Month: January 2020

Tempting as it is to weigh in on Wednesday’s Rachel Maddow’s interview with indicted Rudy Giuliani bagman Lev Parnas (Part 1), let’s put it off until after the second installment airs tonight. It’s raining shoes just now. Waiting for a break in the weather before stepping out into it seems prudent.

Marcy Wheeler issued a similar caution after the show about greeting Parnas statements with too much enthusiasm:

The easiest way to get a Dem to embrace disinformation is to say what they want to hear abt who is implicated in very real Russian scandal.

That's what Parnas did tonight.

Stop wanting the things you most want to be true to be true.

— emptywheel (@emptywheel) January 16, 2020

Remember: Last night’s polite-and-contrite Lev Parnas is the same as (alleged) gun-to-your-head Lev Parnas, the man from whom Florida police in 2008 confiscated “a .38 revolver, a 9mm pistol, an automatic pistol, and a .40-caliber Glock pistol” after a dispute with his landlord.

In Washington, the Senate prepares to hold some kind on trial (in quotes?) to determine whether despot-curious Donald Trump will serve out the rest of his corrupt presidential term. But we’ll come back to that.

Meanwhile, in Moscow

Russia’s “entire government” resigned Wednesday, CNN reported, after President Vladimir Putin announced reforms to make his successor less powerful. (Republican-controlled state legislatures have already tried that after losing governorships.)

Axios reports:

It was not clear whether Putin — scheduled to step down in 2024 — “intends to become prime minister again or carve out another powerful position,” Axios adds. Whatever. Putin wants no rivals, even if he leaves the presidency.

“This is not about a succession plan,” Brookings’ Alina Polyakova said. “This is about consolidating power.”

Putin might have extended or removed term limits, maneuvers recently popular in other countries, including China, Venezuela, and assorted African countries. Axios notes “all 20 of the world’s longest-serving non-royal leaders, are men.”

Back in Washington

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts today will administer a special oath to senators that they will do “impartial justice” in the impeachment trial. Afterwards, they will sign a book attesting to those oaths. How many will violate theirs as swiftly as Trump violated the oath he took three years ago is to be determined.

Parnas Wednesday night confirmed what ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland testified to in November: there was a quid pro quo for release of military aid to Ukraine and “everyone was in the loop.” Including the vice president, the secretary of state, the White House acting chief of staff, and, Parnas added, Attorney General Bill Barr.

Should the Senate acquit him, expect Trump to behave as he did the day after special counsel Robert Mueller testified before Congress about the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russia. July 24th effectively ended the investigation into Trump. July 25 was the day of Trump’s infamous Ukraine “shakedown” call that finally precipitated impeachment. A Senate acquittal will make Trump-the-Unrepentant feel bulletproof. He will want revenge “strongly.” He will still have his loop in place to help get it.

But revenge is not all he will want. Trump collects sycophants because he is one himself — to more powerful men. The blood-squeamish, insecure Trump wants to join Putin in the strong-man club with Kim Jong-un, Rodrigo Duterte, and others.

Putin may be signaling real despots are leaders for life. Trump already jokes at rallies about extending his stay beyond eight years. With Putin making moves in that direction, given the chance by Senate supplicants, Trump may want to emulate him to gain his approval. And to avoid future prosecution once he leaves office.

Trumpism ending the United States as we know it may be unlikely. Still, it is something else Republican senators might consider before handing their dear leader a chance at being Dear Leader.

Update: Marcy has more analysis just now.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide election mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.

Greg Sargent calls attention to the ways in which the media is failing to inform the public of Trump’s monumental dishonesty and the ways in which they fail to properly “convey just how deeply corrupt and absurd Trump’s explicitly stated positions really are.

He adds this to mix as well and I think it’s among the most important:

[T]here’s [another] way in which Trump challenges the media that generates far less attention than either of those: the ways in which the conventions of political reporting often constrain reporters from conveying just how crazy, depraved and saturated in malice and hate some of his rally performances are.

Vox’s Aaron Rupar has a fascinating but deeply dispiriting look at one such example. After Trump’s rally in Wisconsin on Tuesday night, an NPR segment basically sanitized away all of the wretchedness and insanity.

As Rupar notes, at the rally, Trump delivered on those qualities in a big way:

Trump bragged about war crimes. He joked about former Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson perhaps being in hell and about his possibly serving more than two terms in office. He said he’d like to see Hillary Clinton locked up and trashed “filthy, dirty” blue cities like San Francisco in a manner that’s highly unusual for a president.

NPR ran this brief report from a journalist at a local member station:

President Trump addressed thousands of his supporters in Milwaukee on his quest for a second term. He snapped back at Democrats for bringing impeachment proceedings, repeated a debunked claim that Mexico would be paying for a wall, and defended the fatal drone strike of an Iranian commander. Trump was taking on Democrats in their own territory, ahead of their national convention there this summer.

Sargent points out that Trump didn’t “snap back” he raved insanely about San Francisco being filthy and disgusting. He didn’t “take on” Democrats, he called for Clinton to be jailed and egged on the “lock her up” chants. And he didn’t defend his decision to assassinate Suleimani he swaggered around bragging of his plans to hit so much of Iran it would have “taken 30 years to rebuild if that was even possible” had they killed an American.

I watch his rallies. I’ve seen dozens and dozens of them over the past four years. And I know that if you don’t watch them you can’t really understand what is happening between him and his base:

The insanity of that does not come through at all in the NPR report and it’s extremely dangerous. If people don’t see how demented he is — and how much his followers love it — they are not going to grasp the imperative of getting him out of the White House.

I can’t tell you how often IRL I’ve related something that Trump said in his rallies to some mainstream liberal pals and they are floored. They know he’s crude and that he’s dumb. But people who are not obsessive political junkies like me simply don’t grasp just how insane he and his cult really are.

As Sargent observes, that’s a problem:

One key question is whether Trump can supercharge those parts of the country with such tactics without activating a backlash — among young and nonwhite voters, and among the sort of suburban and educated whites who remain alienated by Trump — that overwhelms the numbers in even hyper-energized Trump country. This plainly worries Trump’s advisers, who know the base might not be enough.

Press coverage that sanitizes away the wretched, hateful sides of Trump’s performances could help his appearances carry forward Trump’s mission of electrifying the base, under the radar, without clearly conveying to all those other voters — those who may not be tuning in as attentively to the 24/7 manure show that is this presidency — the truly depraved nature of what he’s dumping in their backyards.

I would just add one more thing, especially about NPR. In rural American where talk radio dominates the airwaves, NPR is often the only alternative. This kind of whitewashing is actually contributing to the political polarization by failing to give the people who depend on them the unvarnished truth of what Trump is.

Governor Ralph Northam of Virginia is declaring a state of emergency for next Monday because a bunch of gun proliferation advocates are planning to descend on the Capitol to protest some new gun control laws.

At a press conference, Northam described the potential for violence and said he was prohibiting all weapons, not just guns. He cited “credible intelligence” from law enforcement that groups including out-of-state militias and hate groups had “malicious plans” for Monday’s rally.

“We’re seeing threats of violence,” the governor said. “We’re seeing threats of armed confrontation and assault on our Capitol.”

Evidently, the gun people have been planning this for some time and are working themselves up into a frenzy on their channels.

“They’re coming to intimidate and cause harm,” Northam said of the “violent groups and white nationalists from outside Virginia.” Later, he expressed concern about “another incident like the one we saw in Charlottesville,” where a white nationalist killed an anti-fascist protester in 2017 at a chaotic rally in which racist groups fought in the streets with counter-protesters.

Like other Americans they could protest gun laws without carrying loaded guns. They could carry signs, they could march around, they could occupy a building or participate in civil disobedience, which requires that one submit oneself to the law. But they don’t. They carry loaded guns to protests and political events.

And that means these protests and political events are not opportunities for people to freely debate and disagree. After all, protests and political events are by their nature often contentious, angry and emotional. When one side is armed with automatic weapons, I think the other side can be forgiven for being reluctant to engage them.

That is obviously not what was intended by our bill of rights.  Basically what these folks are saying by arming themselves in this political context is, “nice little democracy you have there. Go ahead, exercise your first amendment. Make my day.”

That’s what it is called. I’m not a lawyer so I had no clue:

Engrossment means to copy as a final draft. When a document is ready for signature it can be called an engrossment. Regarding, bills and resolutions, the drafts made prior to the final vote of the legislature are called engrossment. Preparing a deed for execution is called engrossment. Engrossment also means to express formally or in legal form.

Delivery of the
Articles of Impeachment pic.twitter.com/MgluWR5I3F

— Mystery Solvent (@MysterySolvent) January 15, 2020

This whole thing may seem like more polarized partisanship at work. But take my word for it, this is unusual. Clinton’s impeachment really was a nutty move that got away from the Republicans. The public was not amused.

This is different. Trump is accused of an abuse of power by extorting a foreign government to smear his political rival. And up until now, Trump hasn’t offered a real defense. He’s whined and screamed “hoax!” and called names. Republicans have clutched their pearls over “the process.” But in this trial, they are finally going to have to actually defend his actions.

I’m going to guess that they will have to declare that it’s perfectly fine for a president to extort foreign governments and they will insist that it was not for his personal benefit.

Unfortunately, all this recent evidence is going to make that very difficult:

The brilliance of another insight from top Mueller lieutenant Andrew Weissmann.

The upshot: Consciousness of guilt!

Parnas document “a real smoking gun…shows that the president and Rudy Giuliani knew this would be improper…precisely what has been charged in the impeachment” pic.twitter.com/5ygoUOwOjp

— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) January 15, 2020

Oops.

Washington Post reporters Philip Rucker and Carol D. Leonnig have a new book coming out called “A Very Stable Genius” revealing more details about the dysfunctional catastrophe that is the Trump administration. As the title suggests, Trump is dumber than dirt. Of course, we knew that.

Here are a few excerpts:

President Trump reveals himself as woefully uninformed about the basics of geography, incorrectly telling Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, “It’s not like you’ve got China on your border.” He toys with awarding himself the Medal of Freedom.

And, according to a new book by Washington Post reporters Philip Rucker and Carol D. Leonnig, Trump does not seem to grasp the fundamental history surrounding the attack on Pearl Harbor.

“Hey, John, what’s this all about? What’s this a tour of?” Trump asks his then-Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, as the men prepare to take a private tour of the USS Arizona Memorial, which commemorates the December 1941 Japanese surprise attack in the Pacific that pulled the United States into World War II.

“Trump had heard the phrase ‘Pearl Harbor’ and appeared to understand that he was visiting the scene of a historic battle, but he did not seem to know much else,” write the authors, later quoting a former senior White House adviser who concludes: “He was at times dangerously uninformed.” […]

Ya think? The book apparently goes deeply into Trump and foreign policy which is what interests me the most.:

Early in his administration, for instance, Trump is eager to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin — so much so, the authors write, “that during the transition he interrupts an interview with one of his secretary of state candidates” to inquire about his pressing desire: “When can I meet Putin? Can I meet with him before the inaugural ceremony?” he asks.

After the two leaders meet face-to-face for the first time — 168 days into his presidency at the Group of 20 summit in Hamburg — Trump promptly declares himself a Russia expert… “Tillerson’s years of negotiating with Putin and studying his moves on the chessboard were suddenly irrelevant,” the duo writes. “ ‘I have had a two-hour meeting with Putin,’ Trump told Tillerson. ‘That’s all I need to know. . . . I’ve sized it all up. I’ve got it.’ ”

I wonder why he was so anxious to meet with Putin in person? Yeah, I know …

And get a load of this quote:

“It’s just so unfair that American companies aren’t allowed to pay bribes to get business overseas,” Trump says, according to the book. “We’re going to change that.”

And this, of course:

At one point, after the department blocks the release of what the president believes was a pro-Trump memo, he calls Kelly ranting. “ ‘This is my Justice Department. They are supposed to be my people,’ Trump told Kelly,” the authors write. “ ‘This is the ‘Deep State.’ . . . Mueller’s all over it.’ ”

And this tracks with what we all have heard before about his reading and comprehension skills:

Some details are more harmless than disconcerting. Early in his presidency, Trump agrees to participate in an HBO documentary that features judges and lawmakers — as well as all the living presidents — reading aloud from the Constitution. But Trump struggles and stumbles over the text, blaming others in the room for his mistakes and griping, “It’s like a foreign language.”

It goes on to describe the failed attempts by various former members of the administration to remove Ivanka and Jared,and Trump abusive behavior toward Kirstjen neilson, at last partially because he disdains her for being only 5’4″ I’m not kidding.

And this quote is a doozy. After the photo of Rob Porter’s ex-wife with a black eye surfaces, Trump said, “Maybe Holderness purposefully ran into a refrigerator to give herself bruises and try to get money out of Porter?”

The new information is interesting, and further fills out the story we already know about this chaotic, incompetent White House. But the most important aspects of all these revelations are the real-world consequences. Here’s just one example of how this ignoramus has single-handedly changed the way the world deals with America.

After that meeting with Modi where Trump made it clear that he didn’t have the slightest clue about India’s relationship with China, not even the fact that it shares a border, After that meeting, an aide told the authors, “ ‘the Indians took a step back’ in their diplomatic relations with the United States.”

Here are the managers. Obviously, the case will be run by Schiff and Nadler but I’m a little bit surprised not to see Raskin and Swalwell on the team. But in the end it doesn’t matter. I’m sure they will be on the cable news shows during the trial and that may be where their talents are better placed.

Via Politico:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)

Schiff was the de facto leader of the impeachment inquiry and has, over the years, cemented his status as Public Enemy No. 1 for Trump and his allies. During the trial, Schiff, 59, a close Pelosi ally and former federal prosecutor who earned his law degree from Harvard Law School, could be afforded an open-ended soliloquy to outline the president’s alleged misconduct. Giving Trump’s political nemesis an uninterrupted stage on the Senate floor could test the notoriously mercurial president’s patience as he vacillates between a desire for a quick, dismissive trial and a robust one that includes a slate of his hand-picked witnesses. Trump has even mused about calling Schiff himself as a witness, though it’s highly unlikely that Senate Republicans would agree to such a move. Pelosi said Schiff will serve as the lead manager.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.)

Nadler, a vocal Bill Clinton defender when the House impeached him in 1998, earned his spot atop the Judiciary panel in part based on a pitch that he has the constitutional know-how to lead a potential impeachment of the president. His committee’s efforts to pursue special counsel Robert Mueller’s evidence largely receded into the background while Schiff’s panel led the Ukraine probe — but the Judiciary Committee returned to the spotlight when it came time to draft articles of impeachment. The panel also issued lengthy reports about the constitutional underpinnings of the case against Trump, which padded Congress’ thin precedent on the issue. The 72-year-old Nadler, a Fordham Law School graduate, will likely buttress Schiff’s presentation of facts by laying out the reason Trump’s alleged offenses warrant removal from office.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)

Lofgren has more impeachment-related experience than perhaps any lawmaker in Washington. She was a staffer for the Judiciary Committee during the impeachment inquiry into Richard Nixon, and was a member of the panel during Bill Clinton’s impeachment in 1998. She ran for chair of the Judiciary Committee ahead of the swearing-in of the new Congress in 2019, but lost the race to Nadler. Lofgren, 72, was first elected in 1994 and got her law degree from Santa Clara University.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.)

Jeffries, 49, has quickly risen through the ranks since his election to the House in 2012, and he has been floated as a future House speaker. Jeffries, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, was chosen as the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus after his party took control of the chamber in the 2018 midterm elections. He has stood out in committee hearings and on cable television as a vocal critic of Trump — and a forceful Pelosi ally and defender. While dozens of House Democrats were announcing their support for an impeachment inquiry last summer, Jeffries remained aligned with the speaker, who was resisting an inquiry until the Ukraine scandal blew up. He got his law degree from New York University.

Rep. Val Demings (D-Fla.)

While she isn’t a lawyer, Demings, 62, has an extensive background in law enforcement and was a standout during the impeachment hearings. Demings, the former Orlando police chief, is one of just two Democrats who sits on both the Intelligence and Judiciary committees, giving her a uniquely prevalent role during the House’s two-part impeachment process. She also brings geographic, racial and gender diversity to the lineup of impeachment managers — a key priority for Pelosi.

Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.)

Crow, 40, was a surprise choice, but Pelosi has leaned heavily on the so-called “national security freshmen” in the Democratic Caucus during her deliberations for the impeachment process. Crow, serving in his first term, doesn’t sit on any of the committees charged with investigating Trump. But he is a former Army captain who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and he received his law degree at the University of Denver. He was one of seven national security-oriented freshman lawmakers who wrote an op-ed in September calling for an impeachment inquiry after the Ukraine scandal came to light. He serves on the House Armed Services Committee.

Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas)

Garcia, 69, was also an unexpected selection to be an impeachment manager, but she serves on the Judiciary Committee and is a former municipal judge in Houston. Garcia, a freshman lawmaker, brings racial, gender and geographic diversity to the lineup of impeachment managers. She received her law degree from Texas Southern University. Her district covers much of Houston, where she also served as the city’s controller.

There is a lot going on right now, what with impeachment and presidential primaries and possible war in the Middle East. Every day in the Trump era feels like a month. It seems as if things may be coming to a head as we launch into what I fervently hope will be the last year of this bizarre and disturbing political ordeal.

Nonetheless, as overwhelming an experience as it is to deal with what happens here every day, I can’t help but think that looking back we will see that we were actually fiddling while Australia burned.

The epic fires that have been ravaging that country for the past several months are a screaming warning to all of us about the effects of the global climate crisis. For the most part, we’re carrying on as if it’s just another one-off disaster. It is not. These extremely high temperatures and the fires and devastation they cause are becoming more and more common. And we know why. We just can’t seem to get the right people to take it seriously.

It is horrifying to see the toll these massive fires are taking on the countryside and even more heartbreaking to see the footage of the animals that are being killed by fire or thirst or driven from their habitats. I can’t even bear to look at it anymore. It’s a living hell.

At this point, officials estimate that a billion animals have perished, a figure that excludes fish, frogs, bats and insects. They don’t even know how many species are now endangered or possibly extinct from this one epic event.

Australia is a particularly interesting case because it doesn’t actually contribute more than its share of greenhouse gases (unlike the U.S.). But it does add some deadly factors into the global mix that makes it culpable for climate change in a big way.

Australia is now the world’s biggest exporter of coal, and its government works hand in glove with other fossil-fuel nations to block global climate policy. As recently as December at the Madrid climate talks, the Australians were revealed to have cooked the books to hide increased emissions. Its government has been actively hostile to any policy to restrict the use of fossil fuels.

The current prime minister, Scott Morrison of the Liberal Party (which is decidedly not “liberal” in the American sense), has faced his personal Katrina this winter. He even pulled a George W. Bush and went on holiday to Hawaii as the country was going up in smoke last fall. He called in to a talk radio show from the Aloha State to proclaim, “I don’t hold a hose, mate, I don’t sit in a control room.” It did not go over well. He returned to an angry and upset populace:

Scott Morrison was abused in Cobargo today, when he was trying for a few marketing photos, so he did a runner #auspol #ausfires #ScottyFromMarketing pic.twitter.com/W39E2LDBI9

— Kangaroo Court of Australia – Shane Dowling (@Kangaroo_Court) January 2, 2020

Australian voters shouldn’t have been surprised. Morrison made his bones in politics with a harsh anti-immigrant program called “Operation Sovereign Borders” which cruelly turned boat people back from their shores. But he is really known for his deep, abiding loyalty to the coal lobby.

Back in 2017, the Guardian reported on this now-legendary moment:

Scott Morrison brought coal into the House of Representatives. A nice big hunk of black coal, kindly supplied by the Minerals Council of Australia.

“This is coal,” the treasurer said triumphantly, brandishing the trophy as if he’d just stumbled across an exotic species previously thought to be extinct.

“Don’t be afraid,” he said, soothingly, “don’t be scared.”

Morrison is a typical right-wing conservative who is in thrall to the energy sector of his country’s economy. But he’s a little different than most in that he’s also a fundamentalist Christian. (In that sense, his administration is more like what we might expect from a President Mike Pence or a President Mike Pompeo.)

This article in the Australian Monthly about Morrison’s religious beliefs shows yet another example of how fundamentalist theology informs the politics of many conservative Christians in powerful positions around the world:

Belief in Satan and the imminent return of Christ also helps explain the prime minister’s less-than-passionate response to the most pressing environmental issue of our time. It is not surprising that Pentecostal activism about climate change is non-existent — the end of the known world is not a matter for mere mortals to decide. When Morrison proudly showed off a piece of coal in parliament, there is no reason to doubt that he believed what he held in his hand was a gift from God. 

Morrison’s poll numbers are falling and he is unlikely to survive as prime minister. But it’s going to take something much more consequential to change Australian politics in this regard. It looks like that might even happen.

On Tuesday, it was reported that Rupert Murdoch’s son James and his wife Kathryn are taking on the climate denialism at News Corp, the family’s massive media empire. According to a longtime NewsCorp executive quoted in the Daily Beast, this is a serious challenge:

“They are pissing inside the tent and that’s unusual. It’s evidence of how high tensions are within the family over climate change. The majority of people who work here agree with James. We are hoping this may be the tipping point,” the exec said.

As Media Matters has reported, the Murdoch empire, which controls 60% of Australia’s media, has been pushing climate change denialism even in the midst of this monumental catastrophe. For instance:

News Corp columnist Andrew Bolt wrote in The Herald Sun: “True, the world has warmed slightly as it rebounds from the little ice age that stretched from 1300 to around 1870, but can we cool it on this panic? In that time of warming, life expectancy has shot up, world grain crops have set new records, and the death rate from extreme weather has been slashed by 99 percent.”

That kind of sophistry has led to the death of a billion animals.

As we know, Australia isn’t the only place where Murdoch is influential. Let’s hope James prevails. It could be one of the most significant contributions to the fight.

Indeed, this whole miserable story mirrors many of the political problems around the world, not least in the U.S. We too have apocalyptic extremists in high places in government and a leader who is in thrall to the fossil fuel industry. The New York Times reported on Tuesday that “among 20 of the most powerful people in government environment jobs, most have ties to the fossil fuel industry or have fought against the regulations they now are supposed to enforce.” We don’t even know the extent of the damage that’s being done.

The carnage Down Under should have awakened even the climate skeptics. The canary in the Australian coal mine is dead. But they won’t admit it. Only political muscle can change the direction in which we’re heading and it’s getting awfully late. Our planet doesn’t have time for any more clowns like Morrison and Trump.

My Salon column reprinted with permission

Tuesday’s document dump from the files of Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas left mouths agape.

Um holy sh*t. This certainly makes it sound like Parnas and co. were actively tracking Yovanovitch's movements. This could explain why Yovanovitch was moved out of Ukraine so quickly. https://t.co/4rBRB06ZGN pic.twitter.com/5Gc8WcGPih

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) January 14, 2020

The cache provides evidence that Parnas’s team(?) was tracking the movements and monitoring the electronics of then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch. Parnas remains under indictment on campaign finance charges. What remains is to confirm what it all means and how closely an impeached president is connected.

The documents Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) forwarded to House judiciary committee chair Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) also introduced a new character into the Donald Trump impeachment saga: Robert F. Hyde.

A Republican candidate for Congress in Connecticut’s 5th Congressional District and a Trump donor, Hyde appears to have had associates tracking Yovanovitch’s movements around Kiev, Daily Beast’s Betsy Swan reports:

Responding to Daily Beast’s request for comment, Hyde insulted House Intelligence chairman Schiff, writing, “Bull Schiff is a giant b*tch.” And: “Did Pelosi get drunk and lose the impeachment articles?” And: “Looks like Schiff wants to whistle blow me.”

“Schiff is a desperate turd playing with this Lev guy,” Hyde tweeted late last night about the man to whom he’d been texting reports from a “private security” team on Yovanovitch’s whereabouts, asking what they should do about her, and how much it would pay.

“There is no evidence that Mr. Parnas participated, agreed, paid money or took any other steps in furtherance of Mr. Hyde’s proposals,” his attorney, Joseph A. Bondy, said in a statement.

Known previously for a vulgar, sexist tweet (since removed) aimed at Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Hyde has donated more than $56,000 to Republican campaign coffers since late 2016, the Hartford Courant reports. The Connecticut Republican Party announced last week that owing to his “vile comments on Twitter,” it would return $750 received from Hyde.

The Courant provides additional color on Hyde:

Anyone associated with the Trump administration by now has a serious credibility problem. It’s not clear how seriously we can take the kind of cartoon villains Trump collects. Nevertheless, it is also hard to believe anything is beyond him/them.

“As far back as I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster,” Henry Hill says at the beginning of Goodfellas. “To me, being a gangster was better than being President of the United States.”  Donald Trump thought, why not both?

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide election mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.

I have always felt that was the most chilling part of the Trump-Zelensky call. The president of the United States was talking to another world leader saying that the former American ambassador to his country was going to “go through some things.” My God.

It reminded me of this:

Check out the exchange between some weird wingnut Trump henchman who’s running for congress named Robert Hyde and Lev Parnas. Apparently Hyde was having Yovanovich followed and seems to have been inquiring about taking steps to shut her up!

Parnas also received messages from a man named Robert F. Hyde who appeared to be describing surveillance of Yovanovitch and referred to her as a “bitch.” Hyde is now running for a U.S. House seat in Connecticut.

After texting about the ambassador, Hyde gave Parnas location updates over the course of a week. In one text, Hyde wrote: “She’s talked to three people. Her phone is off. Her computer is off.” He said she was under heavy security and “we have a person inside.”

Hyde at one point texted Parnas that ”they are willing to help if we/you would like a price,” and “guess you can do anything in Ukraine with money … is what I was told.”

Here’s that last part

It sounds like he was asking if she could be kidnapped or killed.

Or, as Trump said in his call to Zelensky “she’s going to go through some things…”

Recall Yovanovitch’s testimony from November 15th when she relayed that she’d been told to leave the country immediately:

“She said, ‘I don’t know, but this is about your security. You need to come home immediately. ‘You need to come home on the next plane.’ And I said, ‘Physical security? I mean, is there something going on here in the Ukraine?'”

What did the State Department know about this stuff? What had this person been told?

This guy Hyde is a new character in this saga and he seems like a lovely fellow: He wrote the following tweet as Yovanovich was testifying:

He's cleaning his account, so here's a screenshot for posterity: pic.twitter.com/rdDyU0MNxV

— Buffy's Blog (@BuffyBlogs) January 15, 2020

It looks as though he and the president are golfing buds:

This president and his henchmen are gangsters. And that is not a figure of speech.

There is going to be LOT more about this, I’m sure.

More Ukrainian shoes have just dropped. Good old Lev shared some interesting items with the House investigators. And they are planning to use them in the trial.

Talking Points Memo:

The document dump opens with a handwritten note on a Ritz-Carlton Vienna-branded notepad. “Get Zalensky (sic) to Announce that the Biden case will be investigated,” the note reads. Another note on a Ritz Carlton Vienna notepad appears to relate to Parnas’ engagement as an “interpreter” for Dmytro Firtash, the Ukrainian gas billionaire. The note contemplates hiring a “lobbiest,” naming two lobbyists as possible options.

The release includes a number of previously unseen documents, including a May 10 letter from Giuliani to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, asking for a meeting with the then-incoming leader as “private counsel to President Donald J. Trump.” In the letter, Giuliani asks that Zelensky meet with him and Victoria Toensing, an attorney for Ukrainian oligarch Dmytro Firtash and frequent defender of the President on TV.

Parnas’ texts also show that Parnas restarted communication with Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky in September 2019. It’s not clear what the pair discussed; the texts show Kolomoisky telling Parnas “there’s news,” while the Giuliani associated replies that he will call the oligarch later.

Giuliani later met with a series of Kolomoisky’s associates while visiting Kyiv in December 2019. Parnas’s texts have not been corroborated by any other source. Giuliani has declined to comply with House demands for relevant information.

[…]

The texts also show communications between Parnas and former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko. In one March 22 message – sent after The Hill columnist John Solomon began publishing interviews with Lutsenko in which he disparaged Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and the Bidens – Lutsenko tells Parnas “it’s just that if you don’t make a decision about Madam, you’re bringing into doubt all of my allegations. Including about B.”

Lutsenko has repeatedly referred to Yovanovitch as “Madam Yovanovitch,” while Lutsenko references the companies “Burisma” and “seneca” in the same exchange – both of which are central to the conspiracy theories against the Bidens.

There’s more and we don’t know if any of it has been independently authenticated aside from the fact that the House Democrats released them so it’s likely they have some good reasons to believe they are real.

These are just the latest new documents to be released since the House voted out articles of impeachments. There were all those emails released under FOIA and the reports about Russian money changing hands. Those Ukrainian shoes are starting to pile up.