Now this is how you interview a member of the most corrupt administration in U.S. history

Back in December of 2016, I attended a panel at the University of Michigan called Covering Trump: The Presidency and The Press in Turbulent Times. In retrospect, the conversation between the journalists on the panel that evening, who represented news entities like the Wall Street Journal, the Boston Globe, and the Washington Post, was quaint. At least that’s how it looks to me now, as I sit here, reading over my notes. It’s amazing to me, looking back on it three years later, how much time and effort people in journalism poured into the debate over whether they should refer to Donald Trump’s lies as “lies,” or call the something else, like “falsehoods.” Of course, while the well-meaning members of the fourth estate were deciding how to talk about Donald Trump in a way that reflected time-honored norms, the President and his supporters were going on the offensive, calling members of the press “enemies of the people,” and demanding that the press always always cover both sides with equivalent deference, regardless of whether one side was telling the truth, and the other was not. And, somehow, we allowed them to be successful.

As Dan Froomkin, the editor of Press Watch, said recently, “If you’d asked New York Times editors five years ago whether people who deny basic facts, traffic in conspiracy theories, demonize immigrants, and otherwise fight against a pluralistic society should be given equal (or more than equal) time in their news columns, they would have said no.” But, somehow, that’s exactly the point we’ve gotten to.

So, with that said, I’m always on the lookout for members of the press who stand up to people in the administration, unafraid of offending them, and speak the truth. And there was a great example of that today, when NPR’s Mary Louise Kelly, the host of All Things Considered, refused to let Trump administration Secretary of State Mike Pompeo lie his way out of a question about his refusal to defend one of his State Department employees, Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, against the relentless, factually-incorrect, and cruel attacks that have been directed at her from the White House. Here, if you’ve yet to hear it, is how it went down.

And, for what it’s worth, it didn’t end there. Pompeo apparently went after Kelly once the interview was done, saying that no one gave a “fuck” about Ukraine, and challenging her to find Ukraine on a map… which, of course, she was able to do.

I don’t have time to go much further on this tonight, but suffice it to say that I’m of the belief that what Mike Pompeo has done to our State Department diplomatic corps is absolutely criminal. I’ll just leave you with the following quote from former U.S. career diplomat Nicholas Burns. “The rank and file are very disturbed by the inability, the refusal, of the secretary of state to defend his own people,” he said. And, this, of course, is important because, without diplomacy, we’re so much closer to war.

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 24 Comments

Every single American should watch Adam Schiff’s impassioned appeal to his Republican colleagues last night. Please share this.

Here, for those of you who can’t listen to the above video at work, is the transcript of what I think may go down in history as one of the most important political speeches given in our lifetimes.

This brings me the last point I want to make tonight, which is, when we’re done, we believe that we will have made the case overwhelmingly of the President’s guilt. That is, he’s done what he’s charged with. He withheld the money. He withheld the meeting. He used it to coerce Ukraine to do these political investigations. He covered it up. He obstructed us. He’s trying to obstruct you and he’s violated the Constitution. But I want to address one other thing tonight. Okay. He’s guilty. Okay. He’s guilty. Does he really need to be removed? Does he really need to be removed? We have an election coming up. Does he really need to be removed? He’s guilty. Is there really any doubt about this?

Do we really have any doubt about the facts here? Does anybody really question whether the President is capable of what he’s charged with? No one is really making the argument, Donald Trump would never do such a thing, because of course we know that he would, and of course we know that he did. It’s a somewhat different question though to ask, okay, it’s pretty obvious whether we can say it publicly or we can’t say it publicly. We all know what we’re dealing here with this President, but does he really need to be removed? And this is why he needs to be removed. Donald Trump chose Rudy Giuliani over his own intelligence agencies. He chose Rudy Giuliani over his own FBI Director. He chose Rudy Giuliani over his own National Security Advisors. When all of them were telling him this Ukraine 2016 stuff is kooky, crazy Russian propaganda. He chose not to believe them. He chose to believe Rudy Giuliani. That makes him dangerous to us, to our country. That was Donald Trump’s choice. Now, why would Donald Trump believe a man like Rudy Giuliani over a man like Christopher Wray? Okay. Why would anyone in their right mind believe Rudy Giuliani over Christopher Wray?

Because he wanted to and because what Rudy was offering him was something that would help him personally. And what Christopher Wray was offering him was merely the truth. What Christopher Wray was offering him was merely the information he needed to protect his country and its elections, but that’s not good enough. What’s in it for him? What’s in it for Donald Trump? This is why he needs to be removed. Now, you may be asking how much damage can he really do in the next several months until the election? A lot. A lot of damage. Now, we just saw last week, report that Russia tried to hack or maybe did hack Burisma. Okay. I don’t know if they got in. I’m trying to find out. My colleagues on the Intel committee, House and Senate, we’re trying to find out, did the Russians get in? What are the Russian plans and intentions? Well, let’s say they got in and let’s say they start dumping documents to interfere at the next election.

Let’s say they start dumping some real things they hack from Burisma. Let’s say they start dumping some fake things they didn’t hack from Burisma, but they want you to believe they did. Let’s say they start blatantly interfering in our election again to help Donald Trump. Can you have the least bit of confidence that Donald Trump will stand up to them and protect our national interest over his own personal interest? You know you can’t, which makes him dangerous to this country. You know you can’t. You know you can’t count on him. None of us can. None of us can. What happens if China got the message? Now you can say, he’s just joking of course. He didn’t really mean China should investigate the Bidens. You know that’s no joke.

Now maybe you could have argued three years ago when he said, “Hey Russia, if you’re listening, hack Hillary’s emails.” Maybe you could give him a freebie and say he was joking, but now we know better. Hours after he did that Russia did, in fact, try to hack Hillary’s emails. There’s no Mulligan here when it comes to our national security. So what if China does overtly or covertly start to help the Trump campaign? You think he’s going to call them out on it or you think he’s going to give them a better trade deal on it? Can any of us really have the confidence that Donald Trump will put his personal interests ahead of the national interests? Is there really any evidence in this presidency that should give us the ironclad confidence that he would do so?

You know you can’t count on him to do that. That’s the sad truth. You know you can’t count on him to do that. The American people deserve a President they can count on to put their interests first, to put their interests first. Colonel Vindman said, “Here, right matters. Here, right matters.” Well, let me tell you something, if right doesn’t matter, if right doesn’t matter, it doesn’t matter how good the Constitution is. It doesn’t matter how brilliant the framers were. Doesn’t matter how good or bad our advocacy in this trial is. Doesn’t matter how well written the Oath of Impartiality is. If right doesn’t matter, we’re lost.

If the truth doesn’t matter, we’re lost. Framers couldn’t protect us from ourselves, if right and truth don’t matter. And you know that what he did was not right. That’s what they do in the old country, that Colonel Vindman’s father came from. Or the old country that my great grandfather came from, or the old countries that your ancestors came from, or maybe you came from. But here, right is supposed to matter. It’s what’s made us the greatest nation on earth. No constitution can protect us, right doesn’t matter any more. And you know you can’t trust this President to do what’s right for this country. You can trust he will do what’s right for Donald Trump. He’ll do it now. He’s done it before. He’ll do it for the next several months. He’ll do it in the election if he’s allowed to. This is why if you find him guilty, you must find that he should be removed. Because right matters. Because right matters and the truth matters. Otherwise, we are lost.

Senate Republicans are trying everything they can not to listen. They’re reading books. They’re walking out of the Senate chamber. They’re telling their constituents that they aren’t hearing anything new, while simultaneously blocking any new evidence from being heard… We have to keep trying to break through, though, for the good of our country. We’ can’t give up. I know it’s unlikely, given what we’ve seen thus far, but we have to redouble our efforts. I rarely ask you do anything, but please share this video with everyone you know. And please, for God’s sake, call your Senators right now. This really is our last chance to keep this Republic of ours.

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 25 Comments

A defiant Donald Trump, emboldened by his support within the Republican-led Senate, admits to obstruction of Congress at Davos

It’s over two hours long, but, if you haven’t made your way though it yet, I’d encourage you to watch or listen to all of Congressman Adam Schiff’s opening argument, delivered this afternoon at the outset of Donald J. Trump’s Senate impeachment trial. It was an incredible performance, and it really got to the heart not only of Trump’s criminality, but what’s at stake for our country if we allow this administration to continue in the same manner without congressional oversight… For those of you who already did your civic duty today, and listened to what Schiff and others had to say about the rampant criminality of the Trump administration, here’s something else you might want to spend a few minutes considering. It’s video of Donald Trump, in Davos this morning, confessing to his obstruction of justice.

Explaining to members of the press why he’s not concerned about his impeachment trial in the Senate, Donald Trump says, “Honestly, we have all the material. They don’t have the material.” This, of course, is a reference to the fact that, yesterday, the Republican-led Senate voted along strict party lines to ensure that relevant documentation further corroborating the administration’s plan to force Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into announcing a corruption investigation into Joe Biden, be kept from the American people. This, as others, like Representative Val Demings, have pointed out, is a confession on the part of the President that, yes, he is unquestionable guilty of the second article of impeachment — “Obstruction of Congress.” He’s essentially bragging that he’s not worried, because he’s withholding evidence of his crime.

OK, I wasn’t going to just post clips of Schiff’s presentation, as I really wanted people to just follow that link and watch the whole thing for themselves, but here’s just a taste. I think it’s a nice counterpoint to what you just saw in the last clip from our defiant Criminal-In-Chief.

Posted in History, Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

Senate Republicans give Donald Trump the rigged show trial that he wanted

In a huge break with precedent, the Republican led Senate today voted down 11 attempts on the part of Senate Democrats to ensure that pertinent documents and witnesses would be introduced during the trial of Donald J. Trump.

In the history of the United States of America, there have been 15 impeachment trials in the U.S. Senate, and every single one of them had witnesses provide testimony. Senators historically, it would seem, felt as though, in order to honor their sworn oath to provide “impartial justice,” they had to actually hear from witnesses, as well as examine all of the relevant evidence. That, however, isn’t going to happen here. [McConnell says that they may decided to hear from witnesses and examine evidence after the both sides make their cases, but I think we all know that’s bullshit.]

Here, for those of you who might have missed it, is Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, one of the House Impeachment Managers, laying it all out in front of the Senate earlier today, showing how many witnesses had been heard from in each of these 15 impeachment trials that have been held in the history of the U.S. Senate.

And it’s not just the case that members of the Senate considered evidence and heard from witnesses in the past. Here’s a breakdown showing how the Senate trial of Donald J. Trump, under the rules passed in a 53-47 vote along strict party lines tonight, will be considerably different than that of William Jefferson Clinton, our last U.S. president to be impeached.

Adam Schiff had the following to say on this subject earlier today. “All of documents in the Clinton trial were turned over prior to the trial,” he said. “All 90,00 pages of them so that they could be used in the House’s case. None of the documents have been turned over by the president in this case.”

So why is it that the rules, as passed by the Republican controlled Senate tonight, are so drastically different this time? Why is it that this trial is going to look so different than every other impeachment trial in the history of the Senate. Here, again, is Congressman Adam Schiff, addressing the full Senate earlier today as one of the appointed House Impeachment Managers.

You would think that an administration with nothing to hide would welcome an opportunity to present evidence. It seems, however, that’s not the case. And, for what it’s worth, they aren’t just blocking evidence and witnesses from seeing the light of day. The Republicans making the President’s case in front of the Senate today, also lied repeatedly about the House impeachment investigation. Here, for example, is Trump attorney Pat Cipollone saying that House Republicans had been kept from participating in House depositions. This, of course, is a baldfaced lie.

It’s a small ray of sunshine in on an otherwise shitty day for American democracy, but it’s worth pointing out, when talking about these repeated lies and pattern of obstruction, that Senator Elizabeth “A trial without all of the evidence isn’t a trial – it’s a cover-up” Warren just said that, when she’s elected to replace Donald Trump in the White House, one of her first official acts will be to “investigate the corruption during the Trump administration and hold officials accountable for illegal activity.” And one would hope that perhaps individuals like Cipollone, who continue to lie for Donald Trump, in spite of the overwhelming that he withheld vital military aid from an ally at war in hopes for forcing said ally to announce a sham investigation into his primary domestic rival, might actually be held to account.

One more quote before I call it quits for the night. Here’s House Impeachment Manager Val Demings on this coordinated attempt by Mitch McConnell and the Republicans to keep these witnesses and evidence from the American people.

Now do me a favor and call your Senators, OK?

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 32 Comments

Alan Dershowitz, Donald Trump’s defense attorney, conceded in 1998 that there “certainly doesn’t have to be a crime” for impeachment to be pursued. “If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president, and who abuses trust, and who poses great danger to our liberty,” he said, that’s all the justification you need.

Now that the articles of impeachment have been relayed from the House to the Senate, and all of our Senators have sworn under oath to provide “impartial justice,” we’re ready for the trial of Donald J. Trump to commence. While Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has yet to come forward with the rules that will dictate the course of the trial, things are apparently set to begin tomorrow morning. And this afternoon, right at the deadline, the Trump administration issued their 110-page brief, laying out the defense strategy they intend to pursue. And, not surprisingly, they didn’t even really attempt to answer any of the changes enumerated by the House Impeachment Managers. They pretty much just said that Donald Trump, in withholding military aid in order to pressure a foreign government into announcing an investigation into his primary political rival, did “absolutely nothing wrong,” which is pretty much with the President’s lawyer, Alan “I kept my underwear on during the massage” Dershowitz told the nation yesterday on This Week with George Stephanopoulos. Here, if you haven’t seen it yet, is the video.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: “Is it your position that President Trump should not be impeached even if all the evidence and arguments laid out by the House are accepted as fact?”

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: “That’s right.”

This argument, of course, has no legal merit whatsoever. And Dershowitz knows it. Today he’s arguing on Donald Trump’s behalf that, “Abuse of power is not a criteria for impeachment,” and that, “You need ‘criminal type behavior’ akin to treason and bribery,” in order to impeach a U.S. president, but he wasn’t always of that opinion. No, back when he was a professor at Harvard, well before he fell in with the likes of Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump, Dershowitz had a different view. Here he is in 1998, saying that a president doesn’t have to commit a crime for impeachment to be pursued.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: “It certainly doesn’t have to be a crime if you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president, and who abuses trust, and who poses great danger to our liberty.”

As for the legal brief submitted by Dershowitz and the rest of the Trump defense brain trust this afternoon, here’s some of the response from the House Impeachment Managers, who, it would seem, disagree on the seriousness of the President’s abuse of power… Please read it.

The American people entrusted President Trump with the extraordinary powers vested in his Office by the Constitution, powers which he swore a sacred Oath to use for the Nation’s benefit. President Trump broke that promise. He used Presidential powers to pressure a vulnerable foreign partner to interfere in our elections for his own benefit. In doing so, he jeopardized our national security and our democratic self-governance. He then used his Presidential powers to orchestrate a cover-up unprecedented in the history of our Republic: a complete and relentless blockade of the House’s constitutional power to investigate high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

President Trump maintains that the Senate cannot remove him even if the House proves every claim in the Articles of impeachment. That is a chilling assertion. It is also dead wrong. The Framers deliberately drafted a Constitution that allows the Senate to remove Presidents who, like President Trump, abuse their power to cheat in elections, betray our national security, and ignore checks and balances. That President Trump believes otherwise, and insists he is free to engage in such conduct again, only highlights the continuing threat he poses to the Nation if allowed to remain in office.

Despite President Trump’s stonewalling of the impeachment inquiry, the House amassed overwhelming evidence of his guilt. It did so through fair procedures rooted firmly in the Constitution and precedent. It extended President Trump protections equal to, or greater than, those afforded to Presidents in prior impeachment inquiries. To prevent President Trump’s obstruction from delaying justice until after the very election he seeks to corrupt, the House moved decisively to adopt the two Articles of impeachment. Still, new evidence continues to emerge, all of which confirms these charges.

Now it is the Senate’s duty to conduct a fair trial—fair for President Trump, and fair for the American people. Only if the Senate sees and hears all relevant evidence—only if it insists upon the whole truth—can it render impartial justice. That means the Senate should require the President to turn over the documents he is hiding. It should hear from witnesses, as it has done in every impeachment trial in American history; it especially should hear from witnesses the President blocked from testifying in the House. President Trump cannot have it both ways. His Answer directly disputes key facts. He must either surrender all evidence relevant to the facts he has disputed or concede the facts as charged. Otherwise, this impeachment trial will fall far short of the American system of justice.

President Trump asserts that his impeachment is a partisan “hoax.” He is wrong. The House duly approved Articles of impeachment because its Members swore Oaths to support and defend the Constitution against all threats, foreign and domestic. The House has fulfilled its constitutional duty. Now, Senators must honor their own Oaths by holding a fair trial with all relevant evidence. The Senate should place truth above faction. And it should convict the President on both Articles…

Just to reiterate… Donald J. Trump, as Congressman Adam Schiff said today, “invited foreign interference, endangered our national security, and sought to cheat in the next election.” And, for that, he should be removed from office. And to argue that abuse of power is not impeachable is not only absurd, but it brings into sharp focus the fact that the administration doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on. They know that the evidence of the President’s constitutional misconduct is overwhelming, and that leaves them in a position where they have to fight to keep witnesses from testifying, push to hold Senate debate under cover of night, and put shameless has-beens like Alan Dershowitz on the stand to completely debase themselves, arguing that the executive branch is all-powerful, and above legislative oversight. This is not only wrong, constitutionally speaking, but it is incredibly dangerous. And we need to light up the Senate switchboards today, letting our elected officials know that we are watching, and that we expect them to honor their oaths to provide “impartial justice.”

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 106 Comments

Connect

BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative American Under Maynardism