Skip to content

Month: March 2018

Ellison takes point by @BloggersRUs

Ellison takes point
by Tom Sullivan

Stand for something. Something more than building the caucus. Something beyond feeding a “corrupt cabal of consultants and nonprofits.” Something beyond catering to bankers.

Stand for striking, underpaid teachers like those in West Virginia, for instance, whose health insurance costs have spiked as their salaries have slumped and insurance industry profits soar.

So long as Republicans control Washington, it may not amount to much, but with the resignation of Michigan’s Rep. John Conyers, Rep. Keith Ellison has taken point on House Democrats’ effort to pass a single-payer health plan. A similar bill from independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is known as Medicare for All in the Senate.

The Intercept reports:

On Wednesday, Rep. Keith Ellison, deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee, stepped up and asked his colleagues for unanimous consent to replace Conyers as the lead sponsor of the legislation. They granted him permission.

Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, told The Intercept he had spoken ahead of time to Conyers, who gave him his blessing. The Conyers bill, though, is largely a shell, and Ellison said he wants to flesh it out for when it’s re-introduced next time. “We’re constantly going to try to improve the bill, to find way to make it more effective, make it work better,” he said.

“We’re going to listen to the people. We want to drive a lot of discussion. We want to get the 120 who are on the bill to really listen and have folks give them input,” Ellison said. “We want to talk to experts, but we also want to talk to people. So we’re going to improve it based on that. We’re not going to try to impose ideology, we’re going to be pragmatic.”

Alone among industrialized countries, America’s patchwork system of private insurance is costly, as Ellison stated in a floor speech yesterday:

Lauren Gambino writes in the Guardian:

Public polling shows a growing share of Americans support a universal, or single-payer, system of healthcare. Once a liberal pipe-dream, many prominent Democrats have since embraced the approach and liberal voters have rallied around the cause.

Ellison thinks it is only a matter of time before a single-payer healthcare system is adopted by the Democratic party. He pointed to the number of candidates running in 2018 on a platform embracing universal healthcare.

In Texas on Tuesday night, Beto O’Rourke, a supporter of a single-payer system, won the Democratic primary there to challenge Ted Cruz for his Senate seat in November. And two other Democratic candidates and supporters of universal healthcare advanced in a crowded primary to a May runoff election.

With Republicans in control of Washington, the Democrats’ House and Senate bills are aspirational exercises. But they make a statement that Democrats stand more for people than finance, that what we can do together is more meaningful than private gain. Paul Ryan and Republicans offer the You’re On Your Ownership Society instead. Thin gruel.

When they’re not so busy opposing, sometimes Democrats representing voters in Washington actually propose something that meets their needs. Ellison is not likely to let colleagues forget that. In an election year or any year standing for something even in the face of failure demonstrates character, something sorely lacking inside the Beltway.

The text of the House bill is here.

* * * * * * * *

Request a copy of For The Win, my county-level election mechanics primer at tom.bluecentury at gmail.

Can someone explain why an incoming president needed a back channel to Moscow?

Can someone explain why an incoming president needed a back channel to Moscow?

by digby

We knew that Jared was working to get one. Now we know that the Seychelles meeting was at least in part to get one too. Why would an incoming president even need such a thing? He can get on the horn to Putin any time he wants.

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has gathered evidence that a secret meeting in the Seychelles just before the inauguration of Donald Trump was an effort to establish a back-channel between the incoming administration and the Kremlin — apparently contradicting statements made to lawmakers by one of its participants, according to people familiar with the matter.

In January, 2016, Erik Prince, the founder of the private military company Blackwater, met with a Russian official close to President Vladi­mir Putin, and later described the meeting to congressional investigators as a chance encounter that was not a planned discussion of U.S.-Russia relations.

A witness cooperating with Mueller has told investigators the meeting was set up in advance so that a representative of the Trump transition could meet with an emissary from Moscow to discuss future relations between the two countries, according to the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

George Nader, a Lebanese-American business who helped organize and attended the Seychelles meeting, has testified on the matter before a grand jury gathering evidence about discussions between the Trump transition team and emissaries of the Kremlin, as part of Mueller’s investigation into Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 election.

And oh my, Erik Prince is a liar? Say it ain’t so …

Vlad sends a love letter

Vlad sends a love letter

by digby



Such a beautiful mutual admiration society:

Russian President Vladimir Putin lavished praise on President Donald Trump, but added that he was sorely disappointed with the U.S. political system, saying that it has been “eating itself up.”

Speaking in a series of interviews with Russian state television which were included in a documentary released Wednesday, Putin described Trump as a great communicator.

“I have no disappointment at all,” Putin said when asked about the U.S. president. “Moreover, on a personal level he made a very good impression on me.”

The two leaders met on the sidelines of international summits last year. Putin praised Trump as a “balanced” man, who easily gets into the gist of various issues and listens to his interlocutor.

“It’s possible to negotiate with him, to search for compromises,” Putin added.

He also noted that he spent some time talking to Melania Trump when he sat next to her during an official dinner at the Group of 20 summit in Hamburg, Germany in July. The Russian leader said he told her and the wife of the Italian premier “about Siberia and Kamchatka, about fishing … about bears on Kamchatka and tigers in the Far East.”

“I made some exaggerations,” the action-loving Russian leader said with a grin. “When you talk about fishing, you can’t help exaggerating.”

Asked jokingly by the interviewer if he was trying to recruit the women, the KGB veteran responded by saying: “No, I stopped dealing with that a long time ago.”

He added with a smile: “But I liked doing that, it was my job for many years.”

Venting his frustration with the U.S. political system, Putin said “it has demonstrated its inefficiency and has been eating itself up.”

“It’s quite difficult to interact with such a system, because it’s unpredictable,” Putin said.

Russia-U.S. ties long have been strained by the Ukrainian crisis, the war in Syria and other issues, and Moscow’s hopes for better ties with the U.S. under Trump haven’t materialized. Tensions have escalated further amid the ongoing congressional and FBI investigations into allegations of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

Speaking about the Russia-West rift, Putin said it has been rooted in Western efforts to contain and weaken Russia.

“We are a great power, and no one likes competition,” he said.

He said he was particularly dismayed by what he described as the U.S. role in the ouster of Ukraine’s Russia-friendly president in February 2014 amid massive protests.

Putin charged that the U.S. had asked Russia to help persuade then-President Viktor Yanukovych not to use force against protesters and then “rudely and blatantly” cheated Russia, sponsoring what he called a “coup.”

Russia responded by annexing Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula.

“Few expected us to act so quickly and so resolutely, not to say daringly,” Putin said.

He described the Western sanctions over Crimea and the insurgency in eastern Ukraine as part of “illegitimate and unfair” efforts to contain Russia, adding that “we will win in the long run.”

It’s all there, isn’t it?

I think Vlad understands his BFF very well. Recall:

June 3, 2016

At a rally in California, Trump mocked those who wanted him to “disavow” Putin’s praise of him.

“Then Putin said, ’Donald Trump is a genius, he’s going to be the next great leader of the United States.’ No, no, think of it. They wanted me to disavow what he said. How dare you call me a genius. How dare you call me a genius, Vladimir. Wouldn’t it be nice if we actually got along with Russia? Wouldn’t that be good?”

All it takes is a little flattery and he’s there.

And maybe some cash.

.

Dear Leader giveth and Dear Leader taketh away

Dear Leader giveth and Dear Leader taketh away

by digby

It appears that Trump doesn’t care about his voters in Nebraska any more than he cares about the loathesome Californians:

Under the heading timing is everything, Vice President Mike Pence’s Tuesday fundraiser for Gov. Pete Ricketts appears to be bad timing at best.

Planned weeks in advance, Pence’s downtown Omaha stop comes just a matter of days after President Trump announced a potential “trade war” by placing a 25 percent tariff (which many consider nothing more than a tax) on foreign steel and a 10 percent tariff on foreign aluminum.

A decision leaving Nebraska’s farmers holding the bag, according to the 60 thousand family-strong Nebraska Farm Bureau. “Today, more than 30 percent of U.S. gross farm income is derived from our ability to export agricultural commodities,” says NFB President Steve Nelson. “Retaliatory actions will most certainly target U.S. agricultural commodities, many of which are produced here in Nebraska.”

Yes, the NFB’s 93 county-wide organization, which endorsed Ricketts in 2014, is furious. You see it was just four years ago (see video below) on election night when Ricketts promised the NFB he couldn’t wait to “grow agriculture…we’ll get started tomorrow.”

Fast forward four years, another election year, and Mr. Trump—Rickett’s has called Trump “forward thinking“— is being scolded loud and clear by Nelson who fired off a one-page letter addressed specifically to Mr. Trump:

“It has been very well documented that your historic path to the White House came directly through rural America. While your thoughts on trade where well known by farmers and ranchers, it would be very dangerous to assume it was the focus of their support. Mr. President, please do not turn your back on the farm and ranch families who depend on international markets and who rely on you to make wise decisions that don’t put their economic future in jeopardy.”

News Channel Nebraska has asked the Governor’s office the following questions:

Does Governor Ricketts agree with President Trump’s recent comments regarding a trade war?
Does the governor intend to express his concerns about a trade war with Vice President Pence when they visit on Tuesday?
Late Monday afternoon a spokesman for Ricketts issued the following statement to NCN:

Since his very first meeting with President Trump, Governor Ricketts has advocated for Nebraska on trade issues with this administration. The Governor has already shared with the Trump Administration about the potential impact the steel tariffs may have on Nebraska businesses and the possible retaliation on Nebraska agricultural products by our trading partners. The Governor understands that it is a part of a broader negotiation strategy, but wants to ensure that the administration grows agriculture through their trade policy.

The Ricketts campaign has released details of the Pence-Ricketts get-together which finds speeches from both but no indication that the Vice-President will be taking questions from the news media—questions that would undoubtedly pit the NFB against the Trump Administration.

He got a lot of rural votes but I’m guessing that Trump doesn’t find farmers to be quite macho enough to merit his concerns. He’s an east coast guy who grew up in a time when the big industrial cities were belching smoke from the smokestacks. Steel workers, factory workers, miners and rich people are Real Americans to him.

Did people really think that Donald Trump cared about anyone with whom he doesn’t personally identify?

Lol. That was a big mistake.

Here’s the letter:

.

Headline of the day

Headline of the day

by digby

I have to laugh. When you have an f-ing moron at the top the drain has been wide open from the start.

President Donald Trump once presided over a reality show in which a key cast member exited each week. The same thing seems to be happening in his White House.

Trump’s West Wing has descended into a period of unparalleled tumult amid a wave of staff departures, yet the president insists it’s a place of “no Chaos, only great Energy!” The latest to announce his exit is Gary Cohn, Trump’s chief economic adviser, who had clashed with the boss over trade policy.

Cohn’s departure has sparked internal fears of an even larger exodus, raising concerns in Washington of a coming “brain drain” around the president that will only make it more difficult for Trump to advance his already languishing policy agenda.

Multiple White House officials said the president has been pushing anxious aides to stay on the job.

“Everyone wants to work in the White House,” Trump said during a news conference Tuesday. “They all want a piece of the Oval Office.”

The reality is far different.

Vacancies abound in the West Wing and the broader Trump administration, with some jobs never filled and others subject to repeat openings. The position of White House communications director is soon to be empty again after the departure of its fourth occupant, Hope Hicks.

Top economic adviser Gary Cohn is leaving the White House after breaking with President Donald Trump on trade policy, the latest in a string of high-level departures from the West Wing. (March 6)

“They are left with vacancies atop of vacancies,” said Kathryn Dunn-Tenpas of the Brookings Institution who tracks senior-level staff turnover. Her analysis shows the Trump departure rate has reached 40 percent in just over a year.

“That kind of turnover creates a lot of disruption,” she said, noting the loss of institutional knowledge and relationships with agencies and Congress. “You can’t really leave those behind to your successor.”

Turnover after a year in office is nothing new, but this administration has churned through staff at a dizzying pace, and allies are worried the situation could descend into a free-fall.

One White House official said there is concern about a potential “death spiral” in the West Wing, with each departure heightening the sense of frenzy and expediting the next.

Multiple aides who are considering departing, all speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters, said they didn’t have a clue about whom the administration could find to fill their roles. They said their desire to be team players has kept them on the job longer than planned. Some said they were nearing a breaking point.

“You have situations where people are stretched to take on more than one job,” said Martha Joynt Kumar, director of the White House Transition Project.

She cited the example of Johnny DeStefano, who oversees the White House offices of personnel, public liaison, political affairs and intergovernmental affairs. “Those are four positions that in most administrations are each headed by an assistant to the president or a deputy assistant,” Kumar said.

The overlap between those qualified to work in the White House and those willing to take a job there has been shrinking too, according to White House officials and outside Trump allies concerned about the slow pace of hires.

Trump’s mercurial decision-making practices, fears of being drawn into special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and a stalled legislative agenda are keeping top-flight talent on the outside.

“Most of all, President Trump hasn’t demonstrated a scrap of loyalty to current and former staff, and everyone knows it,” said Michael Steel, a former aide to onetime Gov. Jeb Bush, R-Fla., and ex-House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Trump acknowledged that he is a tough boss, saying he enjoys watching his closest aides fight over policy.

“I like conflict,” he said Tuesday.

Since his days on the campaign, Trump has frequently and loudly complained about the quality of his staff, eager to fault his aides for any mishaps rather than shouldering responsibility. His attacks on his staff have sharpened in recent weeks, and he has suggested to confidants that he has few people at his side he can count on, according to two people familiar with his thinking who were not authorized to discuss private conversations publicly.

read on …

This “I like conflict” line is an obvious talking point crafted by someone in the PR department. It makes him sound like he’s an emperor watching a gladiator fight and giving thumbs up and thumbs down after the battle is over.

This is nonsense. It’s what happens when an ignorant, egomaniac is over his head and has no idea what to do. Right now he’s falling back on the idiotic ideas he first took on back in the 1980s because it’s all he knows. And unfortunately he’s learning that he can do a whole lot of things even if both parties are against him. The presidency is a very powerful position.

What he doesn’t understand is that there are reverberations to his decisions that he cannot control. I’m not sure that would stop him. He’ll just blame others as he always does.

This is a critical moment. But then they all are.

.

At least he’s an isolationist peacenik

At least he’s an isolationist peacenik

by digby
In case you were wondering:

When President Trump signed the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act, he agreed to report to Congress by March 12 any changes to President Obama’s rules governing the U.S. use of military force and related operations. These changes began in secret last fall with the dismantling of Obama-era limits on drone strikes and commando raids outside conventional battlefields.
Why it matters: Even if the administration meets the deadline, which appears unlikely, it may not make its report public. Human rights groups consider the failure to release and explain changes to a previously public policy a dangerous step backward.
Show less

Some reported changes to existing policy: 

  • Allow lethal targeting of individuals outside of armed conflict zones who do not pose an imminent threat, in violation of international law 
  • Relax the “near certainty” standard that the target is present at the time of the strike, increasing risk to civilians
  • Give the CIA and U.S. military authority to carry out drone strikes without prior approval from the White House

Transparency around the use of lethal force is essential to assessing the lawfulness of military operations and providing redress for victims. This information is especially critical in light of the dramatic increase in strikes in Yemen and Somalia in 2017 and the resulting civilian casualties.

If Trump lets the deadline pass or provides only a classified response, it will fall to Congressional leaders to hold the administration accountable to the American people. They could call for the release of a declassified statement of the policy or pass legislation requiring the administration to reveal its reasoning and authority for targeting and killing. As Congress seeks to reassert its warmaking authority, this important policy deadline is a good place to start.

A lot of us were unhappy with Obama’s drone policy. Trump’s is, of course, much worse. And there is no institutional pressure to stop him.

Devin Nunes is a national security threat

Devin Nunes is a national security threat

by digby
I wrote about the latest antics for Salon this morning:

There are so many political stories breaking right now that it’s honestly impossible to keep up. Kellyanne Conway has been charged with violating the Hatch Act for blatantly using her White House position to boost the campaign of accused child molester Roy Moore. A bunch of Democratic senators decided to party like it’s 2005, voting with the GOP to deregulate some banks for no good reason. Meanwhile, Donald Trump took questions at a joint appearance with the Swedish prime minister and pretty much started a trade war with the EU, fatuously declaring that trade wars are good for countries with a trade deficit, so there’s no way the U.S. can lose.

By the end of the day Monday, we had The New York Times reporting that Robert Mueller’s team has a new cooperating witness who can shed light on that January 2017 meeting in the Seychelles between Trump’s buddy Erik Prince, the crown prince of the United Arab Emirates and a Russian investor close to Vladimir Putin. Apparently there is reason to believe that foreign money was being funneled into the Trump campaign, which would be not just unethical but illegal.

Oh, and adult film actress Stormy Daniels has filed a lawsuit against Trump, claiming that he never personally signed their non-disclosure agreement preventing her from talking about their affair. Whether Daniels will prevail is unknowable, but it’s fair to assume that the atmosphere in the White House personal residence isn’t great at the moment.

Now stop for just a moment and ask yourself what would be happening right now if the president were someone other than Donald Trump and the Congress was in the hands of officials other than his willing accomplices. Considering the past history of presidential scandals, I think we can be pretty sure that Republicans in the House would not be talking about wrapping up their investigation and calling it a day. (They held nine separate investigations into the Benghazi attack, five of them — Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, Judiciary, and Oversight and Government Reform — in the House of Representatives alone.) But that’s exactly what they are planning:

Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee appear close to closing the committee’s yearlong investigation into Russian interference . . . 

“We’re being shut off,” Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) said during a Monday appearance on “CNN Newsroom.” 

“If I had to predict, in the next month they will shut down the House and Senate investigations and I would imagine they would cheer on the White House attempt to shut down Mueller,” he added.

That investigation is the only one happening in the House right now. There is no probe into the massive corruption and conflicts of interest in every agency of the executive branch, including the Oval Office. Congress isn’t bothering to look into the issue of White House security clearances, nepotism, Trump’s Syria policy or the military operation in Niger that went disastrously wrong. The executive branch is running wild, doing whatever the incompetent, unqualified and/or extremist agency head feels like doing, and Congress has decided it no longer needs to oversee the White House. Well, OK — there is one exception. Congressional Republicans are intent upon investigating the FBI and the Department of Justice over the silly Carter Page FISA business and are demanding a parallel special prosecutor to oversee it.


Honestly, at this point, shutting down the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation would probably be a blessing. It has more or less become an adjunct of the Trump administration’s obstruction of justice strategy, going all the way back to March of last year with Rep. Devin Nunes’ infamous “midnight run” gambit, when he pretended to have found information about the White House which it had actually surreptitiously provided to him. The New York Times dryly reported at the the time that it was “likely to fuel criticism that the intelligence chairman has been too eager to do the bidding of the Trump administration.”

Yes, well, that criticism definitely didn’t stop him. We all know about Nunes’ inane “memo” that turned out to be meaningless, and he’s getting increasingly Trumpish by the day. Salon’s Sophia Tesfaye reported yesterday on his latest Fox News appearances attacking Hollywood and the media because Stephen Colbert played a joke on him. He seems to be coming a bit unhinged.

Perhaps that’s because of a couple of serious reports in recent days that show Nunes and his lieutenants may be going beyond aggressive partisanship and have ventured into real obstruction of justice. Last week, the Senate Intelligence Committee accused members of Nunes’ team of leaking text messages from Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., showing that he had tried to set up a meeting with Christopher Steele. (Nunes had sent his top staffer to London to try to meet with Steele last summer, so the idea that this was a scandal is ridiculous.) That leak carries more than a whiff of suspicion, considering that a couple of weeks earlier, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange had mistakenly contacted a fake Sean Hannity account on Twitter to discuss “other channels” for Assange to send information about Warner. It’s the sort of connection that a House Intelligence Committee chairman with any concern for integrity or honesty would normally go out of his way to avoid.

On Monday, the Daily Beast reported that Nunes’ committee has been feeding information to Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, he of the above-mentioned Stormy Daniels “hush” agreement and a starring role in the Steele dossier. Cohen’s lawyer reportedly contacted the attorney for a witness who had earlier appeared before the House Intelligence Committee, telling him that a committee source had said the witness might have knowledge of the dossier that could help Cohen. The attorney for this unnamed witness declined to share information and complained to the committee about the leak. The committee spokesperson denied it had happened, but said the testimony wasn’t confidential anyway. You have to ask yourself why a member of the House Intelligence Committee, supposedly tasked with protecting and overseeing national secrets, would want to tip off Michael Cohen about information that might help him. It’s all very shady.

There has never been a case of congressional corruption on quite this level before. Speaker Paul Ryan is unwilling to rock the boat, and there’s no appetite among the rest of the House GOP caucus to do anything about it. The only possible answer is to toss Nunes and the rest of Trump’s toadies out of the majority in November.

But I’m not sure the American people should ever entrust this committee with investigative powers again. Even with Democrats in the majority, the Republican members would still have access to the government’s most sensitive intelligence, and they’ve made clear that their loyalty is to Donald Trump, not the country. If Nancy Pelosi becomes speaker of the House next January, she may need to disband this committee completely. Devin Nunes and his gang are a serious national security risk.

.

Is it true what they say about Texas? by @BloggersRUs

Is it true what they say about Texas?
by Tom Sullivan


whiteafrican (CC-BY)

Texas Democrats are hoping for a blue wave this fall. But, says Rep. Matt Krause, R-Fort Worth, “Greg Abbott and his $43 million campaign fund is a great seawall for any blue wave.” They will need it with Texas Democrats fielding candidates in all of the state’s congressional districts for the first time in 25 years. It’s not as if Repubicans have anything new to offer.

Nancy Pelosi is not on the ballot anywhere in Texas this fall, but Texas voters can expect to hear plenty about her. At the close of the Texas primaries last night, Republicans were already invoking her name.

After winning renomination last night, Republican Congressman Pete Sessions of Dallas declared his reelection race a choice between a “Nancy Pelosi liberal” and values “embodied by North Texans.” In a post Women’s March world, that tired line might not be the wisest pitch, but count on hearing it from Republicans even after Pelosi is gone, just as the sitting president cannot let go of slamming his 2016 rival.

Sessions’ is one of ten congressional seats House Democrats have targeted in Texas, reports the Dallas Morning News. Three dozen races were on yesterday’s ballots.

Incumbent Republicans Sen. Ted Cruz and Governor Greg Abbott easily won renomination to the fall ballot. Cruz will face Democrat Beto O’Rourke, a three-term congressman from El Paso. “Beto wants those open borders, and wants to take our guns,” twangs a jingle from Cruz released immediately after results were final. Abbott will face either former Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez or Andrew White. The two face a runoff after finishing 43-27 in the Democratic primary for governor.

But the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will have to work harder if it expects to get its preferred candidate in TX-7. Previously attacked by the House Democrats’ campaign arm, activist and journalist Laura Moser finished second among seven candidates in the Houston-area primary and advances to a May 22 runoff against attorney Lizzie Pannill Fletcher.

Houston may send its first-ever Latina to Congress. Sylvia Garcia handily defeated Beaumont businessman Tahir Javed for the Democratic nomination in TX-29:

“This was for Latinos who for too long have sat on the political sidelines while the president sits in the White House blaming all of our problems on immigrants,” she said.

The heavily Democratic district was drawn in 1992 to help elect a Latino to Congress but has been filled ever since by U.S. Rep. Gene Green, a Democrat who announced he is not seeking re-election.

Democratic turnout was the highest in 16 years, reports the L.A. Times:

More than 830,000 Democrats had voted with ballots still being counted late Tuesday, the best showing in a midterm primary for Texas Democrats since than 1 million voters turned out in 2002, the first election after the Sept. 11 attacks. Republicans were close to their turnout in previous midterm primaries, with more than 1.3 million votes and counting.

While 2002 was a high water mark for Democratic turnout in Texas it also showed the limits of the exuberance for turning the state blue. In November that year, the Democrats running for statewide office were all beaten, just as they have been since 1994.

Whether or not Democratic turnout portends a blue wave this time remains unclear. Trump won Texas by 9 points, “the smallest margin of victory by a Republican presidential candidate in Texas in 20 years” reports the Times.

But reports indicate that seats open through retirements are likely to remain in the same party’s hands. Democrats may make more gains in the legislature than in Congress. It’s a start.

* * * * * * * *

Request a copy of For The Win, my county-level election mechanics primer at tom.bluecentury at gmail.

About that meeting in the Seychelles

About that meeting in the Seychelles

by digby

If you want to know why Trump might be losing it, I’d have to guess it’s this:

An adviser to the United Arab Emirates with ties to current and former aides to President Trump is cooperating with the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and gave testimony last week to a grand jury, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Mueller appears to be examining the influence of foreign money on Mr. Trump’s political activities and has asked witnesses about the possibility that the adviser, George Nader, funneled money from the Emirates to the president’s political efforts. It is illegal for foreign entities to contribute to campaigns or for Americans to knowingly accept foreign money for political races.

Mr. Nader, a Lebanese-American businessman who advises Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al-Nahyan, the effective ruler of the Emirates, also attended a January 2017 meeting in the Seychelles that Mr. Mueller’s investigators have examined. The meeting, convened by the crown prince, brought together a Russian investor close to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia with Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater and an informal adviser to Mr. Trump’s team during the presidential transition, according to three people familiar with the meeting.

Mr. Nader’s cooperation in the special counsel’s investigation could prompt new legal risks for the Trump administration, and Mr. Nader’s presence at the Seychelles meeting appears to connect him to the primary focus of Mr. Mueller’s investigation: examining Russian interference during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Mr. Nader represented the crown prince in the three-way conversation in the Seychelles, at a hotel overlooking in the Indian Ocean, in the days before Mr. Trump took office. At the meeting, Emirati officials believed Mr. Prince was speaking for the Trump transition team, and a Russian fund manager, Kirill Dmitriev, represented Mr. Putin, according to several people familiar with the meeting. Mr. Nader, who grew close later to several advisers in the Trump White House, had once worked as a consultant to Blackwater, a private security firm. Mr. Nader introduced his former employer to the Russian.

The significance of the meeting in the Seychelles has been a puzzle to American officials ever since intelligence agencies first picked up on it in the final days of the Obama administration, and the purpose of the discussion is in dispute. During congressional testimony in November, Mr. Prince denied representing the Trump transition team during the meeting and dismissed his encounter with Mr. Dmitriev as nothing more than a friendly conversation over a drink.

A lawyer for Mr. Nader did not respond to requests for comment. A spokesman for Mr. Dmitriev has repeatedly declined to comment about the Seychelles meeting, as has Yousef al-Otaiba, the Emirati ambassador in Washington.

Mr. Dmitriev, a former Goldman Sachs banker with an M.B.A. from Harvard, was tapped by Mr. Putin in 2011 to manage an unusual state-run investment fund. Where other such funds seek to earn returns on sovereign wealth, Mr. Dmitriev’s Russian Direct Investment Fund seeks outside investments, often from foreign governments, for unglamorous infrastructure projects inside of Russia.

The Obama administration imposed sanctions on the fund as part of a raft of economic penalties after the Russian government sent military forces into Ukraine in 2014.

The United Arab Emirates, which Washington considers one of its closest Arab allies, has invested heavily in Mr. Dmitriev’s fund as part of an effort to build close relations to Russia as well. After Crown Prince Mohammed met with Mr. Putin in 2013 in Moscow on a state visit, two investment arms of the government in Abu Dhabi committed to invest $6 billion in the Russian Direct Investment Fund, eventually paying to build projects like roads, an airport and cancer treatment centers in Russia.

Mr. Dmitriev became a frequent visitor to Abu Dhabi, and Emirati officials came to see him as a key conduit to the Russian government. In a 2015 email, the Emirati ambassador to Moscow at the time described Mr. Dmitriev as a “messenger” to get information directly to Mr. Putin. The email was among a large number hacked from the account of the ambassador to Washington and published online. The now former ambassador to Moscow, Omar Saif Ghobash, did not respond to an email about the leak.

Mr. Nader was first served with search warrants and a grand jury subpoena on Jan. 17, shortly after landing at Washington Dulles International Airport, according to two people familiar with the episode. He had intended to travel on to Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump’s Florida estate, to celebrate the president’s first year in office, but the F.B.I. had other plans, questioning him for more than two hours and seizing his electronics.

Since then, Mr. Nader has been questioned numerous times about meetings in New York during the transition, the Seychelles meeting and meetings in the White House with two of Mr. Trump’s senior advisers, Jared Kushner and Stephen K. Bannon, who has since left the administration.

The meeting in the Seychelles also took place against the backdrop of a larger pattern of secretive contacts between the Trump team and both the Russians and the Emiratis. In the weeks after the 2016 presidential election, Crown Prince Mohammed aroused the suspicions of American national security officials when they learned that he had breached protocol by visiting Trump Tower in Manhattan without notifying the Obama administration of his visit to the United States.

There’s more at the link. If Nader is cooperating it means there’s something there. And it looks like it’s big.

Trump has been acting out for a while. You know he’s hearing about this.

The Mooch back in good graces?

The Mooch back in good graces?

by digby

Sure, everything is fine. There’s nothing wrong with this presidency. It’s all good:

President Donald Trump publicly derided reports Tuesday that chaos is engulfing the West Wing, but in private, the man who thrives on discord seems to be sowing some of it himself.

The President has emboldened Anthony Scaramucci, the boisterous former communications director who was fired after just 10 days, to continue attacking White House chief of staff John Kelly during his cable news appearances, a source familiar with the situation told CNN.

In multiple television segments, Scaramucci has faulted Kelly for the “terrible morale” in the West Wing, at times referring to him as “General Jackass” and suggesting he apologize for his handling of the Rob Porter resignation. According to this source, the President is aware of Scaramucci’s criticisms and has not discouraged him from making them. Sources familiar with his thinking say Scaramucci is frustrated with Kelly because he has limited the former communications director’s White House access.

“I like conflict. I like having two people with two points of view,” Trump said Tuesday when asked about internal strife during a news conference. “I like watching it, I like seeing it.”

The outside attacks come amid days of discord inside the White House, underscored Tuesday evening by the departure of Gary Cohn, Trump’s chief economic adviser. The President heralded Cohn as “a rare talent” in a statement announcing his departure, but his ouster comes in the midst of a fractious debate inside the White House over imposing tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. Trump opted to go with tariffs over opposition from Cohn…

According to conversations with a dozen Trump advisers inside and outside the White House, little has happened to change the feeling of malaise that has settled into the West Wing. Morale, many of these advisers said, remains low, with few signs of turning around.

Fergawdsakes …

By t he way,this “I like conflict” thing is such utter PR damage control BS. He likes people licking his boots, period.

.