"... to deny now and clean it up later (e.g.: I didn’t tell Comey to drop the Flynn investigation, but even if I had done so it would have been appropriate... ). In politics, you’re apt to be safe with this sort of thing — if the ultimate clean-up is plausible, people tend to forget the original dissembling. But in a courtroom, or an interview with prosecutors and FBI agents, a false denial or even a bumbling misstatement can get you indicted. Trump is litigious and cocky. He has been in lots of lawsuits and has taken the measure of lots of lawyers. He may be very confident that he can handle an interview. He may be certain he has not colluded with Russia and thus convinced there’s no need to worry. Trust me, though: He has not been sweated before like he would be in a special-counsel interview...."
From "Donald Trump Should Refuse a Mueller Interview" by Andrew McCarthy (National Review).
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
To live freely in writing...
Support the Althouse blog by doing your Amazon shopping going in through the Althouse Amazon link.
Amazon
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Support this blog with PayPal
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
Posts
Blog Archive
-
►
2024
(2669)
- 11/17 (57)
- 11/10 (52)
- 11/03 (62)
- 10/27 (62)
- 10/20 (49)
- 10/13 (49)
- 10/06 (59)
- 09/29 (58)
- 09/22 (62)
- 09/15 (52)
- 09/08 (58)
- 09/01 (56)
- 08/25 (51)
- 08/18 (57)
- 08/11 (54)
- 08/04 (64)
- 07/28 (60)
- 07/21 (75)
- 07/14 (69)
- 07/07 (63)
- 06/30 (49)
- 06/23 (68)
- 06/16 (58)
- 06/09 (61)
- 06/02 (59)
- 05/26 (56)
- 05/19 (54)
- 05/12 (53)
- 05/05 (56)
- 04/28 (65)
- 04/21 (57)
- 04/14 (68)
- 04/07 (56)
- 03/31 (55)
- 03/24 (56)
- 03/17 (59)
- 03/10 (52)
- 03/03 (63)
- 02/25 (59)
- 02/18 (45)
- 02/11 (60)
- 02/04 (56)
- 01/28 (50)
- 01/21 (64)
- 01/14 (62)
- 01/07 (59)
-
►
2023
(3115)
- 12/31 (58)
- 12/24 (43)
- 12/17 (55)
- 12/10 (66)
- 12/03 (57)
- 11/26 (56)
- 11/19 (44)
- 11/12 (55)
- 11/05 (69)
- 10/29 (63)
- 10/22 (54)
- 10/15 (62)
- 10/08 (69)
- 10/01 (70)
- 09/24 (55)
- 09/17 (49)
- 09/10 (62)
- 09/03 (54)
- 08/27 (54)
- 08/20 (45)
- 08/13 (50)
- 08/06 (54)
- 07/30 (62)
- 07/23 (50)
- 07/16 (49)
- 07/09 (59)
- 07/02 (61)
- 06/25 (63)
- 06/18 (53)
- 06/11 (63)
- 06/04 (67)
- 05/28 (53)
- 05/21 (60)
- 05/14 (66)
- 05/07 (66)
- 04/30 (67)
- 04/23 (54)
- 04/16 (55)
- 04/09 (64)
- 04/02 (63)
- 03/26 (64)
- 03/19 (76)
- 03/12 (60)
- 03/05 (52)
- 02/26 (63)
- 02/19 (49)
- 02/12 (66)
- 02/05 (63)
- 01/29 (60)
- 01/22 (57)
- 01/15 (60)
- 01/08 (66)
- 01/01 (60)
-
►
2022
(3553)
- 12/25 (55)
- 12/18 (56)
- 12/11 (73)
- 12/04 (71)
- 11/27 (76)
- 11/20 (76)
- 11/13 (80)
- 11/06 (71)
- 10/30 (72)
- 10/23 (60)
- 10/16 (61)
- 10/09 (63)
- 10/02 (70)
- 09/25 (56)
- 09/18 (62)
- 09/11 (64)
- 09/04 (76)
- 08/28 (75)
- 08/21 (63)
- 08/14 (71)
- 08/07 (76)
- 07/31 (74)
- 07/24 (71)
- 07/17 (66)
- 07/10 (67)
- 07/03 (70)
- 06/26 (73)
- 06/19 (79)
- 06/12 (74)
- 06/05 (87)
- 05/29 (54)
- 05/22 (66)
- 05/15 (72)
- 05/08 (76)
- 05/01 (62)
- 04/24 (62)
- 04/17 (70)
- 04/10 (69)
- 04/03 (82)
- 03/27 (67)
- 03/20 (64)
- 03/13 (64)
- 03/06 (79)
- 02/27 (64)
- 02/20 (66)
- 02/13 (68)
- 02/06 (59)
- 01/30 (70)
- 01/23 (58)
- 01/16 (61)
- 01/09 (64)
- 01/02 (68)
-
►
2021
(3054)
- 12/26 (55)
- 12/19 (52)
- 12/12 (53)
- 12/05 (51)
- 11/28 (44)
- 11/21 (62)
- 11/14 (54)
- 11/07 (54)
- 10/31 (65)
- 10/24 (73)
- 10/17 (61)
- 10/10 (62)
- 10/03 (64)
- 09/26 (59)
- 09/19 (48)
- 09/12 (53)
- 09/05 (60)
- 08/29 (76)
- 08/22 (67)
- 08/15 (66)
- 08/08 (53)
- 08/01 (55)
- 07/25 (56)
- 07/18 (58)
- 07/11 (59)
- 07/04 (52)
- 06/27 (57)
- 06/20 (57)
- 06/13 (65)
- 06/06 (64)
- 05/30 (50)
- 05/23 (64)
- 05/16 (56)
- 05/09 (65)
- 05/02 (63)
- 04/25 (62)
- 04/18 (56)
- 04/11 (64)
- 04/04 (71)
- 03/28 (68)
- 03/21 (57)
- 03/14 (66)
- 03/07 (60)
- 02/28 (53)
- 02/21 (56)
- 02/14 (40)
- 02/07 (62)
- 01/31 (53)
- 01/24 (61)
- 01/17 (56)
- 01/10 (58)
- 01/03 (58)
-
►
2020
(3644)
- 12/27 (49)
- 12/20 (40)
- 12/13 (56)
- 12/06 (61)
- 11/29 (57)
- 11/22 (59)
- 11/15 (57)
- 11/08 (71)
- 11/01 (76)
- 10/25 (68)
- 10/18 (69)
- 10/11 (64)
- 10/04 (70)
- 09/27 (71)
- 09/20 (64)
- 09/13 (61)
- 09/06 (70)
- 08/30 (72)
- 08/23 (78)
- 08/16 (71)
- 08/09 (50)
- 08/02 (76)
- 07/26 (62)
- 07/19 (70)
- 07/12 (64)
- 07/05 (74)
- 06/28 (84)
- 06/21 (88)
- 06/14 (73)
- 06/07 (91)
- 05/31 (99)
- 05/24 (82)
- 05/17 (76)
- 05/10 (93)
- 05/03 (78)
- 04/26 (72)
- 04/19 (63)
- 04/12 (71)
- 04/05 (74)
- 03/29 (79)
- 03/22 (64)
- 03/15 (83)
- 03/08 (75)
- 03/01 (78)
- 02/23 (70)
- 02/16 (69)
- 02/09 (67)
- 02/02 (81)
- 01/26 (68)
- 01/19 (61)
- 01/12 (63)
- 01/05 (62)
-
►
2019
(3453)
- 12/29 (81)
- 12/22 (51)
- 12/15 (74)
- 12/08 (73)
- 12/01 (66)
- 11/24 (74)
- 11/17 (77)
- 11/10 (68)
- 11/03 (69)
- 10/27 (83)
- 10/20 (83)
- 10/13 (92)
- 10/06 (65)
- 09/29 (49)
- 09/22 (60)
- 09/15 (68)
- 09/08 (67)
- 09/01 (54)
- 08/25 (64)
- 08/18 (61)
- 08/11 (56)
- 08/04 (57)
- 07/28 (53)
- 07/21 (68)
- 07/14 (61)
- 07/07 (60)
- 06/30 (65)
- 06/23 (67)
- 06/16 (54)
- 06/09 (42)
- 06/02 (64)
- 05/26 (62)
- 05/19 (60)
- 05/12 (64)
- 05/05 (77)
- 04/28 (78)
- 04/21 (43)
- 04/14 (58)
- 04/07 (67)
- 03/31 (75)
- 03/24 (65)
- 03/17 (68)
- 03/10 (70)
- 03/03 (71)
- 02/24 (62)
- 02/17 (88)
- 02/10 (72)
- 02/03 (55)
- 01/27 (68)
- 01/20 (72)
- 01/13 (76)
- 01/06 (76)
-
▼
2018
(3410)
- 12/30 (59)
- 12/23 (45)
- 12/16 (76)
- 12/09 (83)
- 12/02 (69)
- 11/25 (68)
- 11/18 (61)
- 11/11 (61)
- 11/04 (68)
- 10/28 (76)
- 10/21 (71)
- 10/14 (53)
- 10/07 (53)
- 09/30 (61)
- 09/23 (61)
- 09/16 (63)
- 09/09 (57)
- 09/02 (55)
- 08/26 (54)
- 08/19 (63)
- 08/12 (59)
- 08/05 (69)
- 07/29 (64)
- 07/22 (60)
- 07/15 (69)
- 07/08 (67)
- 07/01 (67)
- 06/24 (62)
- 06/17 (68)
- 06/10 (65)
- 06/03 (65)
- 05/27 (54)
- 05/20 (63)
- 05/13 (53)
- 05/06 (78)
- 04/29 (74)
- 04/22 (68)
- 04/15 (71)
- 04/08 (53)
- 04/01 (76)
- 03/25 (64)
- 03/18 (78)
- 03/11 (67)
- 03/04 (71)
- 02/25 (66)
- 02/18 (70)
- 02/11 (64)
- 02/04 (68)
- 01/28 (80)
- 01/21 (73)
- 01/14 (65)
- 01/07 (82)
-
►
2017
(3818)
- 12/31 (85)
- 12/24 (66)
- 12/17 (75)
- 12/10 (74)
- 12/03 (77)
- 11/26 (75)
- 11/19 (58)
- 11/12 (70)
- 11/05 (75)
- 10/29 (67)
- 10/22 (76)
- 10/15 (72)
- 10/08 (70)
- 10/01 (63)
- 09/24 (59)
- 09/17 (63)
- 09/10 (65)
- 09/03 (66)
- 08/27 (69)
- 08/20 (59)
- 08/13 (66)
- 08/06 (73)
- 07/30 (89)
- 07/23 (79)
- 07/16 (81)
- 07/09 (75)
- 07/02 (64)
- 06/25 (83)
- 06/18 (70)
- 06/11 (67)
- 06/04 (74)
- 05/28 (75)
- 05/21 (77)
- 05/14 (81)
- 05/07 (89)
- 04/30 (83)
- 04/23 (80)
- 04/16 (71)
- 04/09 (78)
- 04/02 (74)
- 03/26 (83)
- 03/19 (74)
- 03/12 (77)
- 03/05 (60)
- 02/26 (49)
- 02/19 (72)
- 02/12 (74)
- 02/05 (88)
- 01/29 (91)
- 01/22 (82)
- 01/15 (47)
- 01/08 (60)
- 01/01 (48)
-
►
2016
(3557)
- 12/25 (61)
- 12/18 (62)
- 12/11 (59)
- 12/04 (60)
- 11/27 (74)
- 11/20 (68)
- 11/13 (79)
- 11/06 (62)
- 10/30 (88)
- 10/23 (75)
- 10/16 (68)
- 10/09 (58)
- 10/02 (72)
- 09/25 (70)
- 09/18 (70)
- 09/11 (79)
- 09/04 (64)
- 08/28 (53)
- 08/21 (62)
- 08/14 (70)
- 08/07 (67)
- 07/31 (68)
- 07/24 (57)
- 07/17 (71)
- 07/10 (53)
- 07/03 (53)
- 06/26 (80)
- 06/19 (81)
- 06/12 (73)
- 06/05 (65)
- 05/29 (74)
- 05/22 (67)
- 05/15 (70)
- 05/08 (89)
- 05/01 (79)
- 04/24 (67)
- 04/17 (59)
- 04/10 (61)
- 04/03 (52)
- 03/27 (68)
- 03/20 (76)
- 03/13 (68)
- 03/06 (81)
- 02/28 (65)
- 02/21 (69)
- 02/14 (70)
- 02/07 (75)
- 01/31 (68)
- 01/24 (59)
- 01/17 (69)
- 01/10 (80)
- 01/03 (69)
-
►
2015
(3788)
- 12/27 (71)
- 12/20 (68)
- 12/13 (81)
- 12/06 (70)
- 11/29 (78)
- 11/22 (58)
- 11/15 (76)
- 11/08 (84)
- 11/01 (73)
- 10/25 (74)
- 10/18 (65)
- 10/11 (75)
- 10/04 (87)
- 09/27 (59)
- 09/20 (71)
- 09/13 (55)
- 09/06 (63)
- 08/30 (72)
- 08/23 (70)
- 08/16 (70)
- 08/09 (65)
- 08/02 (65)
- 07/26 (55)
- 07/19 (66)
- 07/12 (69)
- 07/05 (62)
- 06/28 (83)
- 06/21 (79)
- 06/14 (69)
- 06/07 (81)
- 05/31 (84)
- 05/24 (78)
- 05/17 (90)
- 05/10 (85)
- 05/03 (86)
- 04/26 (77)
- 04/19 (78)
- 04/12 (63)
- 04/05 (63)
- 03/29 (79)
- 03/22 (73)
- 03/15 (63)
- 03/08 (79)
- 03/01 (66)
- 02/22 (82)
- 02/15 (78)
- 02/08 (67)
- 02/01 (84)
- 01/25 (79)
- 01/18 (63)
- 01/11 (87)
- 01/04 (70)
-
►
2014
(3825)
- 12/28 (62)
- 12/21 (44)
- 12/14 (78)
- 12/07 (97)
- 11/30 (84)
- 11/23 (82)
- 11/16 (70)
- 11/09 (71)
- 11/02 (91)
- 10/26 (79)
- 10/19 (71)
- 10/12 (86)
- 10/05 (61)
- 09/28 (58)
- 09/21 (67)
- 09/14 (56)
- 09/07 (70)
- 08/31 (64)
- 08/24 (63)
- 08/17 (51)
- 08/10 (79)
- 08/03 (71)
- 07/27 (75)
- 07/20 (81)
- 07/13 (75)
- 07/06 (67)
- 06/29 (41)
- 06/22 (80)
- 06/15 (78)
- 06/08 (91)
- 06/01 (59)
- 05/25 (58)
- 05/18 (90)
- 05/11 (73)
- 05/04 (72)
- 04/27 (72)
- 04/20 (73)
- 04/13 (82)
- 04/06 (81)
- 03/30 (77)
- 03/23 (66)
- 03/16 (56)
- 03/09 (77)
- 03/02 (90)
- 02/23 (73)
- 02/16 (91)
- 02/09 (77)
- 02/02 (91)
- 01/26 (86)
- 01/19 (81)
- 01/12 (90)
- 01/05 (67)
-
►
2013
(5117)
- 12/29 (83)
- 12/22 (82)
- 12/15 (51)
- 12/08 (95)
- 12/01 (87)
- 11/24 (79)
- 11/17 (71)
- 11/10 (94)
- 11/03 (86)
- 10/27 (73)
- 10/20 (88)
- 10/13 (79)
- 10/06 (65)
- 09/29 (65)
- 09/22 (78)
- 09/15 (81)
- 09/08 (77)
- 09/01 (79)
- 08/25 (79)
- 08/18 (96)
- 08/11 (64)
- 08/04 (82)
- 07/28 (84)
- 07/21 (110)
- 07/14 (112)
- 07/07 (91)
- 06/30 (101)
- 06/23 (101)
- 06/16 (106)
- 06/09 (133)
- 06/02 (111)
- 05/26 (86)
- 05/19 (126)
- 05/12 (125)
- 05/05 (133)
- 04/28 (103)
- 04/21 (126)
- 04/14 (98)
- 04/07 (100)
- 03/31 (110)
- 03/24 (121)
- 03/17 (120)
- 03/10 (102)
- 03/03 (98)
- 02/24 (129)
- 02/17 (104)
- 02/10 (116)
- 02/03 (135)
- 01/27 (125)
- 01/20 (125)
- 01/13 (123)
- 01/06 (129)
-
►
2012
(4971)
- 12/30 (88)
- 12/23 (103)
- 12/16 (129)
- 12/09 (120)
- 12/02 (126)
- 11/25 (98)
- 11/18 (62)
- 11/11 (87)
- 11/04 (111)
- 10/28 (98)
- 10/21 (105)
- 10/14 (101)
- 10/07 (94)
- 09/30 (90)
- 09/23 (83)
- 09/16 (93)
- 09/09 (114)
- 09/02 (93)
- 08/26 (91)
- 08/19 (103)
- 08/12 (68)
- 08/05 (74)
- 07/29 (108)
- 07/22 (117)
- 07/15 (93)
- 07/08 (88)
- 07/01 (85)
- 06/24 (76)
- 06/17 (92)
- 06/10 (126)
- 06/03 (96)
- 05/27 (100)
- 05/20 (124)
- 05/13 (99)
- 05/06 (110)
- 04/29 (87)
- 04/22 (98)
- 04/15 (82)
- 04/08 (87)
- 04/01 (90)
- 03/25 (85)
- 03/18 (98)
- 03/11 (94)
- 03/04 (96)
- 02/26 (91)
- 02/19 (88)
- 02/12 (74)
- 02/05 (78)
- 01/29 (74)
- 01/22 (80)
- 01/15 (77)
- 01/08 (71)
- 01/01 (76)
-
►
2011
(4463)
- 12/25 (93)
- 12/18 (87)
- 12/11 (88)
- 12/04 (73)
- 11/27 (84)
- 11/20 (71)
- 11/13 (77)
- 11/06 (78)
- 10/30 (70)
- 10/23 (79)
- 10/16 (95)
- 10/09 (77)
- 10/02 (99)
- 09/25 (82)
- 09/18 (91)
- 09/11 (79)
- 09/04 (83)
- 08/28 (82)
- 08/21 (91)
- 08/14 (80)
- 08/07 (89)
- 07/31 (69)
- 07/24 (102)
- 07/17 (66)
- 07/10 (90)
- 07/03 (89)
- 06/26 (69)
- 06/19 (80)
- 06/12 (93)
- 06/05 (110)
- 05/29 (90)
- 05/22 (88)
- 05/15 (92)
- 05/08 (83)
- 05/01 (95)
- 04/24 (84)
- 04/17 (77)
- 04/10 (90)
- 04/03 (96)
- 03/27 (83)
- 03/20 (96)
- 03/13 (97)
- 03/06 (105)
- 02/27 (91)
- 02/20 (83)
- 02/13 (79)
- 02/06 (75)
- 01/30 (78)
- 01/23 (78)
- 01/16 (104)
- 01/09 (80)
- 01/02 (103)
-
►
2010
(3835)
- 12/26 (73)
- 12/19 (72)
- 12/12 (96)
- 12/05 (76)
- 11/28 (77)
- 11/21 (75)
- 11/14 (92)
- 11/07 (82)
- 10/31 (84)
- 10/24 (64)
- 10/17 (79)
- 10/10 (84)
- 10/03 (88)
- 09/26 (77)
- 09/19 (69)
- 09/12 (73)
- 09/05 (62)
- 08/29 (67)
- 08/22 (65)
- 08/15 (82)
- 08/08 (67)
- 08/01 (83)
- 07/25 (67)
- 07/18 (76)
- 07/11 (73)
- 07/04 (60)
- 06/27 (86)
- 06/20 (66)
- 06/13 (57)
- 06/06 (53)
- 05/30 (79)
- 05/23 (88)
- 05/16 (85)
- 05/09 (81)
- 05/02 (81)
- 04/25 (71)
- 04/18 (61)
- 04/11 (80)
- 04/04 (62)
- 03/28 (64)
- 03/21 (66)
- 03/14 (49)
- 03/07 (71)
- 02/28 (76)
- 02/21 (66)
- 02/14 (82)
- 02/07 (61)
- 01/31 (79)
- 01/24 (87)
- 01/17 (80)
- 01/10 (72)
- 01/03 (69)
-
►
2009
(3716)
- 12/27 (58)
- 12/20 (53)
- 12/13 (84)
- 12/06 (77)
- 11/29 (78)
- 11/22 (50)
- 11/15 (83)
- 11/08 (78)
- 11/01 (74)
- 10/25 (85)
- 10/18 (69)
- 10/11 (63)
- 10/04 (91)
- 09/27 (86)
- 09/20 (82)
- 09/13 (60)
- 09/06 (64)
- 08/30 (81)
- 08/23 (82)
- 08/16 (72)
- 08/09 (70)
- 08/02 (45)
- 07/26 (76)
- 07/19 (71)
- 07/12 (42)
- 07/05 (57)
- 06/28 (105)
- 06/21 (86)
- 06/14 (71)
- 06/07 (83)
- 05/31 (83)
- 05/24 (57)
- 05/17 (74)
- 05/10 (83)
- 05/03 (57)
- 04/26 (70)
- 04/19 (67)
- 04/12 (82)
- 04/05 (63)
- 03/29 (62)
- 03/22 (67)
- 03/15 (68)
- 03/08 (50)
- 03/01 (60)
- 02/22 (53)
- 02/15 (55)
- 02/08 (68)
- 02/01 (89)
- 01/25 (81)
- 01/18 (83)
- 01/11 (91)
- 01/04 (77)
-
►
2008
(3407)
- 12/28 (75)
- 12/21 (44)
- 12/14 (63)
- 12/07 (78)
- 11/30 (87)
- 11/23 (68)
- 11/16 (75)
- 11/09 (85)
- 11/02 (81)
- 10/26 (79)
- 10/19 (86)
- 10/12 (70)
- 10/05 (66)
- 09/28 (76)
- 09/21 (84)
- 09/14 (75)
- 09/07 (73)
- 08/31 (81)
- 08/24 (75)
- 08/17 (73)
- 08/10 (73)
- 08/03 (56)
- 07/27 (57)
- 07/20 (55)
- 07/13 (42)
- 07/06 (47)
- 06/29 (58)
- 06/22 (62)
- 06/15 (53)
- 06/08 (65)
- 06/01 (53)
- 05/25 (45)
- 05/18 (62)
- 05/11 (73)
- 05/04 (69)
- 04/27 (69)
- 04/20 (68)
- 04/13 (64)
- 04/06 (63)
- 03/30 (49)
- 03/23 (54)
- 03/16 (56)
- 03/09 (72)
- 03/02 (70)
- 02/24 (61)
- 02/17 (62)
- 02/10 (68)
- 02/03 (60)
- 01/27 (58)
- 01/20 (51)
- 01/13 (49)
- 01/06 (69)
-
►
2007
(2915)
- 12/30 (67)
- 12/23 (50)
- 12/16 (51)
- 12/09 (51)
- 12/02 (50)
- 11/25 (51)
- 11/18 (57)
- 11/11 (64)
- 11/04 (68)
- 10/28 (57)
- 10/21 (55)
- 10/14 (57)
- 10/07 (52)
- 09/30 (60)
- 09/23 (66)
- 09/16 (39)
- 09/09 (61)
- 09/02 (65)
- 08/26 (54)
- 08/19 (55)
- 08/12 (58)
- 08/05 (59)
- 07/29 (53)
- 07/22 (58)
- 07/15 (51)
- 07/08 (63)
- 07/01 (66)
- 06/24 (54)
- 06/17 (45)
- 06/10 (55)
- 06/03 (69)
- 05/27 (60)
- 05/20 (68)
- 05/13 (72)
- 05/06 (56)
- 04/29 (49)
- 04/22 (52)
- 04/15 (52)
- 04/08 (50)
- 04/01 (41)
- 03/25 (50)
- 03/18 (50)
- 03/11 (62)
- 03/04 (54)
- 02/25 (47)
- 02/18 (53)
- 02/11 (50)
- 02/04 (61)
- 01/28 (65)
- 01/21 (50)
- 01/14 (51)
- 01/07 (61)
-
►
2006
(2745)
- 12/31 (53)
- 12/24 (55)
- 12/17 (54)
- 12/10 (65)
- 12/03 (82)
- 11/26 (50)
- 11/19 (54)
- 11/12 (58)
- 11/05 (65)
- 10/29 (56)
- 10/22 (64)
- 10/15 (63)
- 10/08 (55)
- 10/01 (60)
- 09/24 (59)
- 09/17 (43)
- 09/10 (36)
- 09/03 (56)
- 08/27 (54)
- 08/20 (47)
- 08/13 (54)
- 08/06 (51)
- 07/30 (47)
- 07/23 (45)
- 07/16 (42)
- 07/09 (60)
- 07/02 (46)
- 06/25 (52)
- 06/18 (50)
- 06/11 (55)
- 06/04 (54)
- 05/28 (41)
- 05/21 (54)
- 05/14 (47)
- 05/07 (63)
- 04/30 (52)
- 04/23 (40)
- 04/16 (38)
- 04/09 (54)
- 04/02 (48)
- 03/26 (52)
- 03/19 (45)
- 03/12 (47)
- 03/05 (49)
- 02/26 (46)
- 02/19 (50)
- 02/12 (43)
- 02/05 (47)
- 01/29 (56)
- 01/22 (45)
- 01/15 (44)
- 01/08 (44)
- 01/01 (55)
-
►
2005
(2920)
- 12/25 (56)
- 12/18 (49)
- 12/11 (67)
- 12/04 (73)
- 11/27 (62)
- 11/20 (65)
- 11/13 (67)
- 11/06 (68)
- 10/30 (64)
- 10/23 (64)
- 10/16 (68)
- 10/09 (61)
- 10/02 (75)
- 09/25 (59)
- 09/18 (58)
- 09/11 (54)
- 09/04 (57)
- 08/28 (82)
- 08/21 (58)
- 08/14 (67)
- 08/07 (61)
- 07/31 (54)
- 07/24 (62)
- 07/17 (70)
- 07/10 (59)
- 07/03 (65)
- 06/26 (78)
- 06/19 (53)
- 06/12 (54)
- 06/05 (44)
- 05/29 (51)
- 05/22 (53)
- 05/15 (34)
- 05/08 (38)
- 05/01 (61)
- 04/24 (55)
- 04/17 (55)
- 04/10 (63)
- 04/03 (61)
- 03/27 (51)
- 03/20 (42)
- 03/13 (57)
- 03/06 (45)
- 02/27 (48)
- 02/20 (44)
- 02/13 (36)
- 02/06 (50)
- 01/30 (50)
- 01/23 (37)
- 01/16 (29)
- 01/09 (41)
- 01/02 (45)
-
►
2004
(2035)
- 12/26 (48)
- 12/19 (41)
- 12/12 (46)
- 12/05 (47)
- 11/28 (53)
- 11/21 (45)
- 11/14 (46)
- 11/07 (60)
- 10/31 (48)
- 10/24 (45)
- 10/17 (60)
- 10/10 (37)
- 10/03 (42)
- 09/26 (37)
- 09/19 (46)
- 09/12 (30)
- 09/05 (40)
- 08/29 (43)
- 08/22 (39)
- 08/15 (27)
- 08/08 (36)
- 08/01 (32)
- 07/25 (43)
- 07/18 (28)
- 07/11 (35)
- 07/04 (34)
- 06/27 (31)
- 06/20 (35)
- 06/13 (35)
- 06/06 (21)
- 05/30 (32)
- 05/23 (40)
- 05/16 (35)
- 05/09 (46)
- 05/02 (52)
- 04/25 (52)
- 04/18 (45)
- 04/11 (36)
- 04/04 (37)
- 03/28 (31)
- 03/21 (40)
- 03/14 (33)
- 03/07 (36)
- 02/29 (41)
- 02/22 (31)
- 02/15 (33)
- 02/08 (43)
- 02/01 (33)
- 01/25 (43)
- 01/18 (56)
- 01/11 (30)
151 comments:
The beauty of Trump's personality is that he could tell Mueller to go pound sand and not be the least concerned with the media's reaction. Nor with the swamp, LLR's, Adam Schiffless, et al.
I think Trump’s original statement was that he would do the interview if his lawyers agreed. His lawyers are now telling him not to do the interview.
That was easy.
He has filed a lot of lawsuits and testified a lot of times, so I think he understands the process more then a standard politician. Personally I don't think he should testify because he doesn't have to,, but he has his ways of wiggling out of these things. If he does testify I think it should be done live on TV. I would watch that.
Trump won't do the interview because he will listen to his lawyers. He may even come out and say that his great lawyers, the best lawyers, have told him that submitting to an interview may get him in trouble because he has a habit of talking about things in the greatest way possible. If he says his lawyers are great and Mueller disagrees with him, he could be charged with giving a false statement, no matter how great his lawyers actually are.
Trump shouldn't talk to Mueller under oath. A bad idea that will cause him and the nation harm. Democrats need to get the fuck over themselves and accept that if America can survive eight years of a black liberation church, affirmative action confection, it can survive three more years of Trump. This blog's records are full of my dislike of Trump, but if he is forced out of office by legal chicanery, I am ready to take up arms. Vote him out in three years if you can't stand him. Otherwise, if you can't find that he did something as egregious as sell 20% of America's uranium to the Russians, shut the fuck up.
Andy McCarthy makes the useful distinction between the man and the office. Interrogating the President is not a trifling matter and we should not be eager to see it done, no matter how entertaining Trump might be in a televised cage fight with Mueller's team of legal trolls.
He has a way of dangling things and then snatching them away.
Probably a strategy behind this.
By the time Mueller gets an appointment he won't have the job anymore.
If he was smart he would be checking the punctuation on his report and closing the investigation.
If he were really smart, and he isn't, he would be writing up indictments for a bunch of his own people.
If he were courageous, he would be detailing in a report how the Hillary Campaign used Russian assets in an attempt to discredit her political opponent, and how the Obama administration used those same assets to spy on the Trump campaign.
Trump to Mueller: "Email me the questions, I'll get back to you. That is, assuming the emails don't get lost, deleted or bleach-bit".
No brainier. Don't do it.
He should ask MArtha Stewart who went to jail for lying about ... No crime.
BAS observes: He has filed a lot of lawsuits and testified a lot of times, so I think he understands the process more then a standard politician. Personally I don't think he should testify because he doesn't have to,, but he has his ways of wiggling out of these things. If he does testify I think it should be done live on TV. I would watch that.
Trump is slipperier than a greased pig. While I would enjoy watching the encounter, it's hard to believe his counsel would recommend it. Problem is, if he opts out, the media will be all about, 'He has something to hide'. This is tricky.
This is most importantly about our systems of government and not about Trump. Trump is an asshole and will get himself in trouble if he were to testify.
"A president of the United States should never be the subject of a criminal investigation, and should never be asked to provide testimony or evidence in a criminal investigation, in the absence of two things: solid evidence that a serious crime has been committed and a lack of any alternative means to acquire proof that is essential to the prosecution. There is a simple reason for this: The awesome responsibilities of the presidency are more significant to the nation than the outcome of any particular criminal case. There is an exception: When there is reasonable cause to believe the president is complicit in a serious criminal offense, and that he has evidence or knowledge that would be admissible and probative. Only in those circumstances should a president be subject to subpoena, and only then should he submit to questioning. Trump has a responsibility to the office to enforce that standard."
Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller will not ask President Trump any questions about how Trump and his campaign staff colluded with Russia to steal Democrats' e-mails and give them to Wikileaks in order to affect the USA's Presidential election in 2016.
Mueller knows that all that stuff is total bullshit. Furthermore, Mueller knew it from the moment he accepted the appointment to conduct this bogus, disgraceful "investigation".
Rather, Mueller will ask Trump questions about the firing of Mueller's BFF "Crazy Comey the Leaker".
Mueller and his BFF Comey both used to be FBI Directors. Mueller is angry that an FBI Director ever might be fired for a trivial, routine act such as leaking FBI secrets to favored journalists. Mueller himself taught Comey how to leak.
When Mueller was FBI Director, the FBI leaked to favored journalists -- most prominently Nicholas Kristof -- that the FBI was making great progress in its investigation of the anthrax poisoning. Furthermore, Mueller's FBI leaked that the culprit was Steven Hatfill. The FBI had Hatfill on the run. Very soon Hatfill would break under the pressure of the FBI's leaks and would do something stupid or would admit his guilt. That was the FBI's way of using leaks as a tool when Mueller was FBI Director.
And now FBI Comey has been fired merely because he too is a leaker.
Mueller wants to get at President Trump for firing Mueller's BFF Comey. That is why Mueller wants to interview President Trump.
How long has he been releasing his tax returns?
Since Trump is the obvious target by the swamp dwellers(aka the defendant), he is under no obligation to testify.
"He has something to hide." Even if he doesn't, he will be accused of something. The swamp has invested a lot of capital in this.
Yeah, Bill Clinton thought he could weasel his way through sworn testimony, too. And that was just with the B team representing Paula Jones. ("Is you is or is you ain't" my sex toy?) Pride goeth before a fall.
Damn is Chuck Todd biased.
Trump needs to tell Mueller to fuck-off. I believe this whole investigation has been an attempt to set up an obstruction of justice charge out of nothing. It is an attempted coup.
Now I'd be willing to change my mind but Mueller will have to show some evidence of a crime.
First show there was indeed Russian hacking. Then indict some Trump staffers for assisting the Russian hackers.
Once that part of the investigation is complete then come back and argue Trump was involved in the hacking or involved in the cover up of the hacking.
Then I'd be willing to change my opinion.
While I believe the president should not be above the law any more than any other person (cough Clinton cough), I also believe the president's job is too important to be interrupted every time somebody wants to go after him for something.
Interviewing the president should be done only when the crime is real, the evidence is solid, and the president can add colour or facts that are unavailable elsewhere. I see no reason to believe any of those conditions are are met in this case.
Tank said...He should ask MArtha Stewart who went to jail for lying about ... No crime.
Thanks to the Federal Government we all rested safely in our beds for five months.
Humperdink said...Trump to Mueller: "Email me the questions, I'll get back to you.
They should do it with tweeterings so people could watch in real-time.
First show there was indeed Russian hacking.
This is already been shown, you just refuse to believe it.
He should ask MArtha Stewart who went to jail for lying about ... No crime.
Lying to the FBI is a crime in itself. If you don't like that, get the law changed. And not being able to prove the underlying crime (and Martha Stewart was almost certainly guilty of insider trading) is different from saying there was no underlying crime.
It's not easy, having strong opinions while being unimportant.
And now FBI Comey has been fired merely because he too is a leaker.
I don't know where you found this alternative fact, but neither of the reasons given by the administration for firing Comey involved him being a leaker.
When Rod Rosenstein asked Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller to be the Special Counsel, both men already knew:
* Fusion GPS had done contract work for the FBI
* The contract work included searching NSA databases
* The FBI had used Fusion's dossier to apply for FISA warrants to wiretap members of Trump's campaign staff
Although the supposed purpose of appointing a Special Counsel is to satisfy the public that some important issue has been investigated in an objective, nonpartisan manner, that was not the purpose of either Rosenstein or Mueller. Their purpose was to whitewash the FBI.
Neither Rosenstein or Mueller gave a rat's ass that the investigation surely would be rejected by half of the public for being a disgraceful, partisan witch-hunt. Their own purpose would be served if the FBI's misdeeds would be covered up.
Problem is, if he opts out, the media will be all about, 'He has something to hide'. This is tricky.
And if this happens he has no one to blame but himself.
This is already been shown
No it hasn't. Crowdstrike is not an impartial investigator. NSA had low confidence in the Russian hacking claim. Podesta was phished and not hacked.
I have no problem believing Russia was hacking everybody they could. I have no problem believing Russia was trying to undermine the confidence in US elections and US institutions.
I also have no problem believing Russia took Hillary's bribe money and fed bullshit stories to Steele.
I have no problem believing Russia can't believe how good the results have been. But Russia and Hillary have worked well together in the past.
Nobody cares about the "reasons" Trump gave for firing Comey. As President, he had Article 2 authority to fire his ass under the Constitution.
Further, firing Comey didn't impede or obstruct any investigation. It proceeds apace, as we speak, despite the lack of any evidence of a crime.
To paraphrase Popehat, never, never, never talk to the feds. Especially when you know they are looking for process crimes.
“I think Trump’s original statement was that he would do the interview if his lawyers agreed. His lawyers are now telling him not to do the interview.
That was easy.”
You never heard of a subpoena? And then he’d be testifying under oath in front of a grand jury, no?
The fun part of this is that there are multiple investigations going on right now into the DoJ and FBI. I expect that in a week or so, they will #ReleaseTheMemo, which likely, I think, will show that the basis for the Russian collusion meme was baseless, created by the Dems and the Swamp when Crooked Hillary lost. At that point, Mueller’s team of Dem contributors and partisans will be fully revealed for precisely what they are - partisan witch hunters. Meanwhile, after Davos, Trump has the SoTU coming up. Then some more immigration. The CR. By the time things calm down enough to contemplate an interview, I think that it is very possible that Mueller’s probe may be terminated.
Imagine though that Trump does the interview. Maybe under oath. Maybe not. Mueller’s people claim lying to the FBI. Obstruction of Justice. Process crimes. What does Trump do? Employees of the federal govt, reporting to the President, trying to charge him with lying to them? Using the prosecutorial discretion that is derived from his Artice II Powers to attack him? Because this is so ludicrous, we know the real game - which is to generate grounds for impeachment if/when the Democrats retake the House this coming November. So, regardless of how much I am wanting to watch the Swamp use up all their rope, before they swing from the trees, since it is innately political, I don’t think that an interview with the Mueller Gestapo is a good idea.
NSA had low confidence in the Russian hacking claim.
Again, I don't know where you are getting this shit.
If I were Trump, I walk into the interview, tell Meuller thank you for looking out for the country, and then say that he absolutely did not collude with the Russians and that he has a constitutional power to take every action he’s taken to ensure the justice system has integrity. Then I would ask if the interview is voluntary - when Meuller says yes, I’d then respond that it’s also over - and walk out.
Or, we could make an interview contingent on all the evidence, including the “lost texts,” are turned over to Congress. He can tell Meuller that until he brings some integrity to the investigation, I’m not participating.
“Lying to the FBI is a crime in itself. If you don't like that, get the law changed. And not being able to prove the underlying crime (and Martha Stewart was almost certainly guilty of insider trading) is different from saying there was no underlying crime.”
Not for the President. They are Executive Branch employees, which means that they work for him. They have no prosecutorial discretion that he does not delegate to them. Presidents routinely lie to their employees and the public. I expect that I could fill Blogger’s 4096 character limit with lies that his predecessor told. Besides, he could just pardon himself, if he didn’t just decide not to prosecute himself, for, essentially lying to himself (in the form of lying to his FBI employees). Oh, and the difference with Clinton is that he lied in court, in a civil matter, which is the Judicial Branch.
As someone else notef mr trump (pre-prez) was involved in a lot of lawsuits.
Anybody know his win-losr percentage? I assume a lot of wins or we would have heard a lot about how many he lost.
I agree that the "president" probably should not testify but not because it is president trump.
No president should.
But I suspect that if he does testify he will do just fine. I trust him to know what he is doing.
John Henry
“If I were Trump, I walk into the interview, tell Meuller thank you for looking out for the country, and then say that he absolutely did not collude with the Russians and that he has a constitutional power to take every action he’s taken to ensure the justice system has integrity. Then I would ask if the interview is voluntary - when Meuller says yes, I’d then respond that it’s also over - and walk out.”
He would then have dug himself a deeper hole for a charge of obstruction. Also he doesn’t have the type of power you think he does. If he does something with corrupt intent, he can be held to account. He’s the president not the King.
Abuse of power is something he could wade into if he takes actions with corrupt intent.
Earlier this week, The Tablet website published an article titled "Glen Simpson, Conspiracy Theorist, Finds a Place for the Jews in his Trump-Russia Fantasia", written by Lee Smith.
Glenn Simpson is the owner of the company Fusion GPS, who has infected much of the Democratic Party with his own delusions about Russia's devious conspiracies to overthrow democracies and control the world.
Simpson obsessively links this Russian to that Jew to yonder Trump associate. Simpson does not need any evidence, but he has plenty of hunches, which suffice in his own mind.
Smith's article includes the following passages.
-----
He [Simpson] is “shocked” because he can barely believe the scope and size of the network of possible Trump-Russia co-conspirators that his investigations uncovered. There are so many Russian names in Simpson’s testimony —- Russian mobsters, Russian bankers, Russian officials, Russian businessmen, filling his imagination like the characters in a party scene from Anna Karenina.
Naturally, there are Russian women, too, like the “big Trump fan in Russia” who enrolled at American University in Washington, D.C., “which I assume gets you a visa,” says Simpson. “I think she’s suspicious.”
Why? Because, says Simpson, at some time she was working with the Russian “banker-slash-Duma member-slash-Mafia leader named Alexander Torshin who is a life member of the NRA.” ...
What this tells Simpson is that the Russians are trying to infiltrate the NRA as well as other conservative organizations that have an important place in American society, like Chabad, the outreach arm of the Lubavitcher Hasidic movement. After all, Chabad has a presence all over the world, including Moscow, where Putin lives, and New York City, where Trump is from. The Jewish diaspora, says Simpson, “appears to be a very interesting route for the Russians.” ...
Putin is close to several Chabad supporters, as well as Chabad rabbi Berel Lazar, Russia’s chief rabbi. Trump worked with some Russian emigres who are active in Chabad, including a convicted felon, Felix Sater. In Florida, Trump hosted the wedding of the daughter of a Chabad supporter he knows to an associate of one of the Chabad supporters who is close to Putin. ...
n the past, it was Russian intelligence that trafficked in disinformation operations tagging Jews as the engine of instability in Western countries. The most famous specimen was The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
And previously, the ethics and institutional structures of the mainstream American press prevented conspiracy theories from polluting the country’s public sphere. Today, by contrast, American journalists congratulating themselves for their ever-vigilant stance against Russian encroachment on our democratic institutions willingly usher in updated versions of the Protocols.
-----
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/253765/glenn-simpson-press-conspiracy-theory
Mueller should be placed under oath, too. As well as his partisan staff of Clinton lawyers. The room should be circled by the 82nd Airborne Division.
“You never heard of a subpoena? And then he’d be testifying under oath in front of a grand jury, no?”
Let’s see if I understand this. You are essentially suggesting that some of Trump’s employees go to a grand jury, using power delegated from him to them, to request a subpoena for him to testify before them, and that if he refuses, that they could use the prosecutorial discretion derived from his Article II Executive power and delegated to them by him to charge him criminally?
Freder
Wrong report. From your article:
"RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE executed a cyberattack on at least one U.S. voting software supplier and sent spear-phishing emails to more than 100 local election officials just days before last November’s presidential election, according to a highly classified intelligence report obtained by The Intercept."
We are talking about the assessment the CIA and FBI made that Russia attempted to undermine US elections and institutions to help election Trump.
The NSA never bought the motive was to help Trump and discredit Hillary.
So do you have any other comments about the rest of my statement. Or you just going to continue trying to deflect.
For Trump on the Comey firing, I’d say I know there were specific reasons noted for firing Comey because something specific needed to be noted. But my reason for firing him goes far deeper. I simply didn’t trust him - something was off and I had a really bad feeling about him. There’s no way I could have the head of the FBI be someone that I believed to untrustworthy. I have a constitutional power to fire him and I exercised it. End of story.
Now, how I can I take a perjury charge for how I feel? And, Comey has since confirmed Trump’s suspicion through his nefariousness actions.
As for ordering the firing of other people, I’d say that I sometimes run things by my advisors as hypothetical consideration to gauge their response. This is call leadership. Not every statement I make is a direct order - something in simply asking people to think.
“When you ordered me to be fired, was that a hypothetical?” No, that was a not fully thought out order. I have the same feeling with you I have with Comey. My lawyers defended you and I decided to trust them, for now.
All trust and all a defense for perjury. You can argue how he feels. And, absolutely makes statements that test his team’s resolve or expands their thinking without issuing a direct order. It’s a perfectly impossible to disprove.
“People in this town lie and don’t act in the best interest of the country. As president, I can’t have people working in senior positions I believe to be untrustworthy. I probably won’t get the opportunity to fire every untrustworthy person in this town but when the alarms go off for me like they did for Comey, I’m using my constitutional powers to clean up this swamp. Period. So, yeah, I don’t trust you because you’re a BFF with James Comey and I believe you have a massive conflict of interest to protect your friend. My lawyers reassured me that you’re a pro and I don’t have anything like to worry with you. Jury is still out, for me, to be honest.”
Tom suggests: He can tell Meuller that until he brings some integrity to the investigation, I’m not participating.
That sounds like a great strategy. His interview should be contingent upon a thorough investigation of corruption within the DOJ including the FBI.
Bill Clinton was subpoenaed. Clinton was an institutionalist and didn’t fight it. Who knows what a lawless Trump would do.
“WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, July 26) -- Independent counsel Ken Starr served President Bill Clinton with a subpoena in recent days that calls for his testimony before the Monica Lewinsky grand jury next week, CNN has learned.
The issuance of the subpoena marks the first time a sitting president has been subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury.
The subpoena presents a profound political and legal dilemma for the president. Challenging the subpoena could result in a political nightmare and spark a constitutional crisis.”
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/07/26/clinton.subpoena/
Never talk to the police.
Bruce:
You were expecting a thought-out and intelligent comment from garage...er, I mean inga?
Ken Starr had evidence.
“Ken Starr had evidence.”
You have no idea what Mueller has.
Following up my comment at 9:38, I will recommend also a Powerline Blog article titled "The Simpson Mania", written by Scott Johnson.
His article quotes Simpson's Russian-conspiracy-obsessed testimony to the House of Representatives. For example:
-----
You know, the Kushners are ethnic Russian and they, we were told, had relationships of their own with Russian capital. And, you know, the exact story I think was that their relationships were with the Russian diaspora in the New York area.
So more broadly speaking, during the ‘7Os, in the Refusenik era, there was a lot of Russian Jewish immigration to the New York area. And a lot of those people had — well, I’ll just say there was a lot of immigration, and that community is very large, and a Jot of people became very successful and wealthy. And, as I understand it, those are the connections that the Kushners have to outside capital. ...
Dimitri Simes is known in the Russian expat community as a suspected Russian agent. And I believe he is known to the FBI as a suspected Russian agent. And I think that you could develop more information in that area from talking to Russian intelligence defectors and people who come to this country and have been given refuge from Russian intelligence. ...
I think that the origins of the Manafort-Stone-Trump relationship is an interesting area. ... Roger Stone made a joke at one point about how Paul Manafort had disappeared, and he was last seen like carting bags of cash onto Yanukovich’s plane or something like that. You know, Roger Stone has done work in Ukraine. ...
Stone was a protege of a Republican political fellow named Arthur Finkelstein ... Finkelstein worked with Stone and Manafort in Ukraine in or around 2005, 2006, for the same cast of bad guys. And later went off to Hungary to work for the pro-Russian prime minister there, Victor Orban ...
And there is a lot of allegations coming out of the Hungarian expat community about all of that. ... Orban is essentially a Putin puppet and the GRU has a big station there, and there is a lot of unexplained travel by various people. And we have heard a lot of rumors about that, and a lot of allegations since beginning of last year. ...
It [my intention] was to expose a sinister plot by Vladimir Putin, a hostile foreign power, to attempt to alter the outcome of an American Presidential election. ... It became about blowing the whistle on this. And I would say that was the point at which it was a lot bigger issue. And as an ex-journalist, I still have a little bit of that in my blood, and I wanted to expose it for the sake of letting people know what’s going on.
-----
That's how Glenn Simpson thinks and talks all the time.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/01/the-simpson-mania.php
Neither do you, sweetie. But we all knew what Ken Starr had.
Why the difference?
Speaking of Ken Starr...
“Ken Starr said Monday he thinks it is "probable" that special counsel Robert Mueller will interview President Trump in the Russia probe.
"He needs to, in order to round out, complete his investigation, to come to a decision," Starr, the independent counsel in the Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky scandals during Bill Clinton’s presidency, said during an interview on CNN's "New Day."
"He needs to look the president in the eye and ask the appropriate questions."
Starr was pressed on whether a face-to-face with the president is legal and appropriate.
"It's certainly legal and it is appropriate," Starr said.”
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/367915-ken-starr-probable-mueller-will-interview-trump-in-russia-probe
Further, firing Comey didn't impede or obstruct any investigation. It proceeds apace, as we speak, despite the lack of any evidence of a crime.
Indeed. Ironically it was firing Comey that started the special prosecutor investigation. If Trump was trying to obstruct justice, he failed. The Dems are arguing that we should impeach the president for failing to obstruct justice on a crime that doesn't exist.
“Neither do you, sweetie. But we all knew what Ken Starr had.”
I didn’t say I did, but I can see that you’re simply looking for trouble and not interested in discussing the subject. Knowing what Ken Starr had after the fact is sort of a “duh”, sweetie.
I want everyone to see what Donald Trump is like, under oath. This is so sweet. Trump’s deposition in one of the Trump University civil fraud cases:
https://americanbridgepac.org/searchable-transcript-of-donald-trumps-trump-u-deposition/
“If Trump was trying to obstruct justice, he failed. The Dems are arguing that we should impeach the president for failing to obstruct justice on a crime that doesn't exist.”
It doesn’t matter that his attempt to obstruct failed, they will look at his intent.No?
Robert Mueller does not have the same job as Ken Starr. The latter was an INDEPENDENT counsel. Mueller is a Special counsel who works for and reports to the DOJ. He can be ordered by Rod Rosenstein not to subpoena a sitting POTUS. People who think rather than cut and paste understand that.
This is all kabuki theater initially done to remove Trump from office, then to discredit him so that Dems take the House in 2018, but that is only going to happen if the voters go for one of the leftists in 2020. President Tears of Rage Booker? Fauxcohantas Warren? Slow Joe Biden? Lurch Kerry? I don't think so.
DOJ and FBI higher ups will lose their jobs before Trump. Some may even go to jail.
It doesn’t matter that his attempt to obstruct failed, they will look at his intent.No?
If there is no underlying crime-- and so far they have presented zero evidence that there is an underlying crime-- then what was Trump's intent other than to spare this country the shit storm that we're going through?
Regarding intent...
“One could argue that Trump provided direct evidence when he told NBC’s Lester Holt that he was going to fire Comey regardless of the recommendations of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and that he was thinking of “this Russia thing” when he did so. But Trump quickly followed up that comment by indicating that he thought the investigation was bogus, and his defense to obstruction could be that he genuinely believed the Russia investigation was meritless.
Before bringing a case, prosecutors anticipate defenses like that one and gather evidence to rebut potential defenses. We have since learned of very substantial additional evidence that would rebut that defense, or a defense that Trump didn’t understand the consequences of firing Comey. While that evidence is indirect, Mueller could argue that we can infer Trump’s intent from that evidence, which is how prosecutors typically prove a defendant’s intent.”
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/26/mueller-trump-obstruction-of-justice-russia-216532
“If there is no underlying crime-- and so far they have presented zero evidence that there is an underlying crime-- then what was Trump's intent other than to spare this country the shit storm that we're going through?”
You and I do not know what Mueller has and what the underlying crime was. You won’t be hearing from Mueller what the underlying crime was until the investigation is completed, no?
Trump should tell him to stuff it. I don't want that traitorous weasel in the same room as trump. I wouldn't trust him.
So, Obama/Clinton were flexible with Russia; Russia refused to participate in Obama/Clinton's social justice adventures (the shitshows in Egypt and Libya were hallmarks of the SJ wars); Obama/Clinton punished Russia directly and with threats of retributive change to her allies in Ukraine; a disenfranchised DNC insider, "Deep Plunger", exposed Obama/Clinton duplicity; and progressed as a war of Obama/Clinton/DNC axis to remain viable, targeting Trump (the wrong color of diversity), and America caught in the middle.
“He would then have dug himself a deeper hole for a charge of obstruction. Also he doesn’t have the type of power you think he does. If he does something with corrupt intent, he can be held to account. He’s the president not the King.”
Love it. She thinks that it would be criminal if Trump as a person would obstruct Trump as President, in and through his Executive Branch employees.
But, let’s see how this plays out if we switch things around a bit. Let us assume that a very high ranking Executive Branch employee grossly, and wantonly, commits potentially thousands, but definitely hundreds of felonies through a systematic and blatant abuse and mishandling of classified information. And, then, let us assume that the decision not to prosecute that employee was, to some extent, the fear of embarrassment of the President for knowing about the mishandling of classified information at the time it was occurring, and, maybe even participating in it. Did that President Obstruct Justice by, essentially, telling his DoJ people to not prosecute the commitor of those felonies?
And, yes, we are pretty sure now that is why that former govt employee was not prosecuted (plus maybe out of fear of blackmail), through the release of text messages from some of hose involved.
gar...inga
We all knew about the blue dress early in the investigation.
Oh yeah....new day, new history.
I forgot that that is how you do it.
Inga,
Do you read and understand what you cut and paste?
"one can argue" ... just about anything. The author is citing indirect evidence (i.e., subjective inference) as a basis for indictment.
That is absurd. It would mark the beginning of a fascist state that lefties have long been pining for.
Remember, Hitler and Mussolini were socialists.
I think Trumps council is going to insist on the Muellers questions be submitted beforehand in writing. Mueller is of course going to refuse and Trump is going to come out and claim he tried to be reasonable and Mueller didn't want to be reasonable.
“He can be ordered by Rod Rosenstein not to subpoena a sitting POTUS.”
People who read and who are willing to learn from the experts might by now understand Rosenstein won’t order any such thing. If Trump fired Rosenstein, he’d be once again digging the obstruction hole even deeper. To act with corrupt intent to stop the investigation will not help Trump
Ingarage advocating for investigations before establishing a crime took place.
I guess due process is an old-fashioned notion to some.
I am glad that Ingarage advocates for open investigations into people's activities. PDT should be able to do some amazing things with that kind of power.
Knowing ingarage as we do, I am sure that she has thought this through quite deeply.
Very deeply.
The reality is that Comey was not trustworthy. He took notes with Trump, but not Obama. Because he wanted leverage over his boss. Then he leaked about his confidential talk to the press. Does that sound like someone the President could trust? And illegally removed govt property, in the form of those memos (created using govt resources) when he left office.
Making things worse, in retrospect, his agency, the FBI, had been illegally surveiling, and probably wiretapping, his incoming boss, his campaign staff, and transition team. Trump didn’t find this out from Comey or anyone at the FBI. He found out from the Dir of the NSA, Adm Rogers (whose 702 data had been misused by the FBI and Obama White House) and FOIA requests. A loyal and trustworthy employee, as FBI Director, would have told Trump, up front, what his agency was doing. He didn’t.
“ advocating for investigations before establishing a crime took place.
I guess due process is an old-fashioned notion to some. “
I guess some people have never heard of probable cause.
"People who read and who are willing to learn from the experts might by now understand Rosenstein won’t order any such thing. "
Idiotic. That is treating crystal ball "experts" OPINIONS as fact.
The fact is that Mueller can be ordered not to subpoena a sitting POTUS for a fishing expedition because it is not in the best interests of the country. I hope that Rod Rosenstein shares that view. There are no facts to know one way or the other.
We shall see.
You and I do not know what Mueller has and what the underlying crime was. You won’t be hearing from Mueller what the underlying crime was until the investigation is completed, no?
No. I don't think we'll ever hear what the "crime" is. This investigation was supposed to be about "collusion" with Russia, and since that isn't really a crime, now the charge is that he intended to obstruct a crime that doesn't exists. It's a witch hunt against a man whose "crime" is being a Republican.
If Mueller promises to give Trump the same kind of brutal grilling the FBI gave to Hillary about her e-mails, I'd say meet with him.
“That is treating crystal ball "experts" OPINIONS as fact.”
I quoted from Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor.
If Mueller asks Trump to testify under oath, Trump should reply: "You first"
Althouse, my husband wondered how you feel when you read people arguing about the law who have no real idea what we're talking about?
I also quoted Ken Starr, I’m sure we all know who he is.
Can one of the lawyers on this site explain "probable cause" to Inga? How does it apply to this thread?
I am interested to know ...
... from the experts.
Blogger Francisco D said...
Inga,
Do you read and understand what you cut and paste?
To ask is to answer.
Ingarage can't remember from one post to the next what she says. Denies it when it is put right in front of her with her own quotes.
Here is the link to an Althouse post from yesterday:http://althouse.blogspot.com/2018/01/remember-trumps-broader-stated-goal-is.html
For those of you that like trainwreck porn you'll see ingarage make a statement that there was never a 'filibuster-proof' majority. A few of us point out that the source she selectively cited states specifically that the dems had a 4-month long filibuster-proof majority.
Her reaction? She yells and screams that we shouldn't be using 'her source'. That is a quote. Somehow we are idiots and evil-people for going to the same site she c&ped from and filling in the information she conveniently left out.
She then denies that she ever made the statement, despite us laying out her specific quotes for her a few times.
Along the way you will also see how xhe and garage are linked together (careful, the reason is a mind blower!) and you get to revel in her calling me names and throwing shade for stuff I purportedly wrote in the thread but that she can't find.
There are 300+ comments, but all the action takes place after the 200 comment break.
It is an entertaining and eye-opening read.
One of my favorites comes at the end when she tells me to stop trying to tell her what her 'point' was when all I and others had done was quote her own words back at her.
Hilarious.
(BTW, obviously some of the commenters here do know their law, but others of us know what we know from watching Perry Mason and CSI.)
There can't be any 'probable cause' if they can't show a crime. Probable cause of what??
Mariotti is not an expert. He is a politician and an obvious Trump hater. Google him.
BTW, he is running for Illinois Attorney General. LOL!
He is very likely a Deep State crook.
Blogger mockturtle said...
if he opts out, the media will be all about, 'He has something to hide'. This is tricky.
1/28/18, 8:36 AM
Who gives a s*** anymore about what the media says on this issue? Their credibility is completely shot.
Obviously some here haven’t bothered to look up the term...
“Probable Cause
DEFINITION
Probable cause is a requirement found in the Fourth Amendment that must usually be met before police make an arrest, conduct a search, or receive a warrant. Courts usually find probable cause when there is a reasonable basis for believing that a crime may have been committed (for an arrest) or when evidence of the crime is present in the place to be searched (for a search). Under exigent circumstances, probable cause can also justify a warrantless search or seizure. Persons arrested without a warrant are required to be brought before a competent authority shortly after the arrest for a prompt judicial determination of probable cause.”
“Mariotti is not an expert.”
He’s far more the expert than you.
“He is a politician and an obvious Trump hater. Google him.”
I know exactly who he is, you didn’t. And you are a Trump sycophant, so what you say refelects your sycophancy.
Courts usually find probable cause when there is a reasonable basis for believing that a crime may have been committed
My apology in advance for using YOUR SOURCE, but please show me where a court has done so in this case.
Lying to the FBI is a crime in itself. If you don't like that, get the law changed.
It's much easier to change your political affiliation to Democrat. That way you can lie to the FBI like Hillary and her aides did and it'll be no big deal.
“Courts usually find probable cause when there is a reasonable basis for believing that a crime may have been committed.”
Who said they didn’t? Ever heard of a FISA court?
Probable cause is a requirement found in the Fourth Amendment that must usually be met before police make an arrest, conduct a search, or receive a warrant.
Also from YOUR SOURCE.
What does a FISA court have to do with Mueller.
Please show your work.
"There is no reason to doubt the veracity of the story produced by two veteran New York Times reporters, Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman."
- Andrew McCarthy
I can think of one or two.
McCarthy, for all of the good work he has done on this issue, still has some of that swamp mud on his shoes.
“What does a FISA court have to do with Mueller.
Please show your work.”
You cannot be serious. I’m not wasting my time. Do your own homework.
“Probable cause is a requirement found in the Fourth Amendment that must usually be met before police make an arrest, conduct a search, or receive a warrant.
Also from YOUR SOURCE”
Yes indeed. What are you confused about? Why don’t you take some time to read and catch up, you seem lost.
Inga wrote: "I know exactly who he is, you didn’t. "
Three reactions:
1. Andrew McCarthy will be devastated that you threw him over for Mariotti.
2. If you knew EXACTLY who he was, why did you fail to disclose his obvious partisanship?
3. I lived in Chicago for over 50 years. Even the Democrats (of which I was one until 1980) know the score. New face = same corruption.
Inga is really confused about the role of a FISA court. You can tell by her stridency.
If FISA court eavesdropping warrants for the Trump campaign were granted on the basis of the FBI stating that Fusion GPS was a reliable source, then the shit will hit the fan and blow in the direction of your friends.
Look back at Comey's congressional testimony about the infamous dossier.
My God garage. Take your meds. stat
“Her reaction? She yells and screams that we shouldn't be using 'her source'. That is a quote.”
Wow, you are still upset that you lost an argument? Quoting out of context is a sign of desperation. All you’re doing is misrepresenting what I said. You’ll be chewing on your butthurt for quite sometime I suspect. Try not to derail a good discussion here with your personal issues.
Francisco
Xhe doesn't have the capacity to understand what xhe is cutting and pasting. Look how xhe reacts when asked to explain something..xhe. can't. do. it.
“If FISA court eavesdropping warrants for the Trump campaign were granted on the basis of the FBI stating that Fusion GPS was a reliable source, then the shit will hit the fan and blow in the direction of your friends.”
You and I do not know the totality of the basis that the FISA warrant was granted on. All you’re doing is guessing. Maybe Nunes’s Memo will shed some light on it and prove your assertion... or not.
Sure. That's right garage.
Others have read what went on. It did not end well for you.
That's why I am not afraid to point them to the thread.
“Others have read what went on. It did not end well for you.
That's why I am not afraid to point them to the thread.”
Your opinion is based on your humiliation. You’re trying awfully hard to get folks here to join your campaign, eh? Laughable and embarrassing for you. I’m not going to waste my time defending myself against your misrepresentations and outright lies. You’ve derailed this thread, that’s too bad.
If people are interested...it’s got over 300 comments, lol.
The discussion that Livermoron keeps referring to from yesterday evening.
You’ve derailed this thread, that’s too bad.
Everybody who laughed at this from ingarage please raise your hand.
Trump should under NO Circumstances do an interview.
If Trump demands to do SOMETHING, he should answer written questions, in writing. With the understanding there will be NO followup questions.
I don't know who is demanding he answer questions from Mueller - other then the Democrats and the usual dumbo moderate Republicans.
Trump had the right to fire Comey for whatever reason he chose. BTW, once we get Trump cleared of "obstruction of Justice" maybe we can start prosecuting Comey for obstructing the Hillary Email investigation.
Mueller is not going to subpoena Trump, and Trump is not going to sit for any interview either. Trump was trolling Mueller and people like Inga with that comment the other day.
If Mueller wants answers from Trump, he is going to have to submit written questions to get them. If, and this is a big "if", Mueller is interested in getting information for his investigation, then there can be no objection with getting them via written questionnaires(right, Inga?). However, there is a reasonable suspicion that such an interview would not have the goal of obtaining information, but to instead set up some sort of process crime Mueller could put in his report. Trump's lawyers will never allow him to sit for such an interview, and McCarthy is 100% correct.
Inga said...
Who said they didn’t? Ever heard of a FISA court?
Indeed.
And Crowdstrike, Fusion GPS, and several other Democrat front corporations were allowed to look at TS/SCI level surveillance material "accidentally" involving US citizens. Citizens unmasked by Powers.
Then they recycled that information into the Golden Shower Dossier you want to forget about.
Then the FBI/NSA scum that just happen to be on Mueller's "investigative team" used that report to fraudulently apply for warrants to spy on Hillary and Obama's political opponents.
Going to love watching you scream and howl as the Mueller Special Counsel implodes this week and Mueller is eventually indicted.
Ingarage somehow thinks Mueller is an officer of the FISA court.
“If Mueller wants answers from Trump, he is going to have to submit written questions to get them. If, and this is a big "if", Mueller is interested in getting information for his investigation, then there can be no objection with getting them via written questionnaires(right, Inga?)”
Wrong. No Special Prosecutor would allow written answers. Who do you think would be answering them Trump or his lawyers? Of course Trump will have to appear in person and answer Mueller’s questions. He isn’t above the law. Bill Clinton did it, so can Trump.
“...Mueller is an officer of the FISA court.”
Only in your very confused mind.
Inga,
If you are going to copy what Livermore has written, try not to leave out words that completely change the meaning.
It is dishonest.
BTW, the man you formerly thought was the cat's pajamas (Andy McCarthy) wrote in the above mentioned article that Trump should not agree to be interviewed by Robert Mueller and should not even be asked.
What do you think of that expert opinion?
Inga, that is you admitting that the goal isn't to get information. The answers to written questions still have to be truthful, regardless of who answers them. You are admitting that the goal to find a process crime.
Damn autocorrect.
Livermoron, where did you come up with that name?
“If you are going to copy what Livermore has written, try not to leave out words that completely change the meaning.
It is dishonest.”
Yes it is, but no more dishonest that making claims about things I never said. As he did.
“Inga, that is you admitting that the goal isn't to get information. The answers to written questions still have to be truthful, regardless of who answers them. You are admitting that the goal to find a process crime.”
No it’s not. Why should Trump be afforded such privileges as not appearing in person? An interview of that type depends on more than just written answers. There is a back and forth that happens when a live body is there, that doesn’t happen with lawyers writing your answers for you in their own good time. I suspect you know this.
I get the name organically. It was a name I thought I had made up when I was 15 and we were moving to Livermore, Ca. (the world's smartest town). Wondering what a person from Livermore would be called it struck me....a Livermoron! The irony of that was hilarious.
About 8 years ago I discovered that Dr. Teller, Oppenheimer and others called themselves
Livermorons back in the 50's. So I consider myself in good company.
I never did get a degreee in Physics as one would expect a livermoron to have. I have degrees in Psychology, philosophy, and oenology though...so maybe I could bring the booze to one of their parties.
Gotta run now, I’m not avoiding answering any of your questions, relax. My private life goes on despite the comments sections discussions.
Inga said...
“Her reaction? She yells and screams that we shouldn't be using 'her source'. That is a quote.”
Wow, you are still upset that you lost an argument? Quoting out of context is a sign of desperation.
Inga posted that the democrats never had a 60 vote majority in the senate and never had a chance to pass immigration reform without republican help.
In the wider context she said the democrats shouldn't accept any offer Trump makes and that it is republicans fault that there is no immigration reform.
It was classic.
Inga said...
“He can be ordered by Rod Rosenstein not to subpoena a sitting POTUS.”
People who read and who are willing to learn from the experts might by now understand Rosenstein won’t order any such thing. If Trump fired Rosenstein, he’d be once again digging the obstruction hole even deeper. To act with corrupt intent to stop the investigation will not help Trump
By the end of this Rosenstein is going to be pleading guilty.
Inga said...
You and I do not know what Mueller has and what the underlying crime was. You won’t be hearing from Mueller what the underlying crime was until the investigation is completed, no?
That is pure Stalinism.
You could not epitomize it better.
You can submit follow up written questions, Inga. Again, if the goal is to find information, nothing beats written questions and answers- you are more likely to get correct information that way. This isn't even a debatable point. The only thing advantageous to a prosecutor in interviewing a subject live is that the subject is more likely to make a mistake, or be induced into a mistake, that the prosecutor can use as leverage or use as a perjury charge. That last part is why prosecutors prefer live interviews- it has little to nothing about getting the facts.
And if Mueller can't get Trump to agree to a live interview, he will offer written questions. What he won't do is subpoena Trump. Count on it.
Only a complete fool would agree to answer questions from a special prosecutor under oath. Consider the fate of Scooter Libby, a highly experienced political operative and lawyer who managed to become ensnared in a perjury trap despite (or more likely, because) he was entirely innocent of the alleged underlying crime.
Trump has said he'd agree to be interviewed but Mueller. If Mueller attempts to bring just one more person, then Trump can loudly claim Mueller violated his word. Mueller's word can't be trusted, and, like , Comey, Trump will have no choice but to have him fired. Trump will have the message publicly and personally delivered by a low level DOJ attorney so Mueller gets insulted, too.
Why did you ask, Francisco? Just curiosity?
Achilles said:
That is pure Stalinism.
You could not epitomize it better.
Ingarage will never understand it. Not when her ego demands she remain ignorant.
You and I do not know what Mueller has and what the underlying crime was. You won’t be hearing from Mueller what the underlying crime was until the investigation is completed, no?
Mueller is still trying to figure out what the underlying crime was. But he'll find something because that's his job!
Yancy Ward: How can you question a fine legal mind like gara...er inga's?
If anyone knows how special prosecutors work it is zer (or is it zhe??).
?he has a couple of special prosecutor daughters who would never submit written questions.
Just by asking her the question ?he has humiliatingly destroyed you.
Don't believe me? Just ask ?er.
Inga said...
“ advocating for investigations before establishing a crime took place.
I guess due process is an old-fashioned notion to some. “
I guess some people have never heard of probable cause."
Relax Inga. Soon enough there will be probable cause demonstrated to indict Obama and the Clinton's on various felonies. Starting with Comey's obstruction of justice and from there up the chain and sideways as well.
I hope Trump does the interview, pisses off Mueller with every answer, and lets it all hang out. Then we’ll see what this asshole Mueller does with it. Cause he’s got nothing, it’s a sham investigation, it should’ve been shut down before it started, and if Mueller pushes ahead with an indictment he will go down in history as the biggest asshole ever. And Trump will never be tossed from office nor likely even impeached.
Do it Trump. You hold every card.
Ernest Prole is correct: Only a complete fool would agree to answer questions from a special prosecutor under oath. Consider the fate of Scooter Libby, a highly experienced political operative and lawyer who managed to become ensnared in a perjury trap despite (or more likely, because) he was entirely innocent of the alleged underlying crime.
They're looking to elicit perjury, be it ever so innocuous.
I was just curious, Livermoron.
It seems self-denigrating which tells me that you are probably comfortable in your own skin.
Thanks Francisco. Yes it has that element of self-denigration. And I am comfortable about that. I know who I am and, though serious, I don't take my self too seriously. I believe in life-long learning and I pursue that aggressively. Thus all those different degrees. I can't learn if I am not willing to be challenged and question my own beliefs.
I have a sister like gar...er inga. Pretends she knows stuff and won't engage in honest discourse. She makes stupid decisions and has a twisted morality. She is miserable and blames everyone else for it. Her problem is that she just won't learn. She can't deal with the ego issues. Like Inga, lay her own words before her, in her own script, and she will deny them. These are unserious people who can do serious damage.
Those people are ruinous to this country and to the future of humanity.
So, anyway...Thanks.
"comfortable about that"
Me write English real good!
Todd and Tapper. I wanted to like them, I was favorably disposed when I first saw them, but now I can't bear to listen to them for more than two minutes. Why? Wish I were Shakespeare so I could put it into words. A villain can smile, and smile, and smile ?
We should just let Mueller do his job, which seems to be keeping America safe from the scourge of process crimes.
“I have a sister like gar...er inga.”
Wow, I’ve been gone for several hours, come back and he’s still talking about me? Is that normal? How obsessive. What is it with some folks here? How would it be if I wouldn’t be able to comment on any given thread without making mention of you? Wouldn’t you find it odd? You know nothing about me, comparing me to your sister is bizarre.
When you were gone Inga, the average IQ of posters went up by at least 15 points, as did the quality of discussion.
As always, McCarthy's analysis is right on.
Oh that’s nice Fransisco, soul sister to the Moron. When you’re gone the threads are infinitely more normal. If I was paranoid I’d say the Moron and you were one in the same.
#NursingHomePsychologist... lol.
Frau Inga wrote: "If I was paranoid ..."
That is the least of my concerns.
Dishonesty, stupidity and hysteria concern me more.
What happened to #RunningWith ScissorsPsychologist?
Your attempts to insult are incredibly lame.
I think she lapses into disassociative behavior.
Paranoia would be an improvemnet: At least she'd be right about no one liking her.
“If I was paranoid I’d say the Moron and you were one in the same.”
At least use the subjunctive. Failure to properly use it in this situation raises the question whether you were talking hypothetically, or realistically.
Bruce,
I think Inga is confused by verb tenses, among other things.
Inga wrote: " ..."
Oh, who cares anymore?
If subpoenaed:
I would have to consult with "sources" and may be able to submit an answer on the 33rd of Junovembuary.
On advice of my attorney, I refuse to answer any questions in this witch hunt.
-OR-
After consulting the United States Constitution I realize I am the chief executive of the United States and I am your indirect boss. FYNQ
If Inga was Garage, that would... actually explain a lot of things.
I am cross posting this to two different Trump threads.
I was struck today by the thesis in an article by Daniel Greenfield via PowerLine article titled: ARE THE DEMOCRATS FIGHTING A CIVIL WAR? in regards to the claim that Trump could be obstructing justice by firing Coney, and maybe Mueller.
One basic problem that I see here is the idea that the government has some sort of independent justification or legitimacy, above and beyond being an apparatus for implementing the President's Article II Executive power. This is implicit in the idea that Trump couldn't fire either Comey or Mueller, and that he could somehow be obstructing justice by doing so. If the legitimacy of the DoJ is derived from the President's Constitutional powers, then how can he be obstructing justice by telling those who owe their legitimacy to him what to do? By firing them? What they would be saying, from a Constitutional point of view, if he were to be charged with lying to the FBI, Is that he is, essentially lying to himself. Because, in our form of government, the executive branch of government has no independent legitimacy beyond what the President delegates to it out of his Article II powers. The critical point here is that no one elected the bureaucrats. We are a country governed by the consent of the governed, through our national contract, our Constitution. We agree to being governed by this government, as long as it doesn't breach the contract. We don't elect the bureaucrats, but we do elect the President and give him, via this contract, the entirety of the government's executive power, to do, within limits imposed by that document, and duly enacted laws, what he wills with that power. All of that executive power. And the bureaucrats derive their legitimacy and power from their boss, the President.
We take pride in having orderly transitions of power. Many countries do not. Three times though, at least, the Democrats were not happy with the results of elections won by Republicans. The first was not orderly, but rather was quite bloody. The second time, they grudgingly gave in, after having been caught trying to steal the Presidency after the fact. This, third time, is much worse. The previous Administration spent 8 years weaponizing the bureaucracy to its own ends, and esp the DoJ, where progressive litmus test hiring was the norm, filing the ranks of attorneys there with Dem partisans. And, I think, we are seeing the results of that, a second American Civil War, with the Dems and the bureaucrats at war with their duly elected Republican leaders. They are doing what they can to destroy the President, destroy his legitimacy, and remove him from office, one way or another. Of course, it isn't just the Presidency - the DoJ intentionally did not inform the Congressional Gang of 8 of the FISA warrant for Trump Tower, that they were legally required to do, and the Obama deputy AG illegally prevented the OIG from overseeing the DoJ National Security division that obtained that warrant.
Yes, it does scare me. An unaccountable, runaway, unelected bureaucracy, doing essentially what is wishes, regardless of the will of the people who are supposed to be supreme, who the bureaucrats are supposed to serve. Our government has immense power, and more and more, that power seems to be wielded by those unelected bureaucrats. Trump was elected to put limits on this, which is why the permanent bureaucracy is fighting him so viciously. If he fails, I am not sure that we will have another chance.
Post a Comment