could force the impeachment trial to go late into the night. The provision gives the impeachment managers 24 hours to present their arguments, but over just two legislative days, with arguments beginning Wednesday and Thursday at 1 p.m." (Also linked yesterday.)

The New York Times liveblog for Tuesday/Wednesday of impeachment trial developments is here. [Link fixed.] The Guardian's liveblog for Tuesday/Wednesday is here. Both are worth scanning. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~

~~~ Here's the Guardian liveblog's summary: "Over the course of nearly 13 hours, House impeachment managers clashed with White House lawyers as they debated the rules that will govern the impeachment trial. Republican senators voted to kill 11 amendments to the trial rules brought forth by the Democrats, thwarting multiple attempts to subpoena documents and witnesses, including former national security adviser John Bolton. House Judiciary chair Jerrold Nadler, who is one of the impeachment managers, accused Republicans of 'voting for a coverup' by rejecting attempts to acquire more evidence. Voting along party lines, Republicans pushed through the rules as proposed by Senate leader Mitch McConnell, unamended. McConnell did change the rules a bit since he first revealed them, allowing for each side to take three days, rather than two, to present their cases. He also allowed the House's impeachment evidence to be admitted into the Senate record. Throughout, Chief Justice John Roberts played a procedural role -- piping up just once to admonish both sides for a lack of civil discourse. 'I do think that those addressing the Senate should remember where they are,' he said. As the hours wore on, lawmakers looked visibly worn out -- a couple of senators appeared to nod off. The trial is adjourned until Wednesday at 1pm ET, when House managers will present their case."

From the NYT liveblog: Michael Shear: "Republicans made last-minute changes in their proposed organizing resolution for the impeachment trial after fierce attacks from Democrats that the proposed rules were unfair and part of an attempted 'cover-up' of President Trump's actions. The initial proposal ... had set aside 24 hours for each side to argue the case -- but said they had to complete the arguments in two days. Democrats said that would most likely force the debate well into the wee hours of the morning.... When the resolution was read, however, the two-day limit was changed to three days." Mrs. McC: According to MSNBC, the changes were "penciled in" to the copies of the rules distributed to senators. ~~~

~~~ Nicholas Fandos: "Senator Mitch McConnell ... made changes to the proposed rules for the trial after Republicans senators, including Susan Collins of Maine, raised concerns...." ~~~

~~~ Fandos: "In a significant change, the rules resolution submitted by Senator Mitch McConnell automatically enters the evidence collected by the House impeachment inquiry into the Senate record of the trial, in the same way that a similar resolution treated evidence during the 1999 impeachment trial of former President Bill Clinton. Democrats had railed against a provision in the proposed rules that would not have automatically admitted into the official record the House's evidence. They warned that Republicans were attempting to conduct a trial with 'no evidence' at all."

Fandos: "The seven House managers submitted one final written brief at noon on Monday, just an hour before the Senate was set to reconvene as a court of impeachment. The 34-page filing included a point-by-point rebuttal of arguments put forward by President Trump's lawyers in his defense on Monday, and an appeal to senators to convict him based on the House charges." (Also linked yesterday.)

Kyle Cheney & Andrew Desiderio of Politico: "Donald Trump's lawyers made an impeachment U-turn on Tuesday -- one that could have immediate consequences for the president's ongoing legal fight against the House's oversight investigations. After arguing in court for months that federal judges should stay miles away from disputes between Congress and the White House ... the president's lawyers spent the first working day of Trump's Senate impeachment trial arguing the exact opposite, and suggesting that those who disagree are hostile to the Constitution. 'The president's opponents, in their rush to impeach, have refused to wait for judicial review,' said Jay Sekulow.... But that argument is in direct conflict with the Trump Justice Department's own forceful arguments -- some as recently as this month -- that allowing courts to step into such battles between Congress and the White House would be an affront to the separation of powers. On Jan. 3, a Justice Department attorney fighting the House's impeachment inquiry said 'unelected' judges should not be 'refereeing' such disputes."

If there's any unfairness in these proceedings, it's the astounding mismatch between the high skill and preparation of the House managers and the rambling, dissembling and gaslighting of @realDonaldTrump's counsel. It's like the New York Yankees versus the Bad News Bears. -- George Conway, in a tweet ~~~

~~~ Jonathan Allen of NBC News: "... Donald Trump's defense failed him at the opening of his Senate impeachment trial on Tuesday>. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., had one job. He just had to collect 51 votes for the trial rules he had written, in close consultation with White House officials, to deliver Trump an acquittal quickly, quietly and with as few surprises as possible. He couldn't do it.... The other half of Trump's squad, his legal team chose not to defend his actions with a cogent explanation for them. Rather than rebutting hours of evidence presented by House Democratic impeachment managers, White House lawyers opted to repeat Trump's attacks on the process and the disjointed set of rejoinders he's delivered to Democrats in public.... At ... times, Trump's lawyers contradicted each other.... Taken together, McConnell and the White House team demonstrated that, for all of their coordination and the institutional advantages afforded them by Republicans' Senate majority, they still appear focused more on pleasing their audience of one -- Trump -- than persuading any undecided senators or voters outside the chamber."

David Graham of the Atlantic: "The rules that McConnell has laid out ... provide for a Potemkin trial, not a real one. McConnell has been open that his goal is to dispose of the trial before the State of the Union address, on February 4, and the rules show far more interest in speed than accuracy or deliberation.... Trump's acquittal is effectively a foreordained outcome -- especially if senators don't hear any more evidence or witnesses, though it's not clear that any evidence of misconduct by the president could really sway Republican senators at this point. So why bother having a trial at all? The catch is voters, and in particular the multiple electorates that McConnell has to consider: the nation as a whole, but also the voters in those states where vulnerable Republicans are up for reelection.... Vulnerable senators sit in the dock, the jurors are voters, and the verdicts won't come back until November."

Aside. Say What? Aaron Blake of the Washington Post: Jay Seculow, during a brief tirade on the Senate floor, expressed outrage that House Manager Val Demings (D-Fla.) had referred to "lawyer lawsuits." But Demings never used such a term. Later, the White House backed up Seculow, based -- the White House said -- on a mysterious "transcript" Blake couldn't find. Mrs. McC: Maybe Seculow was trying to confuse the "jury" with fake outrage over something that never happened. Hey, it's all he's got.

Trump Lawyers Disagree with Trump Lawyers: ~~~

     ~~~ Jonathan Turley, in a Washington Post op-ed: "There are ample defenses to be raised on both articles [of impeachment] without claiming, implausibly, that this was handled perfectly.... [Trump's] defense ... appears premised on two highly contested points. First, there is the position that there was nothing even remotely inappropriate in the president asking a foreign country to investigate a political rival.... Second..., you cannot impeach a president without a crime. It is a view that is at odds with history and the purpose of the Constitution." Turley was the House Republicans' "Constitutional expert" during the Judiciary Committee hearing on impeachment. ~~~

     ~~~ Charlie Savage of the New York Times: "In summer 2018, when he was still in private practice, [now-Attorney General William] Barr wrote a confidential memo for the Justice Department and Mr. Trump's legal team to help the president get out of [answering questions posed by Robert Mueller's investigators]... III, was pressuring him to answer questions about whether he had illegally impeded the Russia investigation. But ... even without the possibility of criminal penalties [being imposed on the President*], he wrote, a check is in place on presidents who abuse their discretionary power to control the executive branch of government -- impeachment. The fact that the president 'is answerable for any abuses of discretion and is ultimately subject to the judgment of Congress through the impeachment process means that the president is not the judge in his own cause,' he wrote. He added, 'The remedy of impeachment demonstrates that the president remains accountable under law for his misdeeds in office,' quoting from a 1982 Supreme Court case."

The most important moment for the Republican Party since the censure of Joe McCarthy and the impeachment and resignation of Richard Nixon, in which Republicans became great heroes and patriots. Now, we're looking at 'Midnight Mitch' and the so-called world's greatest deliberative body really embracing a cover-up that is there for all to see. That's what this is about. It's about preventing information from becoming known and seen by the American public. -- Carl Bernstein on CNN, last night ~~~

~~~ Lee Moran of the Huffington Post: "Carl Bernstein sent social media users into overdrive after he slapped Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) with a taunting new nickname. The famed Watergate reporter called McConnell 'Midnight Mitch' during a panel discussion on CNN's 'Anderson Cooper 360°' on Monday. It centered on McConnell's proposed compressed schedule for ... Donald Trump's imminent Senate impeachment trial over the Ukraine scandal that would see some testimony taking place in the early hours." (Also linked yesterday.) Thanks to PD Pepe for the lead. Mrs. McC Update: Looks as if Bernstein's critique worked, since Mitch hastily changed the "midnight" rule.

James Crowley of Newsweek: "About 71 percent of Republicans believe that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell should call witnesses during ... Donald Trump's impeachment trial, a new survey showed. SurveyUSA asked 4,096 registered voters whether witnesses with firsthand knowledge should be allowed to testify, with 71 percent of Republicans, 93 percent of Democrats, and 81 percent of Independents saying witnesses should be allowed to testify. Only 15 percent of Republicans said that they should not be allowed to testify...."

The Ugly American. Heather Long of the Washington Post: "President Trump renewed his threat to put hefty tariffs on European cars Tuesday at the World Economic Forum, promising hardball tactics if trade negotiations do not go his way. Just days after Trump scored wins with China, Mexico and Canada, the move highlighted how Trump is quickly pivoting to make Europe the next front in his protectionist trade war. As part of this push Tuesday, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned Italy and Britain could face U.S. tariffs if they pursue taxes on large technology companies such as Facebook and Alphabet's Google. French President Emmanuel Macron agreed in recent days to delay a similar tax to avoid Trump's tariffs. The threatened tariffs were evidence of the growing rift between the United States and Europe, on clear display as leaders from the two continents appeared to be talking from different scripts. Trump insisted on discussing a new trade deal, while European leaders kept emphasizing action on climate change and cooperation."

Rick Noack of the Washington Post: "Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg inveighed against the sowers of 'climate chaos' at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Tuesday, offering a view of the world that stood in stark contrast to President Trump's. In two speeches at the conference, the 17-year-old Thunberg renewed the call to 'start listening to the science' on climate change. The world, she said, needs to 'treat this crisis with the importance it deserves.'... Trump said he was a 'big believer in the environment' but did not single out climate change and lashed out at 'alarmists.' He said the United States will participate in a plan to add 1 trillion trees worldwide -- a plan that climate activists argued would not even begin to scratch the surface." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~

~~~ Silvia Amaro of CNBC: "The U.S. president addressed politicians and business leaders at WEF on Tuesday morning, where he took credit for America's 'stunning turnaround.' In what was his second speech as U.S. leader at Davos, Trump outlined how his 'America-first' approach had worked and advised other countries to follow suit. However, some of the audience members looking on argued that Trump was actually talking to voters back home." (Also linked yesterday.) Mrs. McC: Trump is like that stock fictional character, the bossy rich great aunt the poor relations have to invite to family events & humor throughout in the hopes she'll leave them some of her millions. Nobody wants her around; nobody is impressed by her opinions; but they must be polite and solicitous.

Dan Lamothe of the Washington Post: "More U.S. service members have been transported out of Iraq for medical treatment and evaluations following Iran's missile attack on military facilities there, the Pentagon said Tuesday, nearly two weeks after President Trump and defense officials initially said no one was hurt. The Pentagon said Friday that 11 service members required medical treatment outside Iraq. U.S. military officials declined to say Tuesday how many more are receiving care but said 'additional' personnel had been sent to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany."

Presidential Race

Bernie Surges. Jennifer Agiesta of CNN: "Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has improved his standing in the national Democratic race for president, joining former Vice President Joe Biden in a two-person top tier above the rest of the field, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS. The poll marks the first time Biden has not held a solo lead in CNN's national polling on the race. Overall, 27% of registered voters who are Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents back Sanders, while 24% favor Biden. The margin between the two is within the poll's margin of sampling error, meaning there is no clear leader in this poll. Both, however, are significantly ahead of the rest of the field, including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren at 14% and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 11%. Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg lands at 5% in the poll, while Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and businessman Andrew Yang each hold 4% support. Businessman Tom Steyer has 2%. No other candidate reaches 1% support."

Hey, Hillary Is Good at Projection, Too. Quint Forgey of Politico: “Hillary Clinton lambasted Bernie Sanders in a forthcoming documentary as a 'career politician' who[m] 'nobody likes,' savaging her rival for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination less than two weeks before the 2020 Iowa caucuses. The brutal remarks reopened longstanding party wounds, with multiple Obama White House alumni knocking Clinton, Sanders supporters galvanizing behind their candidate, and current and former Clinton aides rushing to her defense." A New York Times story is here. ~~~

~~~ Hillary, the Cable Show. Here's the Hollywood Reporter's story on the documentary. ~~~

Nobody likes him.... Nobody wants to work with him, he got nothing done. He was a career politician. It's all just baloney and I feel so bad that people got sucked into it. -- Hillary Clinton, on Bernie Sanders, in a Hulu documentary ~~~

~~~ STFU. Mara Gay of the New York Times: "That'll play nicely in a Trump campaign ad if Mr. Sanders is the Democratic nominee.... It's of no help to the [Democratic] cause when Hillary Clinton, the party's 2016 nominee, disparages other Democrats and shatters party unity based on her own festering resentment.... Worse, Mrs. Clinton declined to commit to campaigning for Mr. Sanders, or even supporting him, if he wins the nomination.... As a reminder, after the 2016 Democratic convention, Mr. Sanders campaigned vigorously for Mrs. Clinton." Mrs. McC: In 2016, some people chastised me for my dislike of Clinton. Now, do you see why? ~~~

~~~ Update. Allan Smith of NBC News: "Hillary Clinton on Tuesday night walked back scathing comments in which she would not commit to backing Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.... Asked by the [Hollywood Reporter] in an interview released on Tuesday whether her assessment still stands, Clinton said, 'Yes, it does.' And she would not commit to endorsing Sanders, who backed her as the Democratic nominee following the 2016 primaries, if he becomes the Democratic nominee. 'I'm not going to go there yet,' she said. 'We're still in a very vigorous primary season.' But Tuesday evening, Clinton amended her comments, tweeting that defeating ...t Donald Trump was the top priority, adding, 'I will do whatever I can to support our nominee.'... In The Hollywood Reporter, Clinton also criticized the 'culture around Sanders.... '... it's not only him, it's the culture around him,' Clinton said. 'It's his leadership team. It's his prominent supporters. It's his online Bernie Bros and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors, particularly the women.' Clinton said Sanders has 'not only permitted' that culture but is 'very much supporting it.'"

A Win for Trump & Co. Susannah Luthi of Politico: "The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Democrats' plea to consider a high-stakes legal challenge that could kill Obamacare, punting a resolution in the politically fraught case until after the presidential election. The decision deals a blow to Democrats' hopes to elevate the issue in 2020, but it will come as a relief to ... Donald Trump and Republicans, who've been wary of the lawsuit's potential to scramble their election hopes.... Trump, who has appeared sensitive to Democratic attacks on his efforts to wipe out Obamacare, last week falsely claimed on Twitter he 'saved Pre-Existing Conditions in your Healthcare,' despite his support for a lawsuit that would eliminate those protections. Trump also lashed out at Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar last Thursday over polling that shows Americans trust Democrats more on health care." (Also linked yesterday.)

Stephanie Kirchgaessner of the Guardian: "The Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos had his mobile phone 'hacked' in 2018 after receiving a WhatsApp message that had apparently been sent from the personal account of the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, sources have told the Guardian. The encrypted message from the number used by Mohammed bin Salman is believed to have included a malicious file that infiltrated the phone of the world's richest man, according to the results of a digital forensic analysis. This analysis found it 'highly probable' that the intrusion into the phone was triggered by an infected video file sent from the account of the Saudi heir to Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post." ~~~

~~~ Marc Fisher & Steven Zeitchik of the Washington Post: "A United Nations investigation to be released Wednesday will report that Amazon founder Jeff Bezos's cellphone was hacked in 2018 after he got a WhatsApp message that came from an account purportedly belonging to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, according to a person with direct knowledge of the report. The report is expected to detail a forensic investigation into long-standing allegations by Bezos, the world's richest man, that the Saudi regime launched a cyberattack on him as part of a complex series of conflicts among Bezos, the Saudis, President Trump and the National Enquirer tabloid."

Dan Diamond of Politico: "The CDC confirmed Tuesday that a Washington state resident contracted the first reported case of the deadly Chinese coronavirus in the United States as officials expanded screening of travelers to Atlanta and Chicago. The patient, a man in his 30s, traveled from the city of Wuhan to Seattle on Jan. 15 and sought medical attention four days later, officials said. He was reported in good condition and is currently hospitalized 'out of precaution' and not because of severe illness."

Way Beyond the Beltway

Brazil. Ernesto Londoño & Letícia Casado of the New York Times: "Federal prosecutors in Brazil on Tuesday charged the American journalist Glenn Greenwald with cybercrimes for his role in bringing to light cellphone messages that have embarrassed prosecutors and tarnished the image of an anti-corruption task force. In a criminal complaint made public on Tuesday, prosecutors in the capital, Brasília, accused Mr. Greenwald of being part of a 'criminal organization' that hacked into the cellphones of several prosecutors and public officials last year. Mr. Greenwald, an ardent critic of Brazil's far right president, Jair Bolsonaro, is a deeply polarizing figure in Brazil, where his work is lionized by leftists and condemned as partisan and heavy handed by officials in the Bolsonaro administration. The news organization Mr. Greenwald co-founded, The Intercept Brasil, published articles last year based on the leaked cellphone messages that raised questions about the integrity and the motives of key members of Brazil's justice system." A Daily Beast story is here. ~~~

~~~ The Intercept condemns the prosecutor. ~~~

     ~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Glenn Greenwald is one of the whiniest journalists in the business. He now has something really serious to whine about.

The Commentariat -- January 21, 2020

Late Morning/Afternoon Update:

Mrs. McCrabbie: Of course I'm biased, but I thought Adam Schiff did a masterful job of meticulously outlining why it would be out of sync with precedent and irresponsible for the Senate to disallow witnesses & docs. Pat Cipollone made a stupid, content-free, 3-minute speech in favor of McConnell's rules, and Jay Seculow made a longer, but not a lot better, argument about something. Seculow's remarks were riddled with misrepresentations & flat-out lies. But these are Trump's guys. And the best man will lose -- altho the House managers have already had a minor win -- see Mitch's changes, as noted below by NYT reporters. ~~~

     ~~~ Update: Schiff is now rebutting whatever that was Seculow was talking about, and points out that whatever that was had nothing whatsoever to do with the rules, which were supposed to be the subject of his discourse. He also called out both Trump lawyers for some of the lies they told.

Jordain Carney of the Hill: "House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) criticized Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday over setting the stage for a 'rigged' impeachment trial for president Trump. Schiff, the lead impeachment manager on the House team, zeroed in on a provision in the rules resolution that could force the impeachment trial to go late into the night. The provision gives the impeachment managers 24 hours to present their arguments, but over just two legislative days, with arguments beginning Wednesday and Thursday at 1 p.m."

The New York Times liveblog of impeachment trial developments is here [link fixed]. The Guardian's liveblog is here.

From the NYT liveblog: Michael Shear: “Republicans made last-minute changes in their proposed organizing resolution for the impeachment trial after fierce attacks from Democrats that the proposed rules were unfair and part of an attempted 'cover-up' of President Trump's actions. The initial proposal ... had set aside 24 hours for each side to argue the case -- but said they had to complete the arguments in two days. Democrats said that would most likely force the debate well into the wee hours of the morning.... When the resolution was read, however, the two-day limit was changed to three days." Mrs. McC: According to MSNBC, the changes were "penciled in" to the copies of the rules distributed to senators. ~~~

~~~ Nicholas Fandos: "Senator Mitch McConnell ... made changes to the proposed rules for the trial after Republicans senators, including Susan Collins of Maine, raised concerns...." ~~~

~~~ Fandos: "In a significant change, the rules resolution submitted by Senator Mitch McConnell automatically enters the evidence collected by the House impeachment inquiry into the Senate record of the trial, in the same way that a similar resolution treated evidence during the 1999 impeachment trial of former President Bill Clinton. Democrats had railed against a provision in the proposed rules that would not automatically admitted into the official record the House's evidence. They warned that Republicans were attempting to conduct a trial with 'no evidence' at all."

Fandos: "The seven House managers submitted one final written brief at noon on Monday, just an hour before the Senate was set to reconvene as a court of impeachment. The 34-page filing included a point-by-point rebuttal of arguments put forward by President Trump's lawyers in his defense on Monday, and an appeal to senators to convict him based on the House charges."

The most important moment for the Republican Party since the censure of Joe McCarthy and the impeachment and resignation of Richard Nixon, in which Republicans became great heroes and patriots. Now, we're looking at 'Midnight Mitch' and the so-called world's greatest deliberative body really embracing a cover-up that is there for all to see. That's what this is about. It's about preventing information from becoming known and seen by the American public. -- Carl Bernstein on CNN, last night ~~~

~~~ Moran of the Huffington Post: "Carl Bernstein sent social media users into overdrive after he slapped Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) with a taunting new nickname. The famed Watergate reporter called McConnell 'Midnight Mitch' during a panel discussion on CNN's 'Anderson Cooper 360°' on Monday. It centered on McConnell's proposed compressed schedule for ... Donald Trump's imminent Senate impeachment trial over the Ukraine scandal that would see some testimony taking place in the early hours." Thanks to PD Pepe for the lead.

A Win for Trump & Co. Susannah Luthi of Politico: "The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Democrats' plea to consider a high-stakes legal challenge that could kill Obamacare, punting a resolution in the politically fraught case until after the presidential election. The decision deals a blow to Democrats' hopes to elevate the issue in 2020, but it will come as a relief to ... Donald Trump and Republicans, who've been wary of the lawsuit's potential to scramble their election hopes.... Trump, who has appeared sensitive to Democratic attacks on his efforts to wipe out Obamacare, last week falsely claimed on Twitter he 'saved Pre-Existing Conditions in your Healthcare,' despite his support for a lawsuit that would eliminate those protections. Trump also lashed out at Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar last Thursday over polling that shows Americans trust Democrats more on health care."

Rick Noack of the Washington Post: "Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg inveighed against the sowers of 'climate chaos' at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Tuesday, offering a view of the world that stood in stark contrast to President Trump's. In two speeches at the conference, the 17-year-old Thunberg renewed the call to 'start listening to the science' on climate change. The world, she said, needs to 'treat this crisis with the importance it deserves.'... Trump said he was a "big believer in the environment" but did not single out climate change and lashed out at 'alarmists.' He said the United States will participate in a plan to add 1 trillion trees worldwide -- a plan that climate activists argued would not even begin to scratch the surface."~~~

~~~ Silvia Amaro of CNBC: "The U.S. president addressed politicians and business leaders at WEF on Tuesday morning, where he took credit for America's 'stunning turnaround.' In what was his second speech as U.S. leader at Davos, Trump outlined how his 'America-first' approach had worked and advised other countries to follow suit. However, some of the audience members looking on argued that Trump was actually talking to voters back home."

~~~~~~~~~~

"A National Disgrace." Sham Trial in a Kangaroo Court. Seung Min Kim & Karoun Demirjian of the Washington Post: "In a four-page resolution, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the opening arguments would begin at 1 p.m. on Wednesday, with each side given 24 hours to present their case over a two-day period. The Senate will vote on the resolution Tuesday. The question of witnesses would be decided after senators have 16 hours to question the two parties. This story will be updated." This is a breaking news story at 6 pm ET Monday. Mrs. McC: The parameters for the presentations are downright ridiculous. Here are some of the provisions the reporters outline in an update:

"McConnell's organizing resolution, which he circulated late Monday afternoon, offers each side 24 hours to make their opening arguments starting on Wednesday but compressed into two session days. It is unclear whether Democrats would press to use all their time, which could push testimony past midnight. After the House managers and Trump's lawyers make their case, senators will be allowed 16 hours to question the opposing sides. After that, the sides will debate for a maximum of four hours on whether to consider subpoenaing witnesses or documents at all, followed by a vote on whether to do so. If a majority of senators agree, then there will likely be motions from both sides to call various witnesses, with subsequent votes on issuing subpoenas.

"The resolution also allows Trump's team to move to dismiss the charges at any time -- although it is not explicitly mentioned in the four-page measure -- because doing so is allowed under standard impeachment trial rules. The Senate trial also won't automatically admit evidence from the House process, according to GOP officials, a key difference from the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton more than two decades ago. Though the material will be printed and made available to senators, it won't be automatically admissible unless a majority of senators approve it.

"The resolution infuriated Democratic senators, with Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) calling the document a 'national disgrace' and accusing McConnell of shrouding testimony and rushing the trial." ~~~

~~~ Politico's story, by Burgess Everett & Marianne Levine, is here. A reproduction of the resolution, via the Hill, is here.

Peter Baker & Maggie Haberman of the New York Times: "President Trump's legal team called on the Senate on Monday to 'swiftly reject' the impeachment charges and acquit him, arguing that Democrats would 'permanently weaken the presidency' if they succeeded in removing him from office over what the team characterized as policy and political differences. In a 110-page brief submitted to the Senate the day before Mr. Trump's trial begins in earnest, the president's lawyers advanced their first sustained legal argument since the House opened its inquiry in the fall, contending that the two charges approved largely along party lines were constitutionally flawed and set a dangerous precedent. Mr. Trump's lawyers dismissed the validity of both articles of impeachment lodged against him -- abuse of power and obstruction of Congress -- because they do not state any specific violation of the law, advancing a constrained and widely rejected interpretation of the power to impeach a president. While the lawyers did not contest the basic facts of the case, they maintained that Democrats' accusations in effect seek to punish the president for foreign policy decisions and efforts to preserve executive prerogatives." (Linked yesterday, in an earlier form.) ~~~

     ~~~ Politico's story is here. Trump's brief, via the White House, is here. ~~~

~~~ Calvin Woodward & Hope Yen of the AP take "a look at some statements by Trump and his legal team as opening arguments approach in the Senate impeachment trial: ... Donald Trump's defense against impeachment charges, as laid out in his legal argument released Monday, has distortions at its core. Trump through his lawyers assails Democrats for trying to upend the results of an election, which is precisely the point of impeachment in the Constitution. The case asserts Trump committed no crime, a benchmark for impeachment that the Constitution's authors avoided adopting in a well-documented debate." ~~~

     ~~~ Mrs. Bea McCrabbie: I suppose we should not be surprised, but it's still stunning that the most important legal brief his attorney have ever presented on his behalf "has distortions at its core" and contains a laundry-list of falsehoods. Then again, it seems as if Trump dictated the brief, and his lawyers merely massaged it: ~~~

     ~~~ Matt Stieb of New York: "The memo from Trump's lawyers echoes arguments he's made for months, only in slightly more formal language. It doesn't call Trump's phone call last July with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky 'perfect,' but it does say the call was 'perfectly appropriate.' The House impeachment inquiry isn't referred to as 'the most unfair witch-hunt in the history of Congress,' but it did violate 'every precedent and every principle of fairness followed in impeachment inquiries for more than 150 years,' according to the memo." ~~~

~~~ Charlie Savage of the New York Times: "As President Trump's impeachment trial opens, his lawyers have increasingly emphasized a striking argument: Even if he did abuse his powers in an attempt to bully Ukraine into interfering in the 2020 election on his behalf, it would not matter because the House never accused him of committing an ordinary crime. Their argument is widely disputed.... 'This argument is constitutional nonsense,' [Constitutional scholar Frank] Bowman said. 'The almost universal consensus -- in Great Britain, in the colonies, in the American states between 1776 and 1787, at the Constitutional Convention and since -- has been that criminal conduct is not required for impeachment.'... Many legal scholars say senators should not take this argument seriously.... Several early impeachment proceedings -- including against a judge who got drunk while presiding over cases -- did not involve indictable offenses." ~~~

~~~ George Conway in a Washington Post op-ed: "Trump's answer doesn't bother to present a coherent factual response to the impeachment charges. Instead, it relies on bare conclusions, pointless irrelevancies and outright misstatements -- including whether Trump 'raised the important issue of corruption' in his July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky. Read the rough transcript: He didn't.... As for the law, the answer claims, in the most cursory fashion, that the 'abuse of power' charge, at least as alleged here, 'fails to state an impeachable offense.'... Even if a statutory crime were required [which it isn't], the House's charge that Trump tried to solicit a personal benefit (Ukraine's announcement of an investigation) in exchange for an official act (releasing the security aid) constitutes bribery, both as understood in the Framers' time and under the federal criminal code today. Above all else, though, what Trump's papers really try to do is to attack the very legitimacy of this impeachment -- and, beyond that, of impeachment generally.... If taken to its logical conclusion, Trump's rhetoric about nullification and subversion of the people's will would mean no president could ever be held to account by impeachment." ~~~

~~~ digby: "Even Trump's lawyers are childish little whiners. If you are curious about the contours of the arguments in the Senate trial you can see from the briefs that have been filed by both sides what they plan to do. The Democrats will present the evidence of Trump's corrupt, self-serving abuse of power and obstruction. The Republicans will shriek about 'unfairness' and claim the whole thing is 'rigged' and a 'charade.'... They are going with the Trump tweet defense: scream 'it's a hoax!', claim it was a perfect phone call and strongarm the GOP Senators behind the scenes. McConnell wants to keep as much of the trial blacked out as he can so that Fox News can interpret the trial in Trump's favor for the cult. And they want to get it over with as quickly as possible." ~~~

     ~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: In fairness to the lawyers, (a) they're taking dictation from Trump (see above), and (b) they don't have a case. Ergo, they're following the trial lawyers' dictum (attributed to poet Carl Sandburg), "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." Trump's lawyers are, in effect, yelling like hell.

Bob Bauer in Lawfare: In his book on impeachment, Alan Dershowitz maintains that "'It is difficult to argue reasonably from the text [of the Constitution] that ... a person can be impeached for anything less than a crime.'..." Moreover, he argues, the impeachable crime must be similar in nature to treason or bribery. Under the Dershowitz view, a president who murdered her spouse would not have committed an impeachable offense. We would have in that instance a crime, and a very serious one, but just not the right type for purposes of impeachment or removal from office.... To use an example supplied by Cass Sunstein in his book on impeachment, the president operating within this exclusion could safely, without constitutional consequence, declare that he would not enforce civil rights laws, or decide to take a year's vacation in Rome."

Isweartagod, Stephen Colbert is just as informative as most news shows:

Joyce Vance in a Washington Post op-ed: "Last week, some Republican senators proposed ... a Republican witness for every one the Democrats are permitted.... The problem is, no such concept of 'witness reciprocity' exists in the U.S. justice system.... In our system, evidence must be relevant to the charges or issues at hand before it can be introduced in a trial.... The rule of relevance ensures that cases are decided based on evidence, not distraction or tricks.... Hunter Biden's ... story is unrelated to whether Trump committed the acts for which he was impeached. Even if Biden behaved corruptly in Ukraine, proof of that would not absolve Trump of charges that he abused his presidential power ... [or] whether the president withheld witnesses and evidence from Congress, obstructing its investigation.... While the John Boltons of this administration can offer relevant, firsthand information regarding Ukraine and the president's conduct and must testify if the proceedings are to have any integrity, the Hunter Bidens of the world cannot." ~~~

~~~ BUT. Plan B. Robert Costa & Rachel Bade of the Washington Post: "President Trump's legal defense team and Senate GOP allies are quietly gaming out contingency plans should Democrats win enough votes to force witnesses to testify in the impeachment trial, including an effort to keep former national security adviser John Bolton from the spotlight, according to multiple officials familiar with the discussions.... One option being discussed, according to a senior administration official, would be to move Bolton's testimony to a classified setting because of national security concerns, ensuring that it is not public.... But ... first, Republicans involved in the discussions said, would come a fierce battle in the courts." ~~~

     ~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: This effort suggests Trump's lawyers and allies know Bolton has the goods on Trump. If Bolton really wants to get his message out, but Mitch and the gang won't let him, he could release an "excerpt" from his forthcoming book titled, "This Is What I Would Have Testified in the Impeachment Trial." He would not be under oath; he would not be subject to cross-examination, but the word would be out, and GOP Senators would have to live with refusing to allow a through-and-through confederate Republican to provide highly-relevant information in an impeachment trial of the POTUS*. Given that, there is no way the sensible portion of the public would conclude that the Senate trial had "exonerated" Trump.

Consolation Prize: Trump "Personal Warrior" Badge. Anita Kumar & Matthew Choi of Politico: "After excluding House Republicans from his defense team..., Donald Trump announced Monday night that eight of them would serve as his personal warriors. Republican Reps. Doug Collins (Ga.), Mike Johnson (La.), Jim Jordan (Ohio), Debbie Lesko (Ariz.), Mark Meadows (N.C.), John Ratcliffe (Texas), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.) and Lee Zeldin (N.Y.) will 'serve as part of his team working to combat this hyper-partisan and baseless impeachment,' according to a White House news release Monday. The White House didn't specify in its statement what exactly the members would be doing, but one GOP source says they are expected to play a more behind-the-scenes role, with a focus on messaging and strategy."

The Idiot Abroad. Shannon Pettypiece of NBC News: "Trump landed Tuesday morning in Davos, and will speak before a group of executives, financiers and foreign dignitaries at the World Economic Forum just hours before the Senate is set to begin the first full day of his impeachment trial. He is also expected to hold a series of meetings with world leaders over the next two days, where he can respond to the impeachment developments in real time from across the Atlantic Ocean."

Evan Semones of Politico: "Joe Biden's campaign issued a memo to media outlets on Monday warning them against spreading 'false accusations' driven by ... Donald Trump and Republicans against the former vice president. The memo ... says there is 'no evidence' for disproven claims pushed by the president that Biden sidelined a Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating an energy company that his son, Hunter, held a high-paid position with. Trump pushed ... 'a malicious and conclusively debunked conspiracy theory' about Biden, deputy campaign manager Kate Bedingfield and senior campaign adviser Tony Blinken wrote."

Matthew Choi of Politico: "A majority of Americans want the Senate to convict and remove ... Donald Trump from office, according to a new poll conducted by CNN. Fifty-one percent of respondents to the poll want the Senate to convict Trump on the impeachment charges brought by the House, which would lead to his immediate expulsion from office. Meanwhile, 45 percent of respondents said they don't want to see the president removed. The poll was conducted from Jan. 16-19 and released Monday, on the eve of the Senate impeachment trial, which gets underway Tuesday...."

Impeachment Is Not Enough. Henry Giroux in Salon: "What is often ignored in the mainstream media is that Trump's impeachment battle is part of the wider historical and global struggle taking place over democracy and can be seen, as Larry Diamond points out, in Trump's attack on 'the independence of the courts, the business community, the media, civil society, universities and sensitive state institutions like the civil service, the intelligence agencies and the police.' Trump's crimes far exceed what is stated in the impeachment documents and include not only endless lies, threats and flirtation with extralegal violence but also his attack on the press as the 'enemy of the people.'" Thanks to NJC for the link. (Also linked yesterday.)

Colin Kalmbacher of Law & Crime: "In a three-page letter released late Monday afternoon, [Lev] Parnas's legal team demanded that Attorney General Bill Barr recuse himself from the Southern District of New York's (SDNY) prosecution of their client." The article includes a link to the "innuendo-dripping" letter and outlines some of its most noteworthy claims.

Presidential Race

Meg Kinnard of the AP: "Democratic presidential candidates hit pause on their recent feuds Monday as they walked shoulder to shoulder through the streets of South Carolina's capital city to honor the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. and rally around their push to defeat ... Donald Trump in November. The truce was illustrated when Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren shook hands at Zion Baptist Church, then linked arms as they marched with the other candidates later in the morning. It was a gesture that didn't materialize last week on a debate stage where the leading progressive candidates sparred over whether Sanders once privately said a woman couldn't be president. Warren declined to shake Sanders' outstretched hand after the debate."

Hey, Big Spender. Maya King of Politico: "Michael Bloomberg's big-spending, shock-and-awe TV ad campaign has made politicking more expensive for everyone from his 2020 rivals to Senate, House and state legislative candidates around the country. Eight weeks into his presidential campaign, Bloomberg has already spent more money on advertising -- $248 million -- than most candidates could spend in years. That amount has squeezed TV ad inventory in nearly every state, lowering supply and causing stations to raise ad prices at a time of high demand, as candidates around the country gear up for their primaries. On average in markets around the country, prices for political TV ads have risen by 20 percent since Bloomberg began his campaign. Meanwhile, some local politicians have already found difficulty trying to reach their own constituencies."

You can read full transcripts of the NYT editorial board's interviews with Democratic candidates here.

Beyond the Beltway

Mrs. McC: According to the WashPo these jamokes from the "Ohio Patriots" attended the Richmond rally. If I were wandering down the street and came upon them, I would not continue window-shopping.

~~~Virginia. Alan Suderman & Sarah Rankin of the AP: "Tens of thousands of gun-rights activists from around the country rallied peacefully at the Virginia Capitol on Monday to protest plans by the state's Democratic leadership to pass gun-control legislation -- a move that has become a key flash point in the national debate over gun violence. The size of the crowd and the expected participation of white supremacists and fringe militia groups raised fears that the state could see a repeat of the violence that exploded in 2017 in Charlottesville. But the rally concluded uneventfully around noon, and the mood was largely festive, with rally-goers chanting 'USA!' and waving signs denouncing Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam. Many protesters chose not to enter the designated rally zone, where Northam had imposed a temporary weapons ban, and instead packed surrounding streets, many dressed in tactical gear and camouflage and carrying military-style rifles as they cheered on the speakers."

The Commentariat -- January 20, 2020

Late Morning/Afternoon Update:

Mrs. McC: According to the WashPo these jamokes from the "Ohio Patriots" attended the Richmond rally. If I were wandering down the street and came upon them, I would not continue window-shopping.The Washington Post liveblogged a gun-rights rally in Richmond, Virginia. The Richmond Times-Dispatch liveblog is here. The rally appears to have come & gone with no major incidents.

Peter Baker & Maggie Haberman of the New York Times: "President Trump's legal team will call on the Senate on Monday to 'swiftly reject' the impeachment charges and acquit him, maintaining that he committed no impeachable offense and has been the victim of an illegitimate partisan effort to take him down. In a lengthy brief to be submitted to the Senate the day before his trial begins in earnest, the president's lawyers plan to make the most sustained argument the White House has advanced since the House opened its impeachment inquiry last fall, contending that the two articles of impeachment approved largely along party lines were constitutionally flawed and set a dangerous precedent. Mr. Trump's lawyers plan to dismiss the largely party-line impeachment by the House as a 'brazenly political act' following a 'rigged process' that should be repudiated by the Senate...." Still vacationing in Florida, Trump tweeted, 'Cryin'; Chuck Schumer is now asking for 'fairness', when he and the Democrat House members worked together to make sure I got ZERO fairness in the House." ~~~

     ~~~ Update. New Lede: "President Trump's legal team called on the Senate on Monday to 'swiftly reject' the impeachment charges and acquit him, arguing that lawmakers would 'permanently weaken the presidency' by removing him from office over what it characterized as policy and political differences. In a 110-page brief submitted to the Senate the day before his trial begins in earnest, the president's lawyers advanced their first sustained legal argument since the House opened its inquiry last fall, contending that the two articles of impeachment approved largely along party lines were constitutionally flawed and set a dangerous precedent." Politico's story is here. The brief, via the White House, is here.

Impeachment Is Not Enough. Henry Giroux in Salon: "What is often ignored in the mainstream media is that Trump's impeachment battle is part of the wider historical and global struggle taking place over democracy and can be seen, as Larry Diamond points out, in Trump's attack on 'the independence of the courts, the business community, the media, civil society, universities and sensitive state institutions like the civil service, the intelligence agencies and the police.' Trump's crimes far exceed what is stated in the impeachment documents and include not only endless lies, threats and flirtation with extralegal violence but also his attack on the press as the 'enemy of the people.'" Thanks to NJC for the link.

Christina Wilkie of CNBC (Jan. 17): "The Trump administration is 'looking at' making changes to a decades-old global anti-bribery law, White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow told reporters on Friday.... The questions about possible changes to the FCPA were sparked by revelations in a soon-to-be-released book about Trump, which describes an episode in which Trump bitterly complained about the law, which he sees as a hindrance to U.S. businesses competing overseas. According to Washington Post reporters Phillip Rucker and Carol Leonnig, in 2017 Trump told his then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson that it was 'just so unfair that American companies aren't allowed to pay bribes to get business overseas.'" Trump then said he needed Tillerson "to get rid of that law." Tillerson declined, so Trump told Stephen Miller to draft an executive order. Don't know what happened to that, but as Wilkie notes, such an order would be subject to court challenge. "Business experts, however, say the FCPA is a powerful tool for fighting corruption around the world, and a perfect example of American 'soft power,' or the influence that the U.S. exerts simply by virtue of its reputation." Thanks to Ken W. for the link.

~~~~~~~~~~

Charles Blow of the New York Times: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "evolution, toward a more 'solid realism,' toward the more rational King, toward the more radical King, is why I happen to believe that one of King's most consequential speeches is a little-discussed address he gave in 1967 at Stanford University. It was called 'The Other America.' In it, King blasted 'large segments of white society' for being 'more concerned about tranquillity and the status quo than about justice, equality, and humanity.' He slammed what he called the 'white backlash' for being the cause of black discontent and demands for black power, rather than the result of it, calling it 'merely a new name for an old phenomenon.'"

Meg Kinnard of the AP: "In the closing days before the first votes are cast in the Democratic presidential contest, the party's leading hopefuls are splitting their time between the critical early-voting states South Carolina and Iowa at events celebrating Martin Luther King Jr. Day. While Iowa and New Hampshire Democrats vote first for their nominee, South Carolina's first-in-the-South primary is a crucial proving ground for a candidate's mettle with black voters. The state's showcase holiday celebration, Columbia's King Day at the Dome, is a notable and highly visible event for a Democratic politician. The festivities are marked by a march through the streets of downtown Columbia and a rally at the Statehouse. All the top-tier candidates -- former Vice President Joe Biden, former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, California businessman Tom Steyer, and Sens. Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren -- plan to start Monday with prayer services around Columbia. Joining them in the capital are Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick." More on the presidential race linked below.

Sharon LaFraniere of the New York Times: "Democrats are intensifying their demands for more testimony and documents that could add to the already voluminous evidence against [Donald Trump] and bolster their case by shedding new light on several key questions..... On Sunday, Representative Adam B. Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and the lead House impeachment manager, said he was concerned that the C.I.A. and the National Security Agency were withholding information about Ukraine out of fear of angering the president." LaFraniere lists & elaborates on key questions that more information, both in the form of testimony & documentation, could answer. ~~~

~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Republican Senators continue to argue that House managers are clamoring for witnesses & documents because they "have a weak case." This argument is disingenuous on a number of fronts, most notably of course is that the reason for the "weak case" is that Trump stonewalled the investigation to the max. But Democrats too seldom mention that the stonewalling in fact proves the case for both articles of impeachment: if Trump had not committed impeachable high crimes, he would testify, he would have swamped the House committees with documents, and he would demand his subordinates do the same. In any real trial, the prosecution would have obtained these documents (assuming the perps didn't shred them) & would have deposed pertinent witnesses. Trump has used the power of his office to subvert the course of justice, and his complaints about not receiving "due process" (a Constitutional right that does not apply to impeachments) is beyond ludicrous. ~~~

~~~ John Bresnahan of Politico has a related report on Adam Schiff's assertions, which extend to national security matters other than Ukraine.

Alayna Treene & Jonathan Swan of Axios: "People close to the president say their most compelling argument to persuade nervous Republican senators to vote against calling new witnesses is the claim that they're protecting national security.... Sources close to Trump's legal team have privately expressed confidence that former national security adviser [John] Bolton will ultimately honor Trump's assertion of executive privilege." Mrs. McC: Right. Because national security experts and "experts," who in every other administration testify before Congress on a quasi-regular basis, have no idea how to deflect questions that might, in fact, compromise national security by, say, revealing sources & methods. The usual public answer to compromising questions, I believe, is, "That is something we could only discuss in a classified setting."

Laurence Tribe in a Washington Post op-ed: "The president's lawyers have made the sweeping assertion that the articles of impeachment against President Trump must be dismissed because they fail to allege that he committed a crime -- and are, therefore, as they said in a filing with the Senate, 'constitutionally invalid on their face.' Another of his lawyers, my former Harvard Law School colleague Alan Dershowitz, claiming to represent the Constitution rather than the president as such, makes the backup argument that the articles must be dismissed because neither abuse of power nor obstruction of Congress can count as impeachable offenses. Both of these arguments are baseless. Senators weighing the articles of impeachment shouldn't think that they offer an excuse for not performing their constitutional duty. The argument that only criminal offenses are impeachable has died a thousand deaths in the writings of all the experts on the subject, but it staggers on like a vengeful zombie.... With virtually no federal criminal law in place when the Constitution was written in 1787, any such understanding would have been inconceivable.... Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 65 defined 'high crimes and misdemeanors' as 'those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.'" Tribe goes on to demolish Dershowitz's argument, which is founded on gross misrepresentations of historical facts. ~~~

~~~ MEANWHILE, this ABC News report states Dershowitz's argument without attempting to refute it or report any refutations others might have made. Mrs. McC: In reviewing the transcript of George Stephanopoulos' interview of Dershowitz, it's clear that viewers of ABC's "This Week" also heard Dershowitz's fake argument with no pushback from Stephanopoulos, who -- in fairness -- can't be expected to know the details of Andrew Johnson's impeachment. He can be expected, however, to invite a guest -- like Larry Tribe -- who does have the knowledge to counter Dershowitz's false claims. This, obviously, is how Trump-Dershowitz get to poison the public -- i.e., the November jurors -- with false defenses of Trump.

Mrs. McCrabbie: It appears that Trump's "defense" is to give senators a grabbag of fake excuses to pretend they considered the "facts" and duly rejected actual evidence presented by House managers. It will work. And do count on the fakiest faker of them all, Susan Collins, to latch onto one or more of these bogus defenses as she casts her vote against removing Trump from office.

The Reluctant Advocate. Vicky Ward & Chandelis Duster of CNN: "Alan Dershowitz ... said Sunday the President had to call his wife, Carolyn Cohen, to persuade her to support the idea of Dershowitz making the case for 'the Constitution' in the Senate impeachment trial.... Trump was especially fixated on having controversial defense attorney Dershowitz on the legal team. But Dershowitz has been telling his own associates he didn't want to participate in the President's trial, a source who is familiar with these conversations told CNN. White House officials have applied a lot of pressure over the last several weeks to convince Dershowitz to join the team, sources familiar with the attorney's appointment said. Dershowitz has distanced himself from the Trump legal team and earlier Sunday, he told CNN's Brianna Keilar on 'State of the Union' he would not be involved in the day-to-day with the legal team -- noting that he will just be there to argue the specific issue of constitutional criteria for impeachment, making 'what could be the most important argument on the floor.'

The Impartial Juror, Ctd. Eleanor Mueller of Politico: "... Donald Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, who's reported to have played a central role in trying to convince Ukraine to investigate a Trump political rival, is' not relevant' to the Senate impeachment trial, Sen. John Cornyn said Sunday. 'That's a relationship that causes some of us to sort of scratch our heads,' the Texas Republican said on CBS's 'Face the Nation.' 'But I'd say he's not relevant to the articles and what the Senate is going to be asked to do, impeaching a president for the third time in American history for a non-crime over events that never occurred."

George Conway in a Washington Post op-ed: "This is what happens when you don't pay your legal bills .... -- which is part of the reason [Trump] found the need to make some curious last-minute tweaks to his team, announcing the addition of the legal odd couple of Alan Dershowitz and Kenneth W. Starr.... There was the fact that he would be an erratic client who'd never take reasonable direction -- direction as in shut up and stop tweeting.... That left Trump to be personally defended in the Mueller investigation by a random patchwork of counsel, including Jay Sekulow, a lawyer specializing in religious liberty cases, and John Dowd, a Washington solo practitioner who, according to Bob Woodward, viewed Trump as a 'f---ing liar.' (Dowd denies that [Ms. McC: which I supposed makes Dowd a fucking liar, too].) Last but not least, Trump had the assistance of Rudolph W. Giuliani -- who has done more than anyone other than Trump himself to get Trump impeached." Read on if you have a WashPo subscription; Conway really knocks Dershowitz & Starr.

Jonathan Chait: Saturday, "in response to a detailed 111-page brief outlining the House of Representatives' case for impeachment, President Trump's legal time filed a six-page response. It is notable primarily for advancing an audacious and highly dangerous constitutional claim: that a president cannot be impeached for any abuse of power.... According to its reasoning, a president can only be impeached for a literal criminal violation.... The first problem with this argument is that it rests on incorrect facts.... Last Thursday, the Government Accountability Office formally ruled that withholding the aid did violate the law.... Second..., there is no evidence that impeachment was designed to deal solely with violations of federal law.... Finally, as a constitutional principle, the notion ... would turn impeachment into a ludicrously ill-fitting solution for the problem it was designed to solve. It implies Trump could not be impeached for promising to pardon anybody who murdered his political rivals, but could be impeached if he resold a mattress that was missing its tags.... Trump believes profoundly that a president can use the government exactly as he sees fit. In his mind, 'abuse of power' is an oxymoron.... And now the authoritarian conviction that Trump believes as a matter of instinct has been sanctified as a formal legal theory, endorsed by presidential lawyers."

Ha Ha, Just Kidding! Jon Swaine of the Washington Post: "A Dutch supporter of President Trump said Saturday that he supplied a Republican candidate with purported intelligence on the movements of the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine last year, taking responsibility for text messages that raised concerns the diplomat was placed under surveillance. But the supporter, Anthony De Caluwe, said in a statement that he was not involved in any surveillance of then-Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, and that the messages were merely 'ridiculous banter' with the congressional candidate, Robert F. Hyde, who in recent days became entangled in the impeachment case against Trump. 'My engagement in this exchange with Rob is something that has no credibility,' De Caluwe said in the statement, which was emailed to The Washington Post by a spokeswoman. The spokeswoman, Karyn Turk, said that De Caluwe had never been to Ukraine and had no contacts in the country." (Also linked yesterday.)

David Lynch of the Washington Post: "Standing against a backdrop of Chinese and American flags, President Trump welcomed by name a roster of corporate executives and Wall Street bankers to the signing of his landmark trade deal with Beijing.... It illustrated how a president who once railed against financial industry greed and vowed to remake the Republican Party as a 'workers' party' has prioritized corporate America's desires. Trump's high-profile China deal celebration included billionaire Stephen Schwarzman, a private equity investor; Sheldon Adelson, whose company owns casinos in the Chinese territory of Macau; and Hank Greenberg, the former head of American International Group. Numerous representatives of companies like Honeywell and Boeing that have outsourced jobs to China in recent years joined them, but no representatives of organized labor attended. 'There is precious little in this deal that addresses China's long-standing denial of basic labor rights,' said Richard Trumka, the president of the AFL-CIO. 'It is another big giveaway to Wall Street and Big Pharma and prioritizes new protections for companies that move to China, creating even more incentives for outsourcing.'"

** Joseph Stiglitz, in Common Dreams, republished in RawStory: "It is becoming conventional wisdom that US President Donald Trump will be tough to beat in November, because, whatever reservations about him voters may have, he has been good for the American economy. Nothing could be further from the truth.... In fact, US economic performance over the past four years is Exhibit A in the indictment against relying on these indicators [of GDP and the stock market].... US life expectancy, already relatively low, fell in each of the first two years of Trump's presidency, and in 2017, midlife mortality reached its highest rate since World War II.... Millions have lost their [healthcare] coverage, and the uninsured rate has risen, in just two years, from 10.9% to 13.7%.... In 2017 ... [deaths of despair, caused by alcohol, drug overdoses, and suicide] stood at almost four times their 1999 level.... If fully implemented, the 2017 tax cut will result in tax increases for most households in the second, third, and fourth income quintiles.... Making matters worse, the growth that has occurred is not environmentally sustainable[.]" --s (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~

     ~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics, is formerly chair of the President's Council of Economic Advisors.

** William Saletan of Slate: "It's hard to keep up with ... Donald Trump's scandals. One day he's covering up taxpayer-funded travel expenses for his family. The next, he's stealing money for his border wall. The next, he's being implicated by an accomplice in the extortion of Ukraine. But one horror is right out in the open: Trump is a remorseless advocate of crimes against humanity. His latest threats against Iran, Iraq, and Syria are a reminder that he's as ruthless as any foreign dictator. He's just more constrained.... But Trump's election and his persistent approval from more than 40 percent of Americans are a reminder that nothing in our national character protects us from becoming a rapacious, authoritarian country. What protects us are institutions that stop us from doing our worst." --s (Also linked yesterday.)

~~~ Glenn Kessler, et al., of the Washington Post: "Three years after taking the oath of office, President Trump has made more than 16,200 false or misleading claims.... We started this project as part of our coverage of the president's first 100 days, largely because we could not possibly keep up with the pace and volume of the president's misstatements.... In 2017, Trump made 1,999 false or misleading claims. In 2018, he added 5,689 more, for a total of 7,688. And in 2019, he made 8,155 suspect claims.... He averaged six such claims a day in 2017, nearly 16 a day in 2018 and more than 22 in 2019.... The president added to his total on Sunday evening with more than 20 Trumpian claims -- many old favorites -- during a triumphant speech at the annual conference of the American Farm Bureau. He incorrectly described trade agreements -- suggesting Canadian dairy tariffs were eliminated and an agreement with Japan to reduce tariffs on $7 billion of farm products was 'a $40 billion deal' -- and also falsely asserted that 'tough' farmers and ranchers were crying as he signed a repeal of Obama-era regulations. A video of the event shows no one crying."

Everything Is Going Very Smoothly. Josh Lederman, et al., of NBC News: "The top White House official responsible for Russia and Europe has been put on indefinite administrative leave amid a security-related investigation, two U.S. officials and a former U.S. official said. The official, Andrew Peek, who took over the Russia portfolio at the National Security Council in November, had been scheduled to join ... Donald Trump at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, this week before he was abruptly put on leave, one of the officials said. The officials declined to specify the nature of the investigation.... Peek, whose background is in Middle East affairs, took over the Russia and Europe portfolio from Tim Morrison, who was a key witness in House hearings on Trump's impeachment. The Russia and Europe role is the same one that was previously occupied by Fiona Hill, another key impeachment witness during last year's hearings." ~~~

~~~ Deb Reichmann of the AP: "Andrew Peek was escorted off the White House compound on Friday, according to one of those familiar with his departure."

Presidential Race

** New York Times Editors endorse Elizabeth Warren & Amy Klobuchar for Democratic presidential nominee -- and president. Mrs. McC: This makes me feel pretty smart, as several weeks back I narrowed my choice to these two candidates, too. I've about decided on Warren, but I have a few weeks to change my mind. If you intend to vote in a Democratic primary, you probably should read this piece -- even if you've already decided on another candidate. ~~~

~~~ Lisa Lerer of the New York Times: "The New York Times editorial board endorsed the two leading female candidates for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination on Sunday, throwing its support behind Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. The board's decision to back not one but two candidates is a significant break with convention, one that it says is meant to address the 'realist' and 'radical' models being presented to voters by the 2020 Democratic field. While arguing that President Trump must be defeated, the board does not take a position on the best path forward for Democrats, writing that both approaches 'warrant serious consideration.' (The editorial board is separate from the New York Times newsroom.)"

Beyond the Beltway

Alan Suderman & Sarah Rankin of the AP: "Virginia's capital city is bracing for the expected arrival of thousands of gun-rights activists and other groups that have vowed to descend on Richmond to protest Democrats' plans to pass gun-control legislation. Gov. Ralph Northam declared a temporary state of emergency days ahead of Monday's rally, banning all weapons including guns from the event on Capitol Square. Militia groups and white supremacists were among those expected to mix with gun-rights activists, raising fears the state could again see the type of violence that exploded in Charlottesville in 2017." ~~~

~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: If we had a normal president, we would expect him or her to offer assistance or at least support safe conditions in a fraught situation. BUT. Ben Kesslen of NBC News: "Some saw ... Donald Trump's tweet Friday, saying 'Your 2nd Amendment is under very serious attack in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia,' as a call to join Monday's rally." Maybe that's what "some" saw; I see it as an effort to cause mayhem and possible injury or loss of life. He's itching to make another "good people on both sides" speech in an election year to get out the neo-Nazi vote. ~~~

~~~ Lois Beckett of the Guardian: "Anti-fascist activists will not mount a counter-protest at a gun rights rally at Virginia's state capitol on Monday that is expected to attract thousands, including white supremacists and anti-government militia groups. Anti-fascists from Richmond and Charlottesville publicly advised supporters to avoid the rally altogether, citing serious safety concerns. Molly Conger, a journalist and activist, told the Guardian activists in Charlottesville had agreed to encourage supporters to stay away."

Way Beyond

China. Reuters: "China is stepping up restrictions on the production, sale and use of single-use plastic products, according to the state planner, as it seeks to tackle one of the country's biggest environmental problems.... The United Nations has identified single-use plastics as one of the world's biggest environmental challenges.... [P]lastic bags would be banned in all of China's major cities by the end of 2020 and banned in all cities and towns in 2022." --s (Also linked yesterday.)

Ukraine. Anton Troianovski of the New York Times: "President Volodymyr Zelensky, a comedian, sitcom star and political neophyte, catapulted to the presidency of Ukraine last spring on a promise of sweeping away the country's shadowy web of money and influence. Now, as Mr. Zelensky faces pressure to deliver on his promises, he is finding that actually bringing the corrupt officials and oligarchs to heel is a lot harder than satirizing them on his former TV show, 'Servant of the People.'... Further complicating an already daunting task, Mr. Zelensky has been forced to deal with the fallout from the Trump administration's pressure campaign in Ukraine...." (Also linked yesterday.)

News Ledes

AP: "Police in Kansas City, Missouri, say at least two people are dead and 15 people were reportedly injured in a shooting outside a bar. The shooting took place shortly before midnight Sunday, Kansas City police said at the scene. Capt. David Jackson told news outlets at the scene that responding officers found 'a chaotic scene' and had to call in help from around the city. A man and a woman were found dead. Police believe the shooter is the deceased man, Jackson said in a statement. A spokesman said the shooter opened fire on a line of people waiting to enter a bar, but the motive for the shooting wasn't immediately clear. The shooter was shot by an armed security guard, police said."

AP: "The search for a suspect continued Sunday night after two people were killed and five others were injured following a shooting during a concert at a San Antonio club, Texas authorities said. Police said officers were called shortly after 8 p.m. Sunday to the Ventura, a music venue and bar located along the Museum Reach portion of the San Antonio River Walk. An argument broke out inside of the club and one person pulled out a gun and started shooting, San Antonio Police Chief William McManus said. One victim died at the scene, and another six were transported to a hospital, where one was pronounced dead shortly after arrival."

AP: "A Hawaii man with a history of run-ins with police and neighbors was facing eviction when he stabbed his landlord and killed two officers before the house he and two women were believed to be in burned, authorities and neighbors said Sunday. Police responding to a call for help found a woman who had been stabbed in the leg and resident Jaroslav 'Jerry' Hanel, in his 60s, opened fire, killing Officers Tiffany Enriquez, a seven-year veteran, and Kaulike Kalama, a nine-year veteran, Honolulu Police Chief Susan Ballard said. Police suspect he and two women were inside the house when it caught fire, and Ballard said it could take days for authorities to process evidence and recover any remains."