Skip to content

Month: November 2019

Having a right doesn’t mean it’s right to exercise it for corrupt or unethical purposes

Having a right doesn’t mean it’s right to exercise it for corrupt or unethical purposes

by digby

I watched that interview this morning and was very impressed with the ethical clarity of his remarks. Former Navy Secretary Richard Spencer and former Defense Secretary James Mattis should do the same. I wonder if they will…

Ray Mabus, President Barack Obama’s former Navy secretary, slammed President Donald Trump on Monday morning for interfering in the case of Eddie Gallagher, a Navy SEAL who was charged with war crimes.

“This just dishonors the military so much, and it causes chaos and confusion,” Mabus told MSNBC host Hallie Jackson. “It undermines accountability, it undermines the rule of law, it undermines good order and discipline in the military.”

The ex-Navy secretary said Trump has “the right to do a lot of things” as the President, but “that doesn’t mean he should do them.”

“That doesn’t mean that he isn’t dishonoring the military by doing it,” he continued. “That doesn’t mean that he is not causing just confusion and chaos in the ranks.”

As he said, the president has the right to do a lot of things that he shouldn’t do. Taking up for psychopathic war criminals is one of them.

In fact, it should be an impeachable offense. Treating war criminals like heroes is an abuse of power with extremely dangerous ramifications.

.

Neither Trump nor the dog look happy about it

Neither Trump nor the dog look happy about it

by digby

This brings to mind something I don’t think we’ve appreciated fully. Trump is a germophobe, which means he doesn’t like animals and he’s notoriously unhappy about touching all kinds of things.

I can’t help but think of the massive hissy fit people had about John Kerry drinking green tea for his prostate cancer and ordering a sandwich with swiss cheese. The Real Americans thought it made him an effeminate elitists, dontcha know? But nobody says a word about Trump’s neurotic aversion to animals and germs. That’s very manly and down to earth, apparently.

*Before anyone says anything, I don’t believe germophobia is anything to be ashamed of, of course. Neither is eating swiss cheese and drinking green tea. I’m just pointing out that Trump’s fans can be very tolerant when it comes to him. Others, not so much.

Oh my God:

Pence, by the way, is a well-known animal lover who has a menagerie in the VP residence. He gets a few points for being human, as he shows in his interaction with Conan.

.

Trump hit the trifecta. He’s corrupted the State Dept, the DOJ and now the Pentagon.

Trump hit the trifecta


by digby

Trump and his top military adviser, Fox News’ Pete Hegseth

He’s corrupted the State Dept, the DOJ and now the Pentagon. My Salon column this morning: 

I have to admit that of all the spooky parallels between Donald Trump’s and Richard Nixon’s disregard for the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution, I didn’t see the war-criminal coddling coming. I should have. Nixon famously had the My Lai mass murderer, Lt. William Calley, freed from prison and put under house arrest during his long appeal process. (He ended up only serving three years of his original life sentence and went on to live a quiet and peaceful life in Georgia.)

One of the pillars of Trump’s 2016 campaign was his promise to order torture and his belief in the efficacy of mass summary executions, so it should come as no surprise that he too would be generous to members of the military who have done such things. Those two presidents have more in common than just hatred of the press and massive abuse of power.

Trump has taken an unusual interest in the military justice system since he entered politics. One of his oft-repeated shticks on the trail was to mock Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the soldier who had abandoned his post in Afghanistan and was captured and tortured for five years by the Taliban. Trump declared he should have been summarily executed for being a “dirty, rotten traitor” the way we would have done back in the good old days “when we were strong.” He was very upset when Bergdahl was given a dishonorable discharge with no prison time, tweeting “the decision on Sergeant Bergdahl is a complete and total disgrace to our Country and to our Military.”

By contrast, this month Trump overruled military leaders and cleared three members of the military who had been accused or convicted of war crimes, but whom the hard-right has championed as heroes. He ordered full pardons for former Army Lt. Clint Lorance, who was serving a 19-year sentence for murdering two civilians and Special Forces Maj. Mathew Golsteyn, who was facing trial for the murder of an unarmed Afghan. The most infamous of the three, Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL, had been acquitted of murder but found guilty of a lesser offense in a dramatic trial this summer that got the president’s special attention through his friend Pete Hegseth, a commentator on Fox News. Trump reversed Gallagher’s demotion to allow him to retire with a full pension — even though it was his own men who turned him in for committing murder and other atrocities, at great risk to their own military standing.

In his pardon statement, the president said, “When our soldiers have to fight for our country, I want to give them the confidence to fight.” By that, he meant he wanted to give them the confidence to commit war crimes and not worry that they will be held liable. Last month, Trump tweeted, “we train our boys to be killing machines, then prosecute them when they kill!” He believes in all-out war with no limitations. We don’t have to imagine where that could lead. History is full of horrific examples.

There has been some discussion about the prosecutions of these men being faulty. That may very well be true. But let’s not kid ourselves about Trump’s motivations. The contrast between the way he reacted to the Bergdahl case and these cases illustrates that his concerns are not about due process or mercy. We knew he was a fan of war crimes, and now we know he likes war criminals too.

Fox News celebrated the releases of Lorance and Golsteyn, but the real star of this show is Gallagher, who has been all over TV, trash-talking everyone in the Navy hierarchy, including his former SEAL team and commanding officers. He’s quite the performer and his appearance this weekend on Fox was one for the books:

The Navy had notified Gallagher that he was to face a review early next month to determine if he should retain membership in the elite SEAL force. Apparently, they do these reviews regularly and often remove members from that force for various infractions, none of which rise to the level of Gallagher’s misconduct. His case is an obvious problem, not only because he is dangerously unhinged but because he can now act with impunity due to his close personal friend in the White House. That friend was watching Fox as they covered the story and immediately took to Twitter to countermand their plans, setting the president on a collision course with the Navy.

Over the past few days, there were conflicting stories in the press claiming that the review was off and then back on again, and that the secretary of the Navy, Richard Spencer, was threatening to quit and then not threatening to quit. On Sunday night it was announced that Spencer had been fired by Defense Secretary Mark Esper, allegedly for going directly to the White House to make a secret deal to allow the review but with a guarantee that Gallagher could keep his current rank and SEAL status. The Washington Post reported that this proposal was revealed to Esper by Trump himself:

Esper and Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, learned of Spencer’s private offer to the White House when they spoke with President Trump on Friday …

Spencer distributed a letter that indicates a different reason for his firing, which is far more likely since the president is an inveterate liar who would hardly be offended by such a suggestion in any case. In fact it’s ridiculous, and reminiscent of Trump’s equally absurd excuse that he fired James Comey for being unfair to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 campaign.

I’m not sure why the media keeps saying this was a “resignation letter,” since Spencer says he is “acknowledging his termination.” Either way, and regardless of what came before, it’s entirely likely that Trump watched that crazy Fox appearance by Gallagher in which he claimed the Navy secretary was being insubordinate to the president, and decided that Spencer was done.

The Washington Post’s David Ignatius correctly observed that “the Gallagher case illustrates how an irascible, vengeful commander in chief is ready to override traditional limits to aid political allies in foreign policy, law enforcement and now military matters.” It’s hard to believe that any president in the middle of an impeachment investigation would do something this provocative but Trump may have decided that displaying his power over the military is just what the doctor ordered to prove his dominance and cow the opposition. Or maybe it’s just the natural consequence of yet another institution trying to follow the rule of law and traditional norms of behavior, and butting up against a reckless president who has no respect or understanding of either.

Whatever the case, we’ve crossed another rubicon. Just as the Congress, the State Department and the Department of Justice have been polluted by Trumpism, so now has the U.S. military.

Update: 

Esper says Trump ordered him to allow SEAL to keep status

Of course he did.

Nah, nothing cultlike about this

Nah, nothing cultlike about this

by digby

I don’t know if he’s completely lost his (already feeble) mind or if he’s angling for a pardon — or both.

.

Trump impeachment in review by @BloggersRUs

Trump impeachment in review
by Tom Sullivan


The Committee on the Judiciary Committee, United States House of Representatives, opened its formal impeachment hearings against President Richard Nixon on May 9, 1974. Photo via Library of Congress.

A flurry of breaking stories uncorked over the weekend still require time to age properly. But after two weeks of testimony in the impeachment inquiry, a review might be in order this morning. It’s been hell keeping up.

Thankfully, several sources provided summaries to help ensure everyone is on the same page.

The Washington Post provided a short video cataloging 24 GOP defenses of Donald Trump’s arms-for-political-dirt scheme with Ukraine. It’s a moving target. On Nov. 12, the Post counted 17.

Here’s a summary of this weekend’s count:

Walter Shaub, former director of the United States Office of Government Ethics under presidents Obama and Trump, provides a lengthy bill of particulars against Trump. For a moment there, I thought I was reading the list of 27 complaints against King George III. But Shaub counts 40 against Trump, a few of which are posted below. Donald will be pleased the size of his list is bigger:

Michael McFaul, ambassador to Russia under President Obama and MSNBC contributor, watched every minute of the hearings and knows most of the witnesses to date. “After 2 weeks,” McFaul tweets, “none of the basic facts were ever seriously disputed.” He summarizes his takeaways in a tweet thread. “Trump used his public office — the most sacred office in our country — to try to pursue his private electoral interests,” McFaul concludes. Trump only stopped because he got caught. McFaul’s first few conclusions are below:

There is more, naturally. Settlements against Trump’s “sham university,” his Trump Foundation (closed down by the state of New York), and decades of questionable tax dodges by the Trump Organization document a pattern of self-dealing that will follow Trump’s family business out of office even if as a former president Trump himself somehow evades legal accountability for offenses committed in office.

Finally, over the weekend yet another billionaire master-of-the-universe — Michael Bloomberg — announced he would run for president as a Democrat against Trump in 2020. Not even Wall Streeters think Bloomberg has a chance. If nothing else, it will be fun reminding Trump at every opportunity that Bloomberg’s stack is bigger. Much, much bigger. Perhaps seventeen times bigger. And Bloomberg is actually self-made.

Trump has a history of threatening lawsuits against people who publicly question the size of his, um, endowment. One hopes Bloomberg will question the size of Trump’s fortune for the entertainment value alone.

Let Lindsey do it! He’ll do anything.

Let Lindsey do it! He’ll do anything.

by digby

Via Axios:

Many were perplexed and outraged when, right after clashing with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in a heated Oval Office meeting on Nov. 13, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham hurried back to the Senate floor and did something that likely delighted Erdoğan. Graham blocked a resolution that would have formally recognized Turkey’s genocide of the Armenian people. 

Behind the scenes: Graham had just scolded Erdoğan over his invasion of Syria and attacks on the Kurds, according to sources in the room. 

As we reported at the time, Erdogan pulled out his iPad and showed the Oval Office group a propaganda video depicting the leader of the primarily Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces as a terrorist. 

The South Carolina Republican then chided him over the clip. “Well, do you want me to go get the Kurds to make one about what you’ve done?” he said. 

What happened next, which has not been previously reported: As Graham was leaving the Oval Office, senior White House staff asked him to return to the Senate and block the Armenian genocide resolution — a measure that would have infuriated Erdoğan.
Graham confirmed this in a phone interview on Saturday. 

“After the meeting, we kind of huddled up and talked about what happened,” he said. A White House legislative affairs official told Graham that Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) was going to bring up his Armenian genocide resolution and asked if Graham could “please object.” 

“I said sure,” Graham said. “The only reason I did it is because he [Erdoğan] was still in town. … That would’ve been poor timing. I’m trying to salvage the relationship if possible.”
Asked whether he felt uncomfortable blocking the Armenian genocide resolution, Graham replied: “Yeah. Because I like Bob [Menendez]. He’s been working on this for years, but I did think with the president of Turkey in town that was probably more than the market would bear.” 

“I’m not going to object next time,” Graham added. 

The “next time” happened last week. Menendez and his Republican Senate colleague Ted Cruz introduced the Armenian genocide resolution again. This time, the White House asked another Republican Senate ally, David Perdue, to block it. 

“Senator Perdue objected due to concerns that passage of the resolution would jeopardize the sensitive negotiations going on in the region with Turkey and other allies,” said a Perdue spokesperson.

The “sensitive negotiations” are to get Turkey not to tilt toward Russia. I’m going to guess that’s not going very well.

Trump ought to be careful though. He risks losing his close BFF’s Kanye and Kim. The Kardashians are of Armenian descent and are major endorsers of the resolution. He may not care what anyone else has to say about this but these two seem to be important to him.

.

Another useful GOP idiot with Fox News brain rot

Another useful GOP idiot with Fox News brain rot


by digby


TPM had a big scoop today
that sheds light on Giuliani’s ravings of the past few days:

As far back as October 2018, a former U.S. attorney acting on behalf of Ukrainian interests tried to get federal law enforcement to bite on bogus political dirt about the Bidens and on whether Paul Manafort’s notorious Black Ledger was a forgery.

Bud Cummins, a former U.S. attorney in Arkansas, emailed the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York relaying a request for a meeting on the same topics into which President Trump would later demand Ukraine conduct investigations.

TPM has been investigating Cummins’ role in attempting to serve as an intermediary between certain Ukrainian interests and federal law enforcement. Cummins’ involvement has not been previously reported. However, Rudy Giuliani sent a letter on Saturday to Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham (R-SC) claiming that a former U.S. attorney was ready to provide emails and memoranda about an attempt to get the FBI to investigate Biden and the list of Manafort bribes, called the Black Ledger.

Cummins confirmed to TPM Sunday morning that Giuliani’s letter was referring to him.

Click over to read the whole thing. It’s yet another story of half-baked wingnut conspiracy theory nonsense proving these people will believe anything.

I knew the name Bud Cummins was familiar and it turns out he was one of the US Attorneys forced out by Bush Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in his purge. He was replaced by the GOP political operative Tim Griffin.

Gonzales shouldn’t have bothered. This guy is a true blue wingnut. But maybe he was actually fired because he was even thicker than usual:

Speaking over the phone Sunday morning, Cummins expressed to TPM a mixture of dismay that Berman broke off contact and mild embarrassment at having dealt with Ukrainians whose motivations he admitted he did not understand. Cummins added that when he sent the email to Berman he “wasn’t advocating for the legitimacy of any of this.”

“At the time, I didn’t know a whole lot about Ukraine. I didn’t make any real attempt to vet this.” He added “I didn’t care, that wasn’t my job” in a discussion of what may have been motivating Lutsenko.

Lutsenko and a spokesperson for Lutsenko didn’t immediately return requests for comment. Berman’s office declined to comment.

Cummins told TPM that he had tried to signal to Berman that he was not vouching for the credibility of the allegations themselves. He said that he suggested to Berman that Lutsenko could “delegate some investigators to meet with some line [prosecutors] in his office,” referring to Berman.

Cummins called the lack of response from the Manhattan federal prosecutor a “breathtaking double standard,” given how the Mueller investigation “targeted” President Trump.

It gets dumber:

In 2016, Cummins served as chair of Donald Trump’s campaign in Arkansas, then as a Trump whip at the 2016 Republican National Convention in Cleveland. He went on to serve on the Trump administration transition team.

Cummins said that he believed that “mistrust of the FBI” was what led the Ukrainians to seek a backchannel to the Justice Department. He said that his Ukrainian interlocutors — who he declined to name — apparently went to him because they believed the “FBI in Ukraine had either wittingly or unwittingly become the pawns of the ambassador and secretary of state and vice president, and they cannot be trusted.”

Fox News brain rot is epidemic. It’s worse than ebola. Indeed, I think the greatest damage that’s been inflicted in this whole mess is that the whole world knows that the American conservative elites are a bunch of gullible fools whom you can easily figure out how to dupe just by watching Fox and Friends.

Click over to get the whole story. It’s interesting.

This also reminds me: whatever happened to Rudy’s backchannel with the NY FBI investigation? I guess we’ll never know who he was conspiring with to sabotage Clinton in the fall of 2016 will we?

.

Questions Some Reporter Should Ask Trump by tristero

Questions Some Reporter Should Ask Trump 

by tristero

Given that you believe there was nothing wrong with your phone call to Zelensky, have you asked him again to get dirt on political opponents? What did he say?

Have you asked any other foreign leader or county?

Do you intend to ask other foreign leaders and countries to help aid your re-election bid?

Did Trump have an important partner in pressuring Ukraine?

Did Trump have an important partner in pressuring Ukraine?

by digby

I had not been aware of this until recently, but Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orban held a joint press conference in february of 2017, right after Trump took office and Putin had this (among other things) to say about Ukrain and the American election:

Vladimir Putin: With regard to the current flare-up, we stated that it is already happening. Our position is, in fact, known: it was provoked by the Ukrainian side. Actual fighting began last Friday. On Sunday, the so-called Ukrainian voluntary units captured an opposition stronghold and moved 200 metres into the territory controlled by the militias. On Sunday, they were driven out of there.

Why is this happening now? I believe there are several reasons for that. First, the Ukrainian leadership needs money, and the best way to drum up some money is to go to the European Union, individual countries of Europe, the United States, or international financial institutions, posing as a victim of aggression. This is my first point.

Second, as we all know, during the presidential campaign in the United States, the Ukrainian government adopted a unilateral position in favour of one candidate. More than that, certain oligarchs, certainly with the approval of the political leadership, funded this candidate, or female candidate, to be more precise. Now they need to improve relations with the current administration, and using a conflict to do so is always a better, easier way to draw the incumbent administration into addressing Ukrainian problems and thus establish a dialogue.

The third reason is related to domestic politics. In the wake of the utter failure of economic and social policies, the internal opposition has stepped up its activities and needs to be shut up. It is also necessary to rally the people around the current leaders. This issue can also be resolved more easily if the conflict resumes.

There really is no doubt about who started this particular conflict. But whatever.

As David Frump pointed out on twitter today:

One more thing. We treat Trump’s escalating pressure on Zelensky to accuse Biden – and Russia’s escalating violence vs Ukraine – as two unconnected events. But if Russia knew Trump was pressuring Zelensky (thanks eg to Sondland’s unsecured calls) then maybe events were connected

I keep wondering whether by escalating its violence vs Ukraine in August and September 2019, Russia was doing its part to pressure Zelensky to help Trump win re-election in 2020.

We know that Putin believes that “escalating the conflict” is a useful political tool. He blamed Ukraine for doing it in the past.

One thing we can be sure of — this has been discussed between Trump and Putin. The only question really is whether Putin was just playing Trump or whether they are co-conspirators. We may never know. And I’m not sure it matters.

.

You have to take his threats seriously

You have to take his threats seriously

by digby

Here’s Schiff on why they feel so strongly about protecting the whistleblower.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) said on Sunday that one reason the whistleblower at the heart of the impeachment inquiry hasn’t been called by the House to testify is that President Donald Trump called the person a spy and threatened the whistleblower with the “death penalty.”

With the Intel Committee wrapping up its public impeachment hearings last week, Meet the Press anchor Chuck Todd asked Schiff on Sunday whether Schiff was going to be the House manager for impeachment.

“That’s up to the speaker,” Schiff answered, adding that he didn’t want to get ahead of the process as they haven’t filed articles of impeachment yet.

After Schiff said that the facts surrounding whether the president sought foreign interference in an election are not even being contested by Republicans, Todd then wondered aloud about Schiff’s position on having the whistleblower come forward.

“I know where you are with the whistleblower and the belief that you don’t need to hear from the whistleblower anymore,” the NBC News host stated. “You did pledge that the Intelligence Committee would hear from the whistleblower in some form or another? Are you going to fulfill that pledge?”

“We had a deep interest in having them testify,” Schiff told Todd. “Two things happened. One we were able to prove it with witnesses that had first-hand information and second the president and his allies effectively put that whistleblower’s life in danger.”
[…]
In late September, after the whistleblower’s complaint was made public, the president told a group at a private event that the whistleblower was “close to a spy” and wanted to know who gave the information to the whistleblower.

“You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart with spies and treason, right?” Trump added. “We used to handle it a little differently than we do now.”

Keep in mind that Bill Barr did just reinstate the federal death penalty and Trump’s pardoning murderous war criminals.

I think his message is clear. He isn’t playing by the rules.

.