The Commentariat -- November 16, 2019
Late Morning/Afternoon Update:
Mark Sandy, who has served under both Republican and Democrat presidents, is the first OMB official to meet with impeachment investigators after others, like OMB director and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, refused. Sandy received a subpoena Saturday morning to appear before lawmakers, after his attorney said he would be willing to testify so long as he was subpoenaed."
Greg Miller, et al., of the Washington Post: “For two weeks [this summer, a CIA analyst] pored over notes of alarming conversations with White House officials, reviewed details from interagency memos on the U.S. relationship with Ukraine and scanned public statements by President Trump. He wove this material into a nine-page memo outlining evidence that Trump had abused the powers of his office to try to coerce Ukraine into helping him get reelected. Then, on Aug. 12, the analyst hit 'send.' His decision to report what he had learned to the U.S. intelligence community’s inspector general has transformed the political landscape of the United States, triggering a rapid-moving impeachment inquiry that now imperils Trump’s presidency. Over the past three months, the allegations made in that document have been overwhelmingly substantiated — by the sworn testimony of administration officials, the inadvertent admissions of Trump’s acting chief of staff and, most importantly, the president’s own words, as captured on a record of his July 25 call with the leader of Ukraine.... It is not clear whether any of this would have come to light were it not for the actions of a relatively junior CIA employee, who is now the target of almost daily attacks by Trump and right-wing efforts to make his identity widely public.”
** The New Red Scare. Julia Davis in the Daily Beast: “As Russia’s state media watch impeachment proceedings against U.S. President Donald J. Trump they’re loving what they see.... They listen in delight as Republicans parrot conspiracy theories first launched by Russians. And they gloat about the way Trump removed U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, because they blame her for promoting democratic 'color revolutions' that weakened Moscow’s hold on the former Soviet empire. Best of all, from the Kremlin’s point of view, they see Trump pushing Ukraine back into the Russian fold.... Instead of disseminating their usual conspiracy theories, the Russians watch gleefully as the Republicans do that for them. From the long-debunked 'Crowdstrike' cyber plot positioning Ukraine as the fall guy for what undoubtedly was Russian interference in the 2016 elections, to anti-Semitic conspiracy theories centering around Jewish financier and philanthropist George Soros, rivers of Russian dezinformatsiya are flowing down from the President of the United States and the GOP, through the impeachment hearings, to Trump’s cult-like devotees.”
CBS News has David Holmes' opening statement in a lot more readable form than is CNN's purloined copy, linked below.
Charles Pierce: David "Holmes’s statement is detailed and damning. It’s also faintly hilarious that the whole case may be broken because two old men talked too loudly on their cellphones.*... Holmes's statement ... [Gordon] Sondland squarely back on the hook for having once told Congress that he’d had no contact with anyone at the White House on these matters.... And ... it leaves the president* and his enablers with no defense left except to say that, yes, the president* did it, but it’s not impeachable.... If there’s a gun left here that isn’t smoking, I can’t find it." ~~~
~~~ * Mrs. McCrabbie: I don't think we know what kind of device Trump was shouting at. ~~~
~~~ On another note, how can what now appears to be at least a ten-month effort (December 2018 to September 2019) to abuse presidential power in a scheme that endangered U.S. national security, subverted legal & Constitutional separation of powers, and tried to extort an allied foreign leader while helping a hostile foreign nation (Russia) not be impeachable? Republicans want you to believe the whole scandal boils down to an inadvertent slip-of-the-tongue -- "I'd like you to do us a favor though" -- in a phone conversation. (We'll soon be hearing, "The readout isn't even an exact transcript! Maybe he didn't say "though"; maybe he never said "favor.")
Forrest M. kindly reminds us of this:
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Hillary gets the last laugh. She won the popular vote by a substantial margin, and she has had to put up with a lot less guff from the vast right-wing conspiracy than she would have had she also won the Electoral College. And, of course, Roger there is going to prison, barring a grant of clemency by the Great Orange Blob.
~~~~~~~~~~
Sorry for my relative silence on yesterday's breathtaking news. The Geek Squad had control of my computer for 16 hours, and they didn't fix a thing. But they did tell me things weren't working right. Thanks, guys. -- Mrs. Bea McCrabbie
Manu Raju & Jeremy Herb of CNN: "A US ambassador told ... Donald Trump that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky 'loves your ass' and that Ukraine was going to move forward with the investigation Trump had asked Zelensky for a day earlier, according to new testimony from a US official in Kiev who overheard the phone conversation. David Holmes told lawmakers in a closed-door impeachment inquiry Friday that US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland had told Trump the Ukrainian President would do 'anything you ask him to' and that Sondland had confirmed the Ukrainians were going to 'do the investigation,' one day after Trump has asked Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, according to a copy of Holmes' opening statement obtained by CNN. Holmes' statement confirmed the testimony from Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in Ukraine, who revealed the July 26 phone call with lawmakers at his public testimony Wednesday.... 'While Ambassador Sondland's phone was not on speakerphone, I could hear the President's voice through the earpiece of the phone. The President's voice was very loud and recognizable, and Ambassador Sondland held the phone away from his ear for a period of time, presumably because of the loud volume [of Trump's shouting]," Holmes testified.... Holmes also confirmed Taylor's testimony about the President's thoughts on Ukraine, saying he had asked Sondland 'if it was true that the President did not 'give a s[hit] about Ukraine.' Holmes said Sondland had responded that Trump cares only about 'big stuff.' When Holmes said that the Ukraine war was big, Sondland responded, '"Big stuff" that benefits the President, like the Biden investigation that Mr. Giuliani was pushing,' Holmes said." ~~~
~~~ The statement (here) consists of photos of the pages of Holmes' prepared remarks. ~~~
~~~ Karoun Demirjian, et al., of the Washington Post: David "Holmes’s testimony, first reported by CNN, directly implicates Trump in an alleged scheme at the heart of the impeachment probe.... Holmes’s testimony ... increases pressure on Republicans, who have dismissed other witnesses as relaying hearsay and speculation about Trump’s motives in withholding almost $400 million in aid from Ukraine. It also raises the stakes for next week’s testimony by Sondland, who will be pressed to answer questions about the call. Sondland didn’t mention the call during closed-door testimony before lawmakers last month, according to a transcript. Instead, he claimed little knowledge of any link between Biden and the investigations sought by Trump.... [Ambassador Marie] Yovanovitch described how actions by the president and [Rudy] Giuliani served to undermine American interests in Ukraine. A campaign led by Giuliani and supported by corrupt officials led to her abrupt ouster from her post in Kyiv, she said.... [Rep. Devin] Nunes [-- the committees' ranking member] and the GOP’s counsel, Steve Castor, asked Yovanovitch questions to prove her irrelevance [to the inquiry].... But Trump’s tweet could ultimately make Friday’s hearing a more central part of his own impeachment."
Sheryl Stolberg of the New York Times: “The former United States ambassador to Ukraine told the House impeachment inquiry on Friday that she felt threatened by President Trump and 'shocked, appalled, devastated' that he vilified her in a call with another foreign leader, as Mr. Trump attacked her in real time on Twitter, drawing a stern warning about witness intimidation from Democrats. The extraordinary back-and-forth unfolded on the second day of public impeachment hearings as Marie L. Yovanovitch, who was ousted as the envoy to Ukraine on Mr. Trump’s orders, detailed an unsettling campaign by the president’s allies to undermine her as she pushed to promote democracy and the rule of law. Her testimony ... drew a spontaneous standing ovation and a loud round of applause from spectators, and capped a revealing first week of public hearings as Democrats seek to make their case that Mr. Trump abused his power to enlist Ukraine’s help in discrediting his political rivals, chiefly former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. Speaker Nancy Pelosi this week called it 'bribery,' echoing the language in the Constitution that describes impeachable offenses.”
Michael Shear, et al., of the New York Times: “President Trump on Friday denigrated Marie L. Yovanovitch, the former United States ambassador to Ukraine, even as she testified in the impeachment inquiry about how she felt threatened by Mr. Trump, leading Democrats to accuse him of trying to intimidate a witness in real time. 'Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go?' Mr. Trump wrote, assailing her on Twitter to his 66 million followers and adding that 'It is a U.S. President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors.' The president’s insults came as Ms. Yovanovitch told the House Intelligence Committee in powerful and personal terms of the devastation and fear she felt earlier this year, as she was targeted first by Mr. Trump’s allies and later by the president himself during a phone call with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. Democrats said Mr. Trump’s onslaught amounted to an attempt to threaten Ms. Yovanovitch, who is still a State Department employee, and other potential witnesses against cooperating with the inquiry, a tactic that they said could itself be impeachable.” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Maggie Miller of the Hill: “Former U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch responded in live time to tweets from President Trump denigrating her as she testified in a House impeachment hearing, stating that they were meant to intimidate her. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) offered Yavonovitch the chance to respond to Trump after he paused her dramatic testimony to read Trump's tweet. 'It’s very intimidating,' Yovanovitch said. 'I can’t speak to what the president is trying to do, but I think the effect is to be intimidating.'” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Mike Lillis & Scott Wong of the Hill: “House Democrats wasted no time Friday saying President Trump’s real-time Twitter attack on a top U.S. diplomat — as she was testifying on Trump’s dealings with Ukraine — was more evidence of presidential misconduct as they charge ahead with their impeachment probe. 'The president in real time is engaging in witness intimidation and witness tampering,' an exasperated Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, told reporters during a break in the Yovanovitch hearing.” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ According to MSNBC, Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) put out a statement saying Trump's attack on Yovanovitch was "wrong."
~~~ Rachel Frazin of the Hill: "Fox News host Bret Baier said Friday that President Trump's tweet criticizing former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch was 'adding an article of impeachment real-time.' 'That was a turning point in this hearing so far,' Baier said on Twitter of Trump's tweet." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Joe Concha of the Hill: “'Fox News Sunday' anchor Chris Wallace said Friday that if viewers weren't moved by the impeachment testimony of former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, they 'don't have a pulse,' during commentary on 'America's Newsroom.' The comments from Wallace came as Yovanovitch testified Friday that she felt threatened when she saw President Trump had brought up her service in Ukraine on a July call with the country's President Volodymyr Zelensky. 'I was shocked and devastated,' she told the House Intelligence Committee. 'It was a terrible moment.'” (Also linked yesterday.)
Tamara Keith of NPR: "President Trump on Friday released the rough transcript of a brief, 16-minute congratulatory conversation he had on April 21 with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, timed to coincide with the beginning of the second day of open hearings in the House impeachment inquiry. 'President Trump underscored the unwavering support of the United States for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity – within its internationally recognized borders – and expressed his commitment to work together with President-elect Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian people to implement reforms that strengthen democracy, increase prosperity, and root out corruption,' the press statement said. But in the rough transcript, Trump mentions neither U.S. support for Ukraine in its fight over territory with Russia, nor Ukraine's effort to address corruption.... Trump invited Zelenskiy to the White House, an invitation Trump still hasn't followed through on.... Actually setting a date for that White House meeting would become a central thread in [the impeachment inquiry]...." ~~~
~~~ A ScribD copy of the transcript summary telcon is here.
~~~ White House Blames Vindman. Kaitlan Collins & Kylie Atwood of CNN: "The White House placed the responsibility on ... Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman ... on Friday after being asked about the discrepancy between the April readout of ... Donald Trump's phone call with the Ukrainian President and the transcript released Friday. The President also ignored directives from his National Security Council staff to bring up corruption during his first call with ... Volodymyr Zelensky, despite the White House's claim that fighting corruption was his primary reason for withholding the military aid.... In that transcript, there is no mention of corruption.... 'It is standard operating procedure for the National Security Council to provide readouts of the President's phone calls with foreign leaders. This one was prepared by the NSC's Ukraine expert,' [deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley said, referring to Vindman]. Despite what Gidley said, a White House source told CNN the mistake was due to an error by the White House, a remarkable disagreement over the responsibility for an inaccurate press release within the West Wing. According to that source, the national security adviser reviews and approves a draft press release ... based on prepared talking points for the call and done before it happens.... 'Given that the call occurred on Sunday, April 21, 2019, the White House may not have updated the press release to reflect the contents of the call before it was publicly released,' the source explained." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Finally, something nearly "perfect" about a Trump phone call. (1) He decides to release a supposed transcript of the call because it was that rare occasion in which he did not try to shake down or diss a foreign leader. Rather, he boasted about his own election & the "progress" he had made, and he shared his connection to Ukraine: when he owned Miss Universe, Ukraine always sent hot contestants. (2) But he plumb forgot the readout he'd sent out at the time of the call. (3) The readout turns out to have been largely fictitious, or what you might call "fake." (4) That's because he didn't read his briefing notes that gave him talking points on what-all to say in the call, and the readout was based, comme d'habitude, on a draft of the talking points. The draft readout reflects what he was supposed to say, not what he said, because he can't follow instructions. (5) So he proudly releases the telcon summary, having no earthly idea there's a gross discrepancy between the contemporaneous readout and the telcon memo. Nothing about strengthening democracy or reforms or corruption. (6) So he immediately looks for a scapegoat to finger for the discrepancy, and finds a handy one: a guy he loathes for providing evidence against him in the very case that is the reason Trump released this telcon summary. (7) But then it turns out the reason the readout & the telcon don't match up is because the White House forgot to correct the readout. As I said, nearly perfect: one Trumpian fuck-up after another. But, by chance, no shakedown! Witch hunt!
~~~ A core factor that sometimes gets lost in all the details of the Ukraine scandal is that while U.S. policy is to reduce corruption in Ukraine (and elsewhere), the "policy" of Trump & the Gang has been to increase corruption, at least insofar as it benefits them. Trump isn't just corrupt; he's a subversive, actively working to undermine essential U.S. policy based on democratic ideals. That Trump accidentally forgot to mention corruption in his April 2019 call to Zelensky is a function of his plot to bend Ukraine to his purposes, a plot that Vicky Ward of CNN (story linked below) shows had been hatched as early as December 2018.
The Misadventures of 
, Ctd.
Josh Kovensky of TPM: “Manhattan federal prosecutors are seeking to learn whether Rudy Giuliani could have profited from a natural gas business plan pitched by his two now-indicted buddies, the Wall Street Journal reports. Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman had pitched a business plan involving their company Global Energy Producers, in which Ukraine would import U.S. LNG via a pipeline the the firm was to build across Poland. The extent of Giuliani’s involvement in the firm is unclear. He denied any link to the company in an interview with the newspaper. But Kenneth McCallion, an attorney for former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, said that the pipeline proposal was 'part of the essential package' of what Parnas and Fruman were pitching.”
I don't know those gentlemen. Now, it's possible I have a picture with them, because I have a picture with everybody. -- Donald Trump, on Lev & Igor, October 10 ~~~
~~~ The Hanukkah Plot: Lev & Igor, Secret Agents. Vicky Ward of CNN: "At one point during the [annual White House Hannukah] party [last year, Lev] Parnas and [Igor] Fruman slipped out of a large reception room packed with hundreds of Trump donors to have a private meeting with the President and Giuliani, according to two acquaintances in whom Parnas confided right after the meeting.Word of the encounter in the White House last December, which has not been previously reported, is further indication that Trump knew Parnas and Fruman, despite Trump publicly stating that he did not on the day after the two men were arrested at Dulles International Airport last month. Eventually, according to what Parnas told his confidants, the topic turned to Ukraine that night. According to those two confidants, Parnas said that 'the big guy,' as he sometimes referred to the President in conversation, talked about tasking him and Fruman with what Parnas described as 'a secret mission' to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter."
Darren Samuelsohn & Josh Gerstein of Politico: "Roger Stone has been found guilty on all charges in a case accusing the longtime Donald Trump adviser of seeking to thwart a House investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. After a trial that spanned just over a week, a federal court jury in Washington, D.C., convicted Stone on five felony counts of lying to investigators, one of obstructing a congressional probe and one of witness tampering." (Also linked yesterday.) The New York Times story is here. Mrs. McC: Kinda perfect that while Roger was being convicted of witness tampering, Trump was doing it in real time. ~~~
~~~ All the President's Crooks. Philip Bump of the Washington Post: "[Roger Stone]’s convictions seem to bring to an end the high-profile criminal probes stemming from special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The convictions also contribute to a truly remarkable universe of admitted, proved or alleged criminal behavior involving people linked to Trump.... [Bump lists the convictions of Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, Michael Cohen & George Papadopoulos as well as numerous others not directly connected to Trump. But there's more!] The Stone verdicts were returned during a break in a public impeachment hearing. During that same break, the Wall Street Journal reported that [Rudy] Giuliani himself was under investigation by federal prosecutors regarding a natural gas business in Ukraine. Earlier in the day, Bloomberg reported that Giuliani might also be under investigation for potential campaign finance violations. Reported investigations into Giuliani offered in vague terms extend back for more than a month.... Two associates of ... Giuliani were indicted last month on campaign finance charges. Those men, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, were subpoenaed by House investigators in September...." The Guardian also lists Trump's convict pals. ~~~
~~~ The Conspirators Hang Tight. David Graham of the Atlantic: "Despite the extensive investigation by Mueller and the FBI, as well as inquiries by House and Senate committees, and now the record of the Stone trial, there’s a great deal that we simply don’t know about Trump and Russia, for two reasons. First, Mueller approached his purview narrowly, acting as a prosecutor rather than as a fact-finder, and his report is long on vague formulations and short on specifics.... Second, we still don’t know the whole story, because the key players have kept their peace. Stone ... joins a list of people around Trump ... who have pleaded to or been convicted of similar [obstruction] crimes.... Trump ... did not answer [Mueller's written] questions about obstruction or his campaign transition. Taken together, this represents a wide-ranging conspiracy of silence.... Trump did tweet in anger after the [Stone] verdict, offering a nonsensical list of people he claimed should be in prison: 'So they now convict Roger Stone of lying and want to jail him for many years to come. Well, what about Crooked Hillary, Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, Shifty Schiff, Ohr & Nellie, Steele & all of the others, including even Mueller himself? Didn’t they lie? A double standard like never seen before in the history of our Country?'... There is a double standard...: It’s the standard that sends his aides to prison for putting roadblocks before federal prosecutors, even as the obstructor in chief skates free."
~~~ Note to Roger: There is hope, Roger, et al. ~~~
~~~ Dave Philipps of the New York Times: “President Trump cleared three members of the armed services on Friday who have been accused or convicted of war crimes, overruling military leaders who had sought to punish them. All three have been championed by conservative lawmakers and commentators, who have portrayed them as war heroes unfairly prosecuted for actions taken in the heat and confusion of battle. In a statement released by the White House late Friday, Mr. Trump announced that he was ordering the full pardon of Clint Lorance, a former Army lieutenant, from the military prison at Fort Leavenworth, where he is serving a 19-year sentence for the murder of two civilians. He ordered the full pardon of Maj. Mathew L. Golsteyn, an Army Special Forces officer who was facing murder charges for killing an unarmed Afghan he believed was a Taliban bomb maker. And he reversed the demotion of Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL who was acquitted of murder charges but convicted of a lesser offense in a high-profile war crimes case over the summer.... The moves signaled that as commander in chief, Mr. Trump intends to use his power as the ultimate arbiter of military justice in ways unlike any other president in modern times.”
Trump Business News, Ctd. David Fahrenthold & Josh Dawsey of the Washington Post: “Secret Service agents had identified four U.S. sites as finalists for next year’s Group of Seven summit — but then they were told to add a new finalist: President Trump’s Doral resort, according to an internal Secret Service email released late Friday. 'Our original itinerary included Hawaii, Utah, California and North Carolina,' a Secret Service official wrote, describing a trip that a team of Secret Service personnel took in July to examine the finalists. 'By departure, they had already cut two (California and North Carolina) and added Miami on the back end.' 'Miami' meant President Trump’s resort near the Miami airport, which hadn’t been among the original 10 sites that the Secret Service team had vetted. Although vetting of possible sites had begun in late May, the official wrote on July 12 that 'yesterday was the first time we put eyes on this [Doral] property.' The official’s email was released to the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which made a public-records request and then sued when government agencies did not comply.... In a news conference, [Mick] Mulvaney described a long search process that began with 12 sites, then whittled the list down to four, including Doral.... Jordan Libowitz, a spokesman for ... [CREW], said it appeared Trump had intervened in the process to steer business to himself.”
Presidential Race 2020
Lisa Lerer of the New York Times: “Former President Barack Obama offered an unusual warning to the Democratic primary field on Friday evening, cautioning the candidates not to move too far to the left in their policy proposals, even as he sought to reassure a party establishment worried about the electoral strength of their historically large primary field.... 'Even as we push the envelope and we are bold in our vision we also have to be rooted in reality,' Mr. Obama said. 'The average American doesn’t think we have to completely tear down the system and remake it.' The comments marked an extraordinary entrance into the primary contest by the former president, who has been careful to avoid even the appearance of influencing the direction of the race. His remarks offered an implicit critique of Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, who have urged voters to embrace 'political revolution' and 'big, structural change,' as well as proposals once widely considered to be left to the liberal fringes of the party, including court packing and decriminalizing illegal border crossings.” An AP story is here. ~~~
~~~ Looks as if Warren Figured That out All by Herself. The Warren Two-Step. Ed Kilgore of New York: "As part of her effort to lay out her plans to enact Medicare for All in greater detail, Senator Elizabeth Warren has now released a procedural timeline that makes it clear she will initially push legislation to open up Medicare to parts of the population without any direct interference with private insurance. A second bill implementing Medicare for All fully would come later in her first term. This distinguishes her approach from that of Bernie Sanders, who will push for immediate adoption of Medicare for All, though it will be phased in over his first term. Warren seems to be recognizing the political implausibility of immediate adoption of the big structural change that both she and Sanders have been calling for." Mrs. McC: The lady can dance.
Beyond the Beltway
David Davies of Texas Public Radio: "The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas has granted death row inmate Rodney Reed a stay, meaning he will not be executed on Wednesday, Nov. 20 as previously scheduled.... The case has drawn national attention from celebrities and lawmakers from both parties, who have thrown their support behind Reed, who maintains his innocence."
Way Beyond
AND Prince Andrew of Britain says the reason he kept on staying at the New York mansion of Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein was convicted of pedophilia is that he, Andrew, is "too honourable." Mrs. McC: Thanks, Andy. We band of grubby commoners stand in awe.
Share Article
Reader Comments (13)
@Jeanne, writing at the end of yesterday's Commentariat, does a good job of articulating what many of us felt:
"Made me actively ill to hear those blowhards at the hearing tell the blameless ambassador how much they appreciated her service. They never rattled her. She must have known that they were all backstabbing trumpfondlers. She certainly won the day. And of course, cocky Roger is sure Presidunce Numbnut will pardon him toute de suite. And I guess he might, since ole Rog is about as adorable as Arpeo, about like a rattlesnake. The only people who like the Emperor with no clothes are disgusting fakes and senators, and of course his public, who collectively make me want to take a long shower. Listening to an intelligent, appealing person like the ambassador made me so homesick for the previous administration, imperfect as they may have been. Compared to the f***wits now, they sure rocked."
I don't know why anybody is surprised the Lt. Col.Vindman is being reassigned, probably to someplace unpleasant that will not advance his career. Those two officers he pardoned are really toast, too. They will never be placed in a position of trust again, which means no command, which means no promotions. Maybe posting to Diego Garcia. Do we still have radar stations in the Aleutians?
In a tweet, the Navy acknowledged they are restoring the SEAL to the pay grade of E-7. I think civilians do not understand how insulting to him that is. He will never be a Chief again. If he were in the Army he'd probably be assigned to a Shower and Laundry Battalion (really, there are such units) in Poland. I'm sure the Navy has similar assignments. Dirty jobs, but somebody has to do them.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/15/us/politics/barr-impeachment.html
Barr should keep his mouth shut. He's smarter than Guiliani but makes little more sense.
The Pretender duly elected by the will of the people, Bill? By the will of the electoral college maybe, but by the will of the people? Not so much.
Elected to shake things up in Washington? No doubt the Pretender has done that. He has presided over the most deliberately corrupt administration in the nation's history. Honesty and public service are both out the window.
That's where Barr's unitary executive theories come in real handy. Can't indict, can't even investigate a sitting president? Why the hell not? Even kings have occasionally lost their heads.
The whole idea of a unitary executive in a democracy is sheer lunacy. I can see why Barr didn't mention impeachment in his speech. Kinda hard to square that Constitutional process with his legal theories of impregnable executive power.
This guy is a well-fed Stephen Miller. Stooges both, in all the word's senses, but no less dangerous for that.
Yes, Jeanne does, indeed, speak for me but I did notice that those "blowhards" were also very careful in their questioning. Anita Hill loomed mightily in their minds and they were careful. Unlike, of course, their diatribes against Schiff and the whole process––like gnats constantly in your face. But the topping on this procedure was MR.BIG STUFF putting in his long tendril of a tweet disparaging a woman whose moral compass is something he never had, will never have and the lack of it will bring him down in the end. The smallness of this man was on full display and yet his critters in congress kept flying foul in the face of such evidence.
Mike Pompeo: Where was he when Marie needed him? He was AWOL––let's hope his sorry ass gets it good in the end.
Stephen Fry, that marvelous British entertainer and all round man who can expound on anything, once talked about the royal prodigal of the Queen receiving the Prime Minister once a week to keep her informed. Fry figured that if the U.S. could have an Uncle Sam (elected of course) meet with Trump once a week, strap him in a chair, and force feed him information perhaps we'd be in a better situation. Fry evidently is not privy to the fact that this would be a useless exercise since Fatty doesn't listen, doesn't read and like a steam roller runs down almost everything he can, and isn't it interesting that he can "run down" this list:
" Trump did tweet in anger after the [Stone] verdict, offering a nonsensical list of people he claimed should be in prison: 'So they now convict Roger Stone of lying and want to jail him for many years to come. Well, what about Crooked Hillary, Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, Shifty Schiff, Ohr & Nellie, Steele & all of the others, including even Mueller himself? Didn’t they lie? A double standard like never seen before in the history of our Country?'
Yet those in hot water he "Don't know those gentlemen" or "Don't believe I know him"–––and he has the gaul to even mention the word "lie."
Over 80 ( more are expected) members of Congress––a list is given–-want Stephen Miller to resign.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/stephen-miller-resign-70-congressmembers-say_n_5dcdffdde4b01f982eff2a24
Now that Stone has been convicted can we expect a re-release of the Mueller report with all redactions pertaining to Stone/Credico/Corsi removed? (Doubtful cuz it's all old news).
I'm still curious, too, about who are the three remaining redacted names listed in the cast of characters? What was there role? What's the status of their on-going matter that would be harmed by their disclosure?
I haven't been able to make any guesses based on the alphabetical placement in the list:
1. Graff, Rhona (?) Hawker, Jonathan
2. Katsyv, Peter (?) Kaveladze, Irakli
3. Mnuchin, Steven (?) Müller-Maguhn, Andrew
Will we ever find out?
@Ken W. Reporter Katie Benner notes that "Mr. Barr never uttered the word impeachment...." He is apparently unfamiliar with that provision of the Constitution. It does not, in any case, "overturn an election," especially since -- in modern times -- the president*'s hand-picked successor is waiting at the ready, in this case with new calico curtains folded neatly in the moving van.
Barr can claim, accurately, that the president* has the right to recall an ambassador, but he does not have, as Trump claims, an "absolute" right. For instance, a president can't recall an ambassador because she's standing in the way of his corrupt & criminal scheme.
A president* has the right, under current law, to hold back Congressional funding for another country if he has reason to believe the other country will misuse the funds. But he has no right to hold back the funds in order to bribe officials of the other country to "do us a favor" in furtherance of the president*'s personal priorities, especially when the "favor" itself is against U.S. law.
If you give Trump the most generous benefit of the doubt, you might say, "Well, he genuinely thought Yovanovitch -- a/k/a 'the woman' -- was working against U.S. interests." So what would a real president do if he had such a suspicion, based on the advice of his very own trusted attorney, no less? He would convey those concerns to other federal officials -- maybe the Secretary of State, his NSC director, perhaps the CIA director -- and ask them to investigate & follow up. Depending upon the results of their report, he might indeed make the final call on the ambassador's fate. But a real president wouldn't just tell some subordinate to get rid of "the woman."
As for Trump's supposed revulsion of Ukraine corruption, that's so ludicrous, it's not worth addressing.
@unwashed: Now that the Mueller trials are over, I have no doubt that news organizations will ask that the redactions related to Stone's case be lifted. Alas, the final decision on what gets revealed will be up to Bill Barr. Now, if only we could find out who "Individual 1" is in the Michael Cohen case.
This week in impeachment hearings in 12 words or less:
Democrats: He's guilty of bribery & extortion.
Republicans: Ukraine didn't follow thru, so not guilty.
So attempted bribery & extortion isn't a crime because there was no
follow thru. Just like attempted murder isn't a crime?
Does anyone remember that time in 2016 when Roger Stone held up
a t-shirt reading "Hillary for prison"? Hillary can do her own t-shirt
now.
https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2019/11/21/patrick-deneen-blaming-liberalism/
Fine article. More than fine. Should become a liberal's required reading.
My summary: God ain't no democrat.
Selective Definitions for Confederate Anarchists
The word of the moment is subpoena. This medieval Latin construction meaning “under penalty”, that is, subject to penalty if one disregards or ignores the summons, has been much in the news of late. Trump and his unlawful, criminal minions believe that subpoenas are for others to obey, not for them. So it’s high-larious to hear shouting, ignorant douchebags like Gym Jordan and Devin Nunes demand that the whistleblower be subpoenaed to stand before them to be assaulted but have no problem if any on their side ignores a congressional subpoena. Another example of the magic of IOKIYAR.
Opus Dei delusion reared its ugly head last night in a speech given by AG Barr at the Federalist Society. Barr is very very dangerous and determined. I'm thinking his impeachment may be almost equal to that of Trump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NdbANrjFWE&feature=youtu.be
@JoshMBlackman on twitter has a long series of tweets with the low points of Barr's terrifying speech.
@Ken Winkes: The article can be required reading only for subscribers to the NYRB. It's firewalled. I should like to have read it, though.