Skip to content

Month: June 2019

Emoluments, schmoluments

Emoluments, schmoluments

by digby

Well, at least the money’s not going to a global charity that saves millions of lives. That would be wrong:

In July, a wealthy Iraqi sheikh named Nahro al-Kasnazan wrote letters to national security adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urging them to forge closer ties with those seeking to overthrow the government of Iran.

Kasnazan wrote of his desire “to achieve our mutual interest to weaken the Iranian Mullahs regime and end its hegemony.”

Four months later, he checked into the Trump International Hotel in Washington and spent 26 nights in a suite on the eighth floor — a visit estimated to have cost tens of thousands of dollars.

It was an unusually long stay at the expensive hotel. The Washington Post obtained the establishment’s “VIP Arrivals” lists for dozens of days last year, including more than 1,200 individual guests. Kasnazan’s visit was the longest listed.

“We normally stay at the Hay-Adams hotel,” Kasnazan, 50, said in a recent interview with a Post reporter in Amman, Jordan, where he lives in a gold-bedecked mansion and summons his servants by walkie-talkie. “But we just heard about this new Trump hotel in Washington, D.C., and thought it would be a good place to stay.”

Kasnazan said his choice of the Trump hotel was not part of a lobbying effort, adding that he came to Washington for medical treatment at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, about 45 miles away. Kasnazan, who socialized with State Department officials while in Washington, has set up several new companies in hopes of doing business with the U.S. government.

His long visit is an example of how Trump’s D.C. hotel, a popular gathering place for Republican politicians and people with government business, has become a favorite stopover for influential foreigners who have an agenda to pursue with the Trump administration.

A gallery of would-be foreign leaders — including exiles and upstarts who cannot always rely on a state-to-state channel to reach Trump’s government — have been gliding through the polished lobby of the Trump International Hotel since it opened in 2016.

A few weeks before Kasnazan checked in, a pair of exiled Thai prime ministers spent the night. A few weeks after, a Post reporter saw a Ni­ger­ian presidential candidate holding court in the lobby. None stayed as long as Kasnazan, the leader of an order of Sufi Muslims who said he served as a paid CIA informant in the run-up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.

These visits offer proximity to Trump’s political orbit — as family members, advisers and fans regularly pass through the hotel and snap selfies at the bar — while putting money into a hotel the president still owns.

“We saw all the Trumpers,” said Entifadh Qanbar, a Kasnazan spokesman and aide who was frequently with him at the hotel. “Many ambassadors, many important people. We didn’t talk to them, but we saw them in the hallways.”

The downtown D.C. hotel has emerged as a bright spot in the president’s portfolio at a time when there are signs of declining revenue at some of his other properties. Lobbyists for the Saudi government paid for an estimated 500 nights at the luxury hotel just three months after his election. Executives from the telecom giant T-Mobile booked at least 52 nights there last year.

The president’s ability to profit from foreign customers, in particular, while in the White House has drawn sharp criticism. The Trump Organization is battling a pair of lawsuits, including one filed by Democratic members of Congress, alleging that the business it does with foreign governments violates the Constitution’s emoluments clause, which bars payments to presidents by foreign states.

The company, which runs the hotel, declined to answer questions about how much Kasnazan paid for his stay, or whether it had informed anyone at the White House about the sheikh’s long visit. The company said it donated the profits of his stay to the U.S. Treasury as part of a voluntary policy aimed at countering claims that the president is in violation of the emoluments clause. Critics argue that the policy is insufficient, saying that the Trump Organization does not explain how it calculates its foreign profits or identify its foreign customers.

The Trump Organization did not say how much the profits were from Kasnazan’s stay and did not explain why in his case it applied the “foreign patronage” policy, which it has said is for business from foreign governments. He holds no government office, and his spokesman said he paid the bill himself.

The White House and the National Security Council declined to comment about the visit. State Department officials said that they were not aware of any official meetings between their personnel and Kasnazan at that time, but that they could not say whether informal meetings were held.

Kasnazan willingly acknowledges an ambitious political agenda: He’s advocating for a U.S. military confrontation with Iran and wants U.S. help to blunt Iranian influence in Iraq. He also considers himself a viable candidate to become president of Iraq — even though others view him as a minor political figure.

In addition, Kasnazan has recently registered several companies in the United States to provide private security, oil field services and construction, and said he is eager to do business with the Trump administration.

“We are looking for opportunities,” he said.

Kasnazan checked into the Trump hotel on Nov. 30, a day after his brother, a former Iraqi trade minister, was sentenced in absentia to seven years in prison on graft charges. Kasnazan is also facing charges, said Judge Abdulsatter al-Beriqdar, a spokesman for the Iraqi judiciary.

“Once they are in Iraq, they will be arrested,” al-Beriqdar said.

Kasnazan denies the corruption allegations and says the charges are politically motivated.

Kasnazan said he paid for a suite and one additional room at the Trump hotel, and stayed there with his wife and children until Dec. 26. Qanbar, the spokesman — who for years worked for Ahmed Chalabi, a deceased Iraqi dissident who helped foment the Iraq War — declined to specify the cost but estimated that it was a “couple thousand” dollars per night.

Suites at the Trump hotel range from about $1,000 to $2,000 per night; at the Hay-Adams, they are about $840 to $1,840 per night.

During his recent stay in Washington, Kasnazan said, he socialized with some of the State Department’s Middle East experts outside of the hotel. One of them, Col. Abbas Dahouk, recently retired as a senior military adviser at the department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs and previously served as a military attache at the U.S. Embassy in Saudi Arabia.

Dahouk said he viewed Kasnazan’s visit to the Trump hotel as an effort to make “himself available to talk about Iraq and to speak truth to power,” while seeking U.S. support for countering Iranian influence in Iraq.

“It’s easier to meet people” at the hotel, he said. “Maybe indirectly to also show support to Trump.”

“From his perspective, Trump is America,” Dahouk added.

There is much more to the story and I urge you to read it.

This is exactly why the emoluments clause was put into the constitution. Presidents are not supposed to be taking money for access. It’s thoroughly corrupt. And it’s happening right in front of our eyes.

But the way it looks now, there’s nothing we can do about it. The Democrats are anxious to sweep all this under the rug so they can pretend it didn’t happen and politics are completely normal in America rather than almost hopelessly polluted by the criminals of the Republican Party.

The Republicans under Trump have found out something very important. They can make up scandals and cripple Democrats with nonsensical claims but they can actually do all the things they claim the Democrats do and get away with it. This is an extremely valuable insight. You can be sure they will put it to very good use.

Oh, and for those of you who think a guy like this can’t actually have any effect on policy, think again. Remember a hustler named Ahmad Chalabi? He got over on the so-called “grown-ups.” You think someone like this couldn’t get over on Donald Trump and Jared Kushner?

.

Muddled

Muddled

by digby

I think David Leonhardt of the New York Times articulates the thinking of a lot of people in the last few days. They’ve been patient with the Democrats. But it’sJune. The Democrats have been in charge of the House for 6 months. One quarter of the time they have to conduct oversight on Trump before the election is over. And Michael Cohen was the only must-watch hearing they’ve done.

I’ve been mostly positive about the approach that Democratic leaders have taken to the Trump scandals. Those leaders, starting with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, have insisted on investigating President Trump’s business practices and his 2016 campaign. But the Democrats have also shown some sensible restraint.

Rather than rushing into impeachment hearings as soon as they won House control, they understood that such hearings wouldn’t necessarily persuade more Americans of Trump’s unfitness for office. They have instead vowed to hold hearings that will lay out the evidence of Trump’s misbehavior.

The problem is that the Democrats haven’t actually held many hearings. With the Mueller investigation now completed, I think it’s getting to be time for Democrats to stop explaining what they are going to do and start doing it.

As is, the Democrats’ message is becoming muddled. Both House and Senate Democrats insist that Trump has committed grave offenses that are damaging the country (which he has). In response, they are doing … relatively little. The combination, as my colleague Michelle Goldberg has written, is “increasingly incoherent.”

Remember how much information the Michael Cohen hearing produced and how much attention it generated? It was an excellent example of how Congress can shine light on a president’s wrongdoing. The House should now insist on calling Robert Mueller to testify, even if Mueller would prefer to avoid the spotlight. They should fight, in court if need be, to call any Trump aides or associates who have relevant information.

Until Democrats act, the party’s message about Trump’s wrongdoing is likely to remain unpersuasive to anyone who isn’t already persuaded.

You know how everyone says the DOJ and the White House are slow walking all the documents and subpoenas so they can get closer to the election? Well, it is looking more and more as if the Democrats might be doing the same. If they don’t get started soon, it’s likely this will fizzle out and we’ll get into budgets and government shutdowns and whatever the latest atrocity Trump has committed and that will be that.

Here’s the last half of Goldberg’s column:

[T]he real reasons for Democratic hesitation on impeachment are obvious enough. Democrats don’t have the votes in the Senate to remove Trump, and fear an acquittal in that chamber could embolden him. A majority of voters is not yet convinced that impeachment is warranted, even if they believe Trump is a criminal. Many newly elected Democrats in swing districts don’t want to have to vote on impeachment, and Democrats fear a backlash similar to the one Republicans faced after impeaching Bill Clinton in 1998.

All these hazards are real. But there are also dangers if Democrats fail to take their appraisal of Trump to its logical conclusions. Following public opinion on impeachment, as opposed to attempting to shape it, makes them look weak and vacillating. Endless calls for further investigation send the message that the staggering corruption and abuse of power that Trump has already engaged in is somehow tolerable. And as Brian Beutler has pointed out, if Democrats don’t seize the offensive in both procedural and narrative terms, Republicans will, pressing on with their Benghazi-style investigations into the origins of the Russia probe while inviting even more foreign help in 2020.

The point of impeachment is not to remove Trump before the 2020 election. It is to make clear, in the starkest possible way, why Democrats believe he should be removed. The remainder of his term should be consumed by a formal, televised presentation of all the ways he’s disgraced his office. It’s true that were Trump to be re-elected after such a reckoning, he might be even further unleashed. But were Trump to be re-elected in the absence of impeachment, it would still be seen as a vindication for him, and would leave Democrats humiliated by their excess of caution.

Some Democrats might fear a repeat of the mistakes Republicans made when they impeached Clinton two decades ago, but this suggests a lack of faith in their own leadership. Clinton was impeached for covering up sex with an intern. Were Trump to be impeached, it would be for covering up his entanglements, financial and otherwise, with a hostile foreign power, blatantly profiting from his office, declaring himself above the law, and demanding freedom from oversight as the price of fulfilling ordinary presidential responsibilities. If Democratic politicians don’t believe they can make the public see the difference between these two impeachment scenarios, perhaps they are in the wrong line of work.

Besides, the notion that Republicans suffered a devastating rebuke as a result of the Clinton impeachment is overblown. Republicans kept the House in the 1998 midterms, though Democrats gained five seats. Clinton was damaged enough that his vice president, Al Gore, held him at a distance while running to succeed him. In the 2000 election, Republicans won the presidency, kept the House, and narrowly took the Senate, giving them trifecta control of government for the first time in nearly half a century. Can this really be the cautionary tale that’s frightening Democrats from doing all they can to hold a lawless president to account?

At the Center for American Progress conference, Representative Adam Schiff of California, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, praised Representative Justin Amash, the Michigan Republican who, on in a Twitter thread on Saturday, laid out the ways that Trump had “engaged in impeachable conduct.” Responding to Amash’s case against the president, members of the wealthy family of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said they were cutting off their financial support for the congressman. The conservative House Freedom Caucus, which Amash helped found, condemned him, and he’s facing a primary challenge.

“The fact that he is willing to risk his seat shows a lot of the courage of that conviction, and that has been in very short supply,” Schiff told the audience. He added, “Courage is contagious, but so is cowardice.” He’s right, but not just about Republicans.

Pelosi said she doesn’t want to impeach Trump, she wants to see him in jail. First of all, this notion she’s spreading that he can’t be indicted if there’s a Senate acquittal on impeachment is just nonsense. There’s no double jeopardy attached and impeachment isn’t a criminal proceeding anyway.

She may be trying to say that an acquittal would make it politically impossible for a Democratic Department of Justice to pursue Trump, but let’s get real. The likelihood of the next president’s Attorney General indicting Trump for these crimes is not very high. After all, Democrats like Nancy Pelosi (and I!) have spent the last two years decrying all the disgusting “lock her up” chants at Trump rallies as UnAmerican Banana Republic behavior because we don’t jail defeated political rivals in this country. By doing that, he’s inoculated against the Democrats doing it to him.

Unless Trump actually does shoot someone on 5th Avenue, there is almost no chance he’s going to be indicted. In fact, there’s every chance he’ll pardon himself and the case will be litigated until long after he’s in the grave. It’s certainly possible that the state of New York could indict him on crimes that have nothing to do with these federal offenses. And there will likely be civil cases that will keep him and his family in court for years. But impeachment would have no effect on that anyway.

The most important reason to impeach Trump isn’t to build a case that will put him in federal prison. It’s to make it clear to the Americans people exactly what has happened and take a stand in defense of the constitution. He has committed high crimes and misdemeanors. He’s abusing his power every single day. They are not criminal offenses and the only way to make it clear that this abuse of power is unacceptable is to impeach him, and if they can’t convict, then take it to the big jury — the American people. But they have to make the case.

.

The ugliest American and his propaganda team on display

The ugliest American and his propaganda team on display

by digby

I was in France during the 50th anniversary of D-Day and it was a moving experience. The war was very real and immediate to Europeans even 50 years out and I’d guess it is today as well. The Normandy coast is a very solemn and beautiful place. You know something monumental happened there.

This time, it’s been bespoiled by an ignorant barbarian:

I’m so sorry.

.

Our allies’ last-ditch effort by @BloggersRUs

Our allies’ last-ditch effort
by Tom Sullivan


Men and equipment arrive in Normandy following D-Day invasion, 1944. (National Archives.)

Seventy-five years ago today, WWII allies launched Operation Overlord, the D-Day invasion. The Washington Post headline calls it “the Normandy invasion that saved Europe from Nazism.” And not just Europe.

Before the U.S. President Donald J. Trump arrived in France, British Prime Minister Theresa May presented Trump with a framed draft of the Atlantic Charter Churchill signed in 1941 along with U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Queen Elizabeth II gave Trump a 1959 first edition of Winston Churchill’s “The Second World War” in a single edition (abridged) bound in a crimson and gold-tooled cover, no doubt to catch his eye. Hitting him over the head with both might have been less subtle.

Commemorations all over. Speeches. Statistics. Vintage aircraft. Reenactors. A friend was aboard one of the Dakotas that flew into Normandy.

Naturally, the American president, an “avowed nationalist” (Washington Post), is delivering speeches in Normandy. One hopes they were written by someone with the good sense not to allow him space to ad lib. Trump sat arms crossed and yawning as French President Emmanuel Macron “mixed praise for America’s veterans with a full-throated embrace of the kind of multilateralism Trump has railed against as he’s pursued an ‘America First’ agenda.”

The Post observes:

The D-Day commemoration comes after two years of Trump either slighting or actively undermining the two principal institutions that have worked to ensure Europe’s postwar stability and transatlantic ties: the European Union and NATO. Some see the emotional power of the Normandy landscape as a last-ditch attempt to ensure that those transatlantic ties still hold.

“As far as the Europeans are concerned, I think the general tone is one of desperation at the possibility that the lessons of history could be forgotten,” said Francois Heisbourg, a former French presidential adviser and a senior adviser at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a London-based think tank. “The lesson of history is that the West exists, and when the West is divided, very bad things happen. We don’t forget that it took the Americans two years to get involved in World War II. But we also know we were saved by the Americans — not only by the Americans, but without the Americans it would not have been possible.”

Of the 10,000 who died that day in Normandy, Michele Heller’s father was not among them. Her Czech father had escaped his native country and the Nazis, made his way after four years to the U.S. and enlisted. He survived one of the earliest waves of the D-Day landings, the Battle of the Bulge and more. Like many WWII veterans, her foreign-born father rarely spoke of what he’d seen and experienced in defense of his new country.

His immediate family members who did not escape Nazi-occupied Czechoslovakia perished in concentration camps. Except two cousins, twins, reserved for Josef Mengele’s medical experiments.

Heller writes this morning both as a commemoration and as a reminder:

In the 1840s, half of all U.S. military recruits were immigrants. Today, 40 percent of active-duty personnel are racial or ethnic minorities, and 13 percent of U.S. veterans are foreign-born or children of immigrants.

Why am I telling the story my dad had buried so deeply? Because relaying his experience is a way to illustrate the personal ramifications of anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic, racist sentiment. Nationalist fervor, economic crisis and other factors resulted in the Nazis’ ascendance, their anti-Jewish laws and eventually the war that upended my dad’s youth and took the lives of many of his compatriots, friends and family, both on the battlefields and in the concentration camps.

My father-in-law fought in the front lines in Europe late in the war, including in the Battle of the Bulge. The West Virginia native rarely spoke of combat. He did want to revisit some of the beautiful towns he remembered. He never made that trip. He returned from the war to attend Columbia University and spent a career as a librarian. But the war haunted him. His shelves were filled with books about the war. It was an experience one never really gets over.

I don’t have to ask myself what he would think about our current commander-in-chief’s efforts to resurrect the evils he fought to consign to those history books.

Robert Mueller is a witness, not just a prosecutor

Robert Mueller is a witness, not just a prosecutor

by digby


This chart
by Ryan Goodman at Just Security spells out exactly why Robert Mueller needs to testify before congress. He’s not just a prosecutor. He’s a witness to what William Barr said and did and the record show that they were in clear disagreement:

Chart: A Side-by-Side Compa… by on Scribd

There are dozens of questions that need to be answered about the Rosenstein, Barr, and Special counsel interactions. He’s the only one who can be expected to be honest about it. He has to testify.

.

The fashion report

The fashion report

by digby

I don’t usually care about what the presidents and their spouses and family wear. But in this case, we have two women in that family who are fashion models and frankly, have little else to offer. So I’d expect them to be fabulous in this regard. And the men are all
extremely wealthy and used to wearing these monkey suits (and have access to the best tailors in the world) so there is no excuse for this mess:

Melania and Ivanka are beautiful women and they wear clothes well but on foreign trips Melania dresses in costume and Ivanka often has some real misses. This trip was particularly bad for her.

Here’s the Royal Watch at the Daily Beast:

The royals played it safe during the state visit, with Camilla in various flouncy white dresses and the queen in her usual siren block colors of blue and pink.

And the Trumps looked like they were starring in their own episode of Dynasty.

Fans will remember that the 1985 season the show ended with the Carringtons and Colbys in the fictional European country of Moldavia, where some terrorists shot everybody at the ceremony. (The next season, the principals miraculously roused themselves from the hail of bullets and carried on being vile to each other. And there was even a duplicate Krystle, but we digress.)

The shocks in London were restricted to the fashion variety. Everything was a little too much. On the final day, to commemorate D-Day, Melania wore a belted cream coat, which was very romantic rather than somber, and paired it with a hat, best described as a “sharp flying saucer.” Trump’s hair, briefly slicked back over the weekend to make him look like a mobster on the Atkins Diet, returned to its usual squirrel-about-to-disappear self.

Both Melania and Ivanka have had a maximalist week, clothes-wise, notable for a sheer, dramatically sleeved red evening gown (Melania) and a strange Dalmatian-dotted day outfit (Ivanka).

The entire Trump family headed to London, including Tiffany, whose evening dresses looked more confining than delightful. They Instagrammed a lot of their journey, when not—yes, you Jared and Ivanka—lurking creepily behind curtains. (Surely, a royal servant should be dispatched to make sure they’ve actually gone.)

There were no fashion disasters, merely the lingering impression that the Trump family dresses as it comports itself on the national and international stage: they’ll do it their way, thanks. If you think they look “too much,” they most surely don’t care.

.

.

Gaslighting o’ the day

Gaslighting o’ the day

by digby

This is what Trump voters see and hear from the spokesperson for the Republican National Committee.

As we are commemorating the 75th anniversary of D-Day, when the allies undertook one of the most massive, dangerous missions in world history to defeat the psychopathic monster Adolph Hitler and his compatriot Benito Mussolini.

.

John Kerry must be banging his head against a wall today

John Kerry must be banging his head against a wall today

by digby

The pro-Vietnam War hardhat riot of 1970

Those of us of a certain age have spent our entire lives listening to wingnuts descend like a gaggle of screeching harpies on anyone who opposed the Vietnam War, much less dodged the draft. They crucified Bill Clinton for years over the issue and even a war hero like John Kerry was ruthlessly smeared. Vietnam was the crucible that every politician of that generation had to account for. A man who said something like this would have been relentlessly pilloried by every Republican and half the Democrats in this country:

Piers Morgan says, “you were not able to serve in Vietnam because of bone spurs on your feet, do you wish you’d been able to serve? Donald Trump said this:

“Well, I was never a fan of that war, I’ll be honest with you. I thought it was a terrible war. I thought it was very far away … and at that time nobody ever heard of the country. Today they’re doing very well, in fact on trade they’re brutal, very brutal, they’re great negotiators, they’re great business people. Nobody ever heard of Vietnam. People said, ‘what is happening over there?’. So I was never a fan. This isn’t like I’m fighting against Nazi Germany, we’re fighting against Hitler. And I was like a lot of people. Now, I wasn’t out on the streets marching, I wasn’t saying I was going to move to Canada like a lot of people did … but no, I was not a fan of that war. That war was not something we should’ve been involved in”

Morgan askes, “would you like to have served generally, perhaps in another …” Trump said,”I would not have minded that at all, I think I would have been honored, but I think I’m making up for that now, look, 700 billion dollars I gave last year and this year it’s 716 billion dollars and I think I’m making up for it rapidly…”

I’m sure his old wingnut white guy cultists are all clapping like like the brainwashed trained seals they are. But it galling. After all the years I’ve had to listen to their bullshit about Vietnam and they end up loving this Richie-Rich asshole whose daddy bought him out of the war. Now he says he’s making up for it by saying he “gave” a lot of money to the military like he wrote a personal check!

Just as we no longer have to pay any attention to the conservative evangelicals when they talk about morality, neither do we have to care when the wingnuts wave the flag in our faces. I will be screaming “Donald Trump” in their faces until the day I shuffle off my mortal coil.


Update: And by the way, he didn’t have any bone spurs. He can’t even remember which feet they were on.

.

No, Trump does not want to be impeached Part XXV

No, Trump does not want to be impeached Part XXV

by digby

From the Atlantic piece I linked in the post below:

[T]he recent Mexico event illustrates Trump’s preferred method of relief in moments of crisis. In the days leading up to the tariff announcement, the news cycle was captivated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s first public remarks since he was appointed to his role more than two years ago. Mueller reiterated that his report on Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible obstruction of justice in the executive branch did not, in fact, amount to a “total exoneration” of the president. Hearing these words from Mueller himself spurred many Democrats to ratchet up calls for impeachment, and Trump was clearly affected by the fallout. “How do you impeach a Republican President for a crime that was committed by the Democrats? WITCH-HUNT!” the president tweeted on Wednesday.
[…]
That Trump reverted to tariffs on Thursday offers a clue as to just how distressing the past week has been for him. Trump is no stranger to bad weeks, of course. But according to the senior campaign adviser, he was particularly unnerved by the media attention Mueller’s statement received. “Mueller controlled the news cycle,” this person said. “It was 24/7 the last couple of days. And that’s what bothers him.” Added to that was the increasing number of 2020 candidates calling to begin impeachment proceedings against the president, a topic most have been loath to touch on the campaign trail. For any public bluster from the White House welcoming an impeachment fight, Trump has zero private desire to take one on, according to a second senior campaign official. “To be impeached?!? No one wants that,” the source told me in a text message.

Personally, I don’t care whether Trump “wants” to be impeached. It shouldn’t affect the decision to do it. But I don’t believe it anyway and I suspect the Democrats who keep saying it don’t believe it either. That’s because it makes no sense and the Democrats may be timorous but they aren’t dumb.

He calls it “the ‘I’ word” He said it’s a dirty, filthy, disgusting word. He goes nuts when it comes up. Of course he doesn’t want to be impeached.

.