Righteous Republicans

put country above party...

Calling my fellow Republicans: Trump is clearly unfit to remain in office
Christine Todd Whitman | Jul 22, 2018

...Republican voters, including those who supported Donald Trump, have the obligation to demand action from their elected officials. Vocal opposition is expected from Democrats, but it is Republicans’ disapproval that will have the most sway on Capitol Hill and at the White House.

Those members of the party in Congress who have stood up to the president should be commended. More must follow, with more than private talk and tepid tweets. Only bold leadership can put the United States back on a path that values freedom and democracy, and truly puts America first.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-whitman-trump-helsinki-gop-response-2...

> 1

The total courage and integrity available from republican congresspersons would fit into a thimble and there would still be plenty of room for someone's end finger joint.

The mass of republican congresspersons will only do the right thing regarding trump if and when they can clearly and unavoidably see such being to their political advantage- and not one moment before that possible moment.

Will that moment ever come? One would think so and one would hope so. But there are no guarantees in life. The majority of republican congresspersons may very well hang with trump to the extent that they will get hung up forever, politically. Or trump may triumph in the end. He might be reelected -or declared dictator.

To repeat what should be obvious - there are no guarantees in life or in politics. All we citizens can do is stay on the burning deck and do everything we can legally do to keep the ship from sinking into some unimaginable hellscape from which there can be no escape.

- And have a nice day.

Republican Congressman steps up, says he was 'sickened by the exchange' between Trump and Putin
Jen Hayden | Jul 23, 2018

Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylavnia is a former FBI agent and he’s joining Rep. Will Hurd, a former CIA agent, in criticizing Donald Trump’s obvious kowtowing to Vladmir Putin during their joint press conference in Helsinki. In an interview with NPR’s All Things Considered host Michel Martin, Fitzpatrick offered a sobering assessment of the press conference, saying he was "frankly sickened by the exchange.”

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2018/7/23/1782831/-Republican-Congressman-steps-u...

She's not a current officeholder. I suspect she had no plans to become one. She certainly could win now that she's crossed Trump's base. Ugh.

>1 margd:

Err...for the OP, did you forget the "self-" prefix?

>5 krolik: There are plenty of those, fer sure, but I was thinking of Republicans who risked or eschewed political lives/future at least until Trump phenomenon winds to its inevitable, inglorious end: Corker, Flake, McCain, Frum, Fitzpatrick, Hurd, et al.?

As in "Righteous Among the Nations...is an honorific used by the State of Israel to describe non-Jews who risked their lives during the Holocaust to save Jews from extermination by the Nazis." (wikipedia)

>4 timspalding: Tim's observation is correct re Christine Todd Whitman, though I couldn't help wonder if he meant "couldn't"--a trap for me? :-)

>2 JGL53: I heard that Trump rally location in Kansas was twice down-sized and still only half full. Hopefully, it won't take crash of economy (ag, autos) to bring Trump supporters to their senses... GM stock dropped...

>6 margd:

Ah. My mistake.

The Republican party is in a really bad spot with Trump now. It's not just about losing power in the very near future but the future of the party itself. Most all of the work that went into rebuilding the party brand after the Nixon debacle will be flushed down the toilet if they can't save this guy who I think the majority of Republican office holders privately detest. There is a lot of fear involved in why they are closing ranks around him. Their own futures and the future of their political party are on the line.

I do wonder if the investigation is going to cross over to the other side. The Democratic party has never been immune to corruption or criminal behavior either.

Anyway the Cohen tape the FBI has released portions of is only one of 12 and probably not even the worst. The problem for me with the length of the Mueller investigation is that in the meantime the Orange character wreaks more havoc. It appears to me that there is a whole shitload of stuff on him--it would be nice to see some real criminal charges against him and some of his closer associates soon.

>8 lriley:

The thing is, gerrymandering (partisan and the bizarre spectacle of court-required racial gerrymandering), the larger social process of "sorting" and increasing polarization of American society have left almost all Republicans in safe districts. They aren't on the line. They don't need a rebranding to win, and they're not afraid, or, if they are, it's of being primaried by someone to the right of them.

#9--I keep hearing that the Democratic party thinks it's going to gain a lot of seats in November. That said that remains to be seen. There are other things that Trump is doing that might tip the balance at least in some districts as well--such as this tariff thing.

>6 margd:

You're right; my remark was too glib.

Of course, it would be nice to see more Republicans with skin still in the game take a stand.

And the cynic in me speculates that there are some opportunist careerists who have gone along with the Trump train who will soon flip not because of principle but because they are sniffing the wind...and their next opportunity will be to seize the role of noble dissident (they will be shocked, shocked), whereupon they will be well-positioned for power in the next chapter of the party's history. Excuse me while I reach for my sick bag.

>9 timspalding: I think you are right. I don't see anyone in the Republican party behaving the way one would expect if they thought they were going to be out of office/power in a few months. With gerrymandering and voter suppression they have a guaranteed win in November and they know it. Don't get me wrong - I'd love to see a change but I don't think it is going to happen.

>12 alco261:

I think there's a lot of nervousness overall. Most Republicans are not in origin Trumpists. And they're seen that institutional adherence is suddenly worthless, if Trump wants to screw you in a tweet. And while they may not lose their seats, I think they realize that the Republican party has backed itself into a nasty demographic corner.

>13 timspalding: if Trump wants to screw you in a tweet.

What does this mean?

Charles Koch, network send GOP a message: We're happy to back Democrats who share our policy goals (CNBC)

Doesn't mean much to me, but no doubt it will mean something to those in the USA.

I gather Kochs like Trumpian tax cuts and deregulation (maybe judges?), but not tariffs and immigration moves. (Hurts bizness.)
Message to Trump nation: don't take our $$$ for granted?

>16 margd: Which is why I don't think they'll be many Democrats taking them up on their offer.

Maybe a Trump attack-tweet hurts in an R primary. but in a general election it might be a badge of honor! ;-)

It was good to see so many people (incl. Melania and other Rs) defend LeBron James, who, asked, took his own jab at Trump and is quite able to defend himself, but after all was being interviewed for his commendable school initiative in Akron, Ohio.

Republican political analyst, Rick Wilson has a book coming out tomorrow. Everything Trump Touches Dies: A Republican Strategist Gets Real About the Worst President Ever.

Here's a review from the Chicago Tribune: GOP strategist grinds Trump into hamburger in new book

>20 2wonderY: Wow. Tim Mak has nothing good to say about the new Rick Wilson book.

https://www.npr.org/635978021

Longtime GOP strategist @SteveSchmidtSES explains why he renounced his membership in the Republican Party. Listen wherever you get your podcasts. http://applepodcasts.com/preet (Excerpt at webpage below)

Preet Bharara @PreetBharara | 4:46 AM - 9 Aug 2018
https://twitter.com/PreetBharara/status/1027521560616333312

I have not always agreed with John McCain, but the prospect of losing this American hero & patriot is made all the more difficult by the twin realities of being left with this president and a GOP that, with few and pale exceptions, lacks McCain’s moral courage to speak out.

Ruth Marcus @RuthMarcus (NYT) | 8:38 AM - 24 Aug 2018

#23--while I can appreciate Mr. McCain's almost singlehanded from the republican side real opposition to the present administration and that throughout his Senate career he's been pretty much fearless in the face of power and true to his beliefs I've never really liked him. For one thing he's never met a war he didn't like or the potential for one. He thinks of military solutions as first options. I would also point out that Trump maybe never ever emerges as a presidential candidate if McCain hadn't named Sarah Palin as his running mate back in 2007. Out of all that comes your tea party movement and the almost religious and cult like behavior of that group in its coalescence around those it deems to be prophets.

Though a lifelong Democrat, I never took a dislike to John McCain, still less to Mitt Romney, but I didnʻt vote for either of them (2008, 2012);
Maybe the smartest thing Romney ever said was "You shouldnʻt have to go to the Emergency Room for a store throat."

Rest in peace, Lindsey Graham
Dana Milbank | August 31

...after serving for two decades as Robin to McCain’s Batman, Graham buried whatever remained of his own reputation for iconoclasm even before his partner’s funeral.

On Tuesday, Graham took a seat on the couch of “Fox & Friends,” President Trump’s favorite show, and sealed his transition from apostate to Trump apparatchik...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/with-batman-gone-it-seems-robin-has-take... …

___________________________________________________

Benjamin Wittes @benjaminwittes (Lawfare)

A few reflections on this tweet*, which contains a number of themes I have been thinking about a lot recently.

First, "Those who stand against Trump will move on to many different things when he's gone": Yes. We will. Those who stand against Trump come from left, right, and center. What unites them is anti-authoritarianism and democratic pre-politics, not a specific political program.

It is thus not merely probable, but actively desirable that the anti-Trump coalition will break up into its constituent pieces once the current crisis has passed. The country, after all, needs a vibrant democratic right, a vibrant democratic left, and vibrant democratic center...

Second, there is one important thing that we should all try to retain from the current moment, however—and I think this is a critically important thing that I hope will survive the current struggle. That is a certain mutual respect and admiration born of common tectonic values.

I would hope that we would all retain in future disagreements a deep awareness that the people we are disagreeing with are people with whom we shared a foxhole when democratic government itself faced a threat.

I very much hope I will never be able to disagree—however intensely—with such people again without a keen understanding that on the most important values, we share a core. And I hope that will cause me to engage with them more respectfully than I might otherwise have done.

I hope it makes me more open to arguments I would otherwise dismiss. I hope it makes me more respectful in disagreement. I hope it creates the possibility of dialogue between people—and between movements—that have regarded one another as hopeless.

...This brings me to the second half of @Kasparov63's tweet*: "those who still support him should never be forgotten or forgiven." I don't mean to sound arch or moralistic. But yes. Speaking personally, I do judge. And my memory will be very long.

I will never forget the people who stared this moment in the face and made peace with it. I will never forget those who decided to tolerate it because of tax cuts, or judges, or to own the libs.

I will also never forget those on the left who hate the center and the democratic right so much that they prefer to make common cause with the Trumpists than with the impure. I will never forget those of all factions who, when it really mattered, stayed narrow and parochial.

I will never be able to engage these people in the future—no matter how much I might agree with them—without a deep awareness that they lack what to me are the most important democratic virtues and commitments. Frankly, I will always hold them in at least some contempt.

I will remember who put something else before the vitality and health of our democracy...

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1036241825500200961.html

______________________________________________________________________

* Those who stand against Trump will move on to many different things when he's gone, but those who still support him should never be forgotten or forgiven.

Retweeted Ron Fournier @ron_fournier review of WaPO story, "RIP Lindsey Graham": "Brutal"

Garry Kasparov |
1:05 PM - 1 Sep 2018

________________________________________________________________________

Worth a read. I share @benjaminwittes feelings. And the need to hold accountable those who are enabling Trumpism is critical. But my tweak to @Kasparov63 is that we must always hold out the opportunity for redemption. That hill must be especially steep here, but it must exist.

Ian Bassin @ianbassin
7:57 AM - 2 Sep 2018

Nebraska GOP Senator, Ben Sasse, reprimands Trump tweet about Justice Dept. cases against Hunter and Collins:

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/404844-gop-senator-responds-to-trumps-latest-...

If Trump fires Sessions he's going to have a hard time replacing him. Depending on the makeup of the Senate after the mid-terms getting a new AG approved who will be the lackey he wants him to be is going to be nigh impossible. The democrats--if they've got 48 or 49 or 50 are going to be en masse against and there seems to be a number of republican Senators willing to draw the line on protecting the Mueller investigation. Trump seems incognizant of the the fact that he's between a very large lock and an equally hard place. Doesn't appear to me to be any maneuverability room on this.

On the question of Hunter and Collins--these things come up and it's not just republicans that get caught up in the wheels of justice. Corinne Brown and Chaka Fattah were prosecuted not that long ago. Congresspeople fucking about with the stock market do so at great risk. What Collins did was absolutely illegal and it's almost always a slam dunk prosecution. And Hunter should have known better too--his dad was a longtime congressman. You want the job--you don't stick campaign cash in your pocket. Both of them were all kinds of stupid and we can arrogant to the mix.

>28 lriley: I'm glad you pointed to the Brown and Fattah prosecutions. Though they weren't picked up as national scandals, they answer the question of the impartial pursuit of justice by the DOJ. Both investigations presumably begun under the Obama administration. They appear to be on a par with Hunter and Collins.

#29--well Trump wants the public to perceive this issue---like his own issues as a witch hunt....and none of them are......and Sessions FWIW is a real deal conservative (not a fly by the seat of his pants one like Donald himself is). Jeff was chosen by Donald (because he was one of the 'best people') to run the department but he is the administrative head of a vast machine and it doesn't mean he makes decisions on every single case that comes along. There are rules and guidelines. The Collins case in fact is triggered by mechanisms from the SEC--when someone on the board of a company tips off other individuals that a crash is coming and they sell off before the public knows about it---it's pretty much an automatic that the SEC jumps all over those kinds of transactions and they are slam dunk or lay up prosecutions. Fuck Collins anyway--if he didn't know that he's a complete clown---and he didn't need the money. He was one of the richest people in congress. He could have done the right thing and taken the loss and I'd bet you he's thought about that a lot in the last month or so. Zero sympathy.

Personally I've never liked Sessions and Jeff has done a lot of work to push Trump's agenda but he recused himself because he knew it wouldn't be ethical to do otherwise. Trump can't get certain concepts through his extremely thick skull. Part of his problem is he thinks like a dictator would. Businessmen make shit politicians--and that especially goes for shady businessmen.

This may or may not be the correct thread, but I have to share this remarkable (and anonymous) op-ed published in The New York Times today.

I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration

President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader.

It’s not just that the special counsel looms large. Or that the country is bitterly divided over Mr. Trump’s leadership. Or even that his party might well lose the House to an opposition hellbent on his downfall.

The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

I would know. I am one of them.

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.

That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.

The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.

Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.

In addition to his mass-marketing of the notion that the press is the “enemy of the people,” President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic.

Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.

But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.

From the White House to executive branch departments and agencies, senior officials will privately admit their daily disbelief at the commander in chief’s comments and actions. Most are working to insulate their operations from his whims.

Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.

“There is literally no telling whether he might change his mind from one minute to the next,” a top official complained to me recently, exasperated by an Oval Office meeting at which the president flip-flopped on a major policy decision he’d made only a week earlier.

The erratic behavior would be more concerning if it weren’t for unsung heroes in and around the White House. Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.

It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t.

The result is a two-track presidency.

Take foreign policy: In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations.

Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track, one where countries like Russia are called out for meddling and punished accordingly, and where allies around the world are engaged as peers rather than ridiculed as rivals.

On Russia, for instance, the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better — such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable.

This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state.

Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis. So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it’s over.

The bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.

Senator John McCain put it best in his farewell letter. All Americans should heed his words and break free of the tribalism trap, with the high aim of uniting through our shared values and love of this great nation.

We may no longer have Senator McCain. But we will always have his example — a lodestar for restoring honor to public life and our national dialogue. Mr. Trump may fear such honorable men, but we should revere them.

There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first. But the real difference will be made by everyday citizens rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels in favor of a single one: Americans.

- The writer is a senior official in the Trump administration. -

'#31--I'm not sure what to make of that actually. I'm seeing some comedic pornography 'Deep Throat 2' or 'Even Deeper Throat'. I would think the NYTimes though would have vetted and would know precisely who this individual is.

Or could it be a black op piece by the NY Times?--who have been a frequent target of Trump.

Or a black op piece by Bob Woodward? to help sell his book.

Or Mike Pence wanting to be King of the castle?

Or poor Jeff Sessions--seeing an opportunity of getting his own back after a year and a half of abuse and the recent public revelation that Trump refers to him as a retard? And you know Papadopolous kind of put him in the middle of the Trump-Russian thing so......maybe some legal leverage from that when the shit hits the fan.

One of Kelly or Mattis? Probably not but........hey! you know when you're picking from all the best people.

But to me it's kind of like someone maybe trying to get him/herself a get out of jail free card or someone worried about his/her future job prospects....not wanting to be tainted by all the chaos and corruption.

Anyway I'm not at all reassured that this individual or group of people are really looking out for the public first and foremost. IMO it strikes me more as an ass saving maneuver.

My advice to him, her or them---quit your job, don't work for this administration, don't hide who you are, tell the truth.

Some people like Lawrence O'Donnell think it's Dan Coats. Coats is pretty much a traditional meat and potatoes republican--not really a member of the new breed.

Trump op-ed in New York Times passes the key tests (BBC)

>32 lriley:

New York Times Trump Op-Ed denied by Mike Pence

so obviously. we can cross him off the list. Right? Right?

I've seen several other commentaries along this line relating to the anonymous op-ed and Woodward's Fear, but Matt Bai puts it very succinctly:

My problem with the insurrection rationale, however, is that it subverts the rule of law just as much as Trump would if left to his own devices. It amounts to vigilante government. It says: We can’t stand by and wait for help to arrive in the person of the voters or the feckless Congress, so we’re going to leap out of the car and heroically wrest the presidency from the hands of the madman ourselves.

And like all vigilantism, this lends itself to chaos and abuse. Who decides which presidential order gets followed and which is too dangerous? Who draws the line between radical reform and outright recklessness? Who elected John Kelly to make those calls?

Only in banana republics do military juntas seize control of government and leave some titular leader in place to provide the illusion of legitimacy.

In a republic like ours, aides don’t get to secretly decide when the president should be granted his authority to act. We do.

John Kelly’s vigilante White House

also great snark

Better for serious men like Kelly and Mattis (and serious women like Kellyanne Conway and Nikki Haley) to be on the inside, insulating us from an imbalanced president, than to have them all storm out and leave us to the likes of sycophantic Stephen Miller, who may in fact be an extraterrestrial.

Listening to Senator Graham in Kavanaugh hearings, I'm wondering if Pence offered him Vice-presidency??

Steven Colbert criticizes the anonymous writer's characterization of the cabinet invoking the 25th Amendment:

"I want to point out that technically the 25th Amendment is not a 'constitutional crisis,' it's a constitutional remedy."

and someone on twitter poke a pin through their "resistance" balloon:

"They call themselves resistors but they're participating in this travesty to get policies enacted and enforced they support."

and another twitter observation:

We simply can't have people taking documents off the president's desk. We can't have this disintegration of norms and lines of authority. We can't have a shadow apparatus working parallel to the legitimate one.

>36 2wonderY:
Exactly: it's a junta mentality.

#38--in fact they're insisting that there is good stuff the Trump administration has done. Which to the writer of the op-ed is deregulation, judges and free trade shit. That's at best a matter of opinion and personally I haven't seen anything good come out of the Trump White House since day one and at all.

I'm suspicious of this anonymity thing anyway. If this person wants credibility he should resign, come forward and say why. And today there's nothing but 'It wasn't me' denials from senior members.

>37 margd:
I had not thought of that possibility. After Graham's Fox interview, I thought maybe Trump had some interesting kompromat.

>36 2wonderY:
Somehow this all reminds me of Alexander Haig after Reagan was shot: "As of now, I am in control here at the White House."

For those too young to remember, Haig was a highly decorated military man and an extreme hawk, who was serving as Secretary of State. Few if any were reassured by this announcement.

(Edited because I apparently can't type, or autocorrect changed something. The article I was trying to link appeared in the Washington Post on 03/23/2011; it was titled When Reagan Was Shot)

Here’s the most robust response to that NYT op-ed:

https://theintercept.com/2018/09/06/dear-anonymous-trump-official-there-is-no-re...

And another who instead calls it mostly routine:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-09-06/trump-official-s-resistance-o...

The crisis isn’t Trump. It’s his Republican enablers.
Ezra Klein@ezraklein Sep 6, 2018

Trump’s flaws lie in plain sight. It’s the GOP that pretends blindness.

...The Founding Fathers were not unaware of the possibility that a demagogue or a knave might win the presidency. That’s why they checked the executive with an independent Congress and built in powers of impeachment. That Republicans in this Congress have proven so subservient to — or scared of — Trump that they have let the fate of the country hinge on whether his staff can adequately distract and calm him is a subversion of the constitutional order and an abdication of responsibility.

As David Frum writes:

Impeachment is a constitutional mechanism. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment is a constitutional mechanism. Mass resignations followed by voluntary testimony to congressional committees are a constitutional mechanism. Overt defiance of presidential authority by the president’s own appointees — now that’s a constitutional crisis.

...I wrote...last year

Sometimes I imagine this era going catastrophically wrong...and historians writing about it in the future. They will go back and read Trump’s tweets and his words and read what we were saying, and they will wonder what the hell was wrong with us. You knew, they’ll say. You knew everything you needed to know to stop this. And what will we say in response?

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/6/17825406/trump-woodward-op-ed-n...

Obama speaks out against Trump and attacks 'politics of fear and resentment' (Guardian)

Ex-president mentions Trump by name in impassioned speech that rebukes Republicans for ‘pitting one group against another’...

Obama asked: “What happened to the Republican party?"

Add McConnell and Ryan tactics to Wolff, Omarosa, Woodward, NYT Anonymous reports?

Ryan, McConnell try to coax Trump away from shutdown — using props and flattery
Damian Paletta, Erica Werner and Josh Dawsey | September 7, 2018

...House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (Wis.) showed the president glossy photos of a wall under construction along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) brought an article from the Washington Examiner that described Trump as brilliantly handling the current budget process, and portrayed the GOP as unified and breaking through years of dysfunction.

...they sought to persuade Trump to put off a fight for more border wall money until after the November midterm elections, promising to try then to get him the outcome he wants...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/ryan-mcconnell-try-to-coax-trump...

Tom Nichols @RadioFreeTom https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom
Author of "The Death of Expertise", Professor at NavalWarCollege & @HarvardEXT. Former Senate aide.
6:16 PM - 7 Sep 2018

Your Friday Tweetstorm (rebooted).

Trumpers are mounting a lot of desperate defenses of the week’s bad news, with lots of shouting at the Never Trumpers (because we don’t matter) and anxiety about who wil be left on “the day after."
This is because they know we’re right. /1

There’s no more question about “who will be proved right.” The Never Trumpers were right, and our worst fears are playing out right now. Yes, the GOP got its judges. And no, the economy hasn’t collapsed. (yet). The rest is happening as we speak. /2

By this I mean continuing attacks on our constitutional norms by the WH itself; a war on our IC and LE communities; the attempt to politicize the DoJ; even the shredding of the AG. (Karmic payback for Sessions, but wow.) /3

Executive depts are functioning by default, aides are managing up (to put it gently) as they try to whack each other out; policies diverge between sensible stuff the bureaucrats can do, and exec orders that vary from stupid to cruel, and meant mostly as theater for the rubes. /4

In foreign policy, the Russians are rightfully laughing at us; the Chinese and North Koreans have a free pass; we're in a tariff war with our own allies; NATO has been dangerously undermined, Canada is bewildered and angry. Immense damage to US strength. /5

The GOP as a party, meanwhile, is now a cult of personality, bereft of conservative ideals, except for one: That "conservatism" must be carried forward by unelected judges, which is totally not a conservative ideal. Veteran GOPers see what's coming - and have wisely retired. /6

All that's left to see is just how badly the Trumpers got it wrong. It's no longer a matter, for example, of *whether* collusion with Russia happened, it's *how far it went and who knew*. Even if there were no more revelations, this alone is shocking. But there will be more. /7

Elsewhere, POTUS is implicated in two felonies (at least two, for now) involving payouts to a porn star - forcing every GOPer who ever blathered about "character" and "integrity" and "you can't trust a man if his wife can't" to eat those words and swallow them dry, forever. /8

It was unwise for Trump loyalists to double, triple, quadruple, and quintuple down on all this. They were warned: there is no better Trump. It will actually get *worse* from here, which most of them have assured themselves is impossible. And yet it will. And this scares them. /9

In the end, it's a false question about "who will be proved right." Even with a honeymoon grace period, that debate should have ended after Helsinki. But it's over now as we enter this time of national crisis. They know this. It's why they'll yell louder: It's panic time. /10x

#37, 41 Or maybe Trump promised Graham the Attorney General position?

The New Yorker writer, Naomi Fry, writes a thoughtful analysis of complicity, positing that the NYT fell into complicity by publishing as they did:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-anonymous-new-york-times-op-ed...

Further to Woodard book and anonymous NYT article:

Trump and his flunkies: Why aren't staffers standing up to him?
Barbara Res* | Sep 12, 2018

...“Get rid of the (expletive) braille (elevator buttons). No blind people are going to live in Trump Tower. Just do it,”

...Trump...enjoyed tormenting weak people.

Trump ordered “outrageous or just plain stupid ideas, both legal and illegal. Sometimes those lines were blurred”

...Ordering an underling to do something that was impossible gave Trump the opportunity to castigate a subordinate and also blame him for anything that “went wrong” in connection with the unperformed order later. A Trump-style win-win.

...he would expect people to lie for him

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-trump-and-his-flunkies-20180911-story...

* former vice president in charge of construction at the Trump Organization

Ohio businessman and lifetime Republican donor quits the GOP

http://www.dispatch.com/news/20180914/les-wexner-renounces-republican-party-affi...

Ex-GOP donor urges support for Dems in midterms: 'Democracy is at stake'
Aris Folley | 09/15/18

“We need to turn the House and Senate as a check on Donald Trump and his runaway presidency,” (hedge funder and former GOP mega-donor Seth Klarman, previously one of the biggest donors to the Republican Party in New England) said.

... “betrayed” by “spineless” Republicans who he says have been “profiles in cowardice.” Now, Klarman says the only option is to “act as a check and balance.”

“By the (2018) election I think I’ll have spent between $18 and $20 million ” ..., which would make him one of the top donors for the Democratic Party this year.

...accused Republicans of giving a huge tax cut “largely to rich people” and slammed them because they “were supposed to be the fiscally responsible party.”

“Whatever irresponsible fiscal things the Democrats do won’t be worse than what the Republicans have already done”...

...“could conceivably upset a few of my clients” ...“it’s more important that I do what my conscience requires by speaking out.”

“There are things more important than making money”...

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/406861-ex-gop-donor-urges-suppo...

This constant chasing after wealthy donors is one of the worst things about our elections--right up there with purging voter rolls and Diebold voting machines.

The GOP tax bill's bringing out my inner socialist.
The sex scandals are bringing out my inner feminist.
Donald Trump and Roy Moore are bringing out my inner liberal.
WHAT IS HAPPENING?

Bill Kristol @BillKristol | 12:46 PM - 21 Nov 2017

________________________________________________________

The history of the Trump family business is bringing out my inner socialist.
Some defenses of Kavanaugh are bringing out my inner feminist.
The Trump-era degradation of American conservatism is bringing out my inner liberal.
IT’S HAPPENING AGAIN.

Bill Kristol @BillKristol | 6:00 PM - 2 Oct 2018

The Republican Party Needs to Embrace Liberalism
David Frum | November 2018 Issue

Classical liberal values have disappeared from the right and are now disappearing from the left. Someone needs to adopt them. Why not the GOP?

...The social turmoil of the 1960s and ’70s ripped away liberal’s positive associations and, in so doing, helped redeem conservatism from the discredit it incurred during the Great Depression...

....If the Trump years have achieved anything positive, it is to jolt a new generation into appreciating the value of the institutional legacies now under attack: Free trade. International partnerships. Honest courts and accountable leaders. Civil rights and civil liberties. Private space for faith but public policy informed by science. A social-insurance system that cushions failure and a market economy that incentivizes success.

Surely these things still command the assent of enough of us that we can continue our usual political disagreements—about health care, about taxes, about how to govern schools and fund roads—without demolishing the shared foundations of the constitutional order.

... in a democratic society, conservatism and liberalism are not really opposites. They are different facets of the common democratic creed. What conservatives are conserving, after all, is a liberal order. That truth has been easy to overlook in the friction of partisan politics. It must be reaffirmed now, in this hour of liberal peril.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/the-case-for-liberal-republ...

"I don't care--do you?" Wonder if that was a Trump taunt as Melania left to visit the refugee children?

Melania Trump Mourns Elephant Deaths As Her Husband Lets People Import Tusks As Trophies
Lydia O’Connor | Oct 5, 2018

“It is sad to see this,” the first lady reportedly told her guide while viewing 105 tons of ash from an ivory burn.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/melania-trump-mourns-ivory-burn_us_5bb79e8b...

Tom Nichols in The Atlantic ~

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/tom-nichols-why-im-leaving-rep...

Colin Powell:

“We the people” has been replaced with “Me the President.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/colin-powell-scorches-donald-trump_us_5bbad...

Trump again says the Democrats, broadly, are "an angry left-wing mob."
Daniel Dale @ddale8

Of course, people shouting “lock her up” are also in a way a mob.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol | 5:47 PM - 9 Oct 2018

Listen to these Trump voters now:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/10/16/pulse-of-the-people-voter-panel-i...

Ex-Florida GOP chair shreds Trump: 'The worse social poison to afflict our country in decades'

Al Cardenas, a frequent Trump critic, tweeted his comment in response to the president's new campaign ad on immigration.

“You are a despicable divider; the worse social poison to afflict our country in decades,” Cardenas tweeted. “This ad, and your full approval of it, will condemn you and your bigoted legacy forever in the annals of America’s history books.”

The campaign ad that Cardenas refers to in his tweet features clips from the expletive-laden trial of Luis Bracamontes, a deported Mexican man who returned to the U.S. and killed two sheriff’s deputies in 2014. It also shows sometimes violent footage of crowds of migrants.

Cardenas is considered one of the most influential Latino Republicans.

Capt. Sullenberger: I’ve never been more concerned about this country’s future

"I don’t think he’s (Trump) capable or willing to change. I think that he’s remarkably incurious and doesn’t value learning. Instead of talking to the current occupant of that office, I am talking to the American people. I’m saying, you are the ultimate check and balance. It is up to us... we cannot wait for someone to rescue us, we must do it ourselves. Everyone, everywhere, must vote in massive numbers."

That’s how Sullenberger, a Republican for almost his entire life, responded when asked over the weekend what he would say to President Donald Trump if he had a chance to talk to him. “This is not normal,” he said. “I’m as concerned about the state of this nation as I have been in a half century.”

David Jolly, Former GOP Congressman and New Radio Host, Backs Andrew Gillum

"I've turned in my ballot. I voted for Andrew Gillum. The reason is simple: it's because I've served with Ron DeSantis.”

Sad to see knuckle-dragging Republicans (Ted Cruze, Devin Nunes...) survive, when thinking fellows like Carlos Curbelo goes down and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen retires:

Carlos Curbelo, Top Republican On Climate Change, Loses To Debbie Mucarsel-Powell
Alexander C. Kaufman | 1/06/2018

This is bad news for the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus.

...(also) Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Republican congresswoman from a neighboring South Florida district, (for whom) climate change was too obvious to doubt. Their districts suffer routine flooding from sea level rise, both as storm surge and through the porous limestone bedrock beneath much of the Sunshine State’s southern tip. With Ros-Lehtinen retiring, Democrat Donna Shalala, the former health and human services secretary under President Bill Clinton, (replaces her)...

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/curbelo-fl-26_us_5bd9dbbbe4b01abe6a1a8392

Looks like the House is going to be 227-208 for the Democrats which would be a pickup of 32 House seats. It's in the range of 30-35 which was kind of the conservative guess of what would happen. For the Dems this teeters on the edge of okay/underwhelming in that respect. They will have control of the House. They've lost at least 3 seats in the Senate--could lose 2 more--they've won Nevada. As far as governorships--the Gillum loss has got to sting and Abrams doesn't look good either. Trump's last minute campaigning in the south seems to have made a difference.

Back to the Dems Senate losses--Heitkamp, Donnelly and McCaskill were always fucking awful anyway. Donnelly in the last couple weeks was imitating a knuckle dragging Republican. Why not vote for the real thing in that case? Heitkamp was a coal and oil and gas baroness. Hilary thought that McCaskill absolutely stabbed her in the back in 2007 and then McCaskill kisses her ass in 2015 to make up. Even with her own team McCaskill had this vindictive streak. Missouri in any case outside of St. Louis--Dems run to the center/right if they want to win. Hawley who beat McCaskill comes across about as two-faced as it gets. It seems to be the thing in that state.

O'Rourke pushed Cruz really hard and the Dems turned a couple Texas house seats doing it. Despite losing Beto has a future. I liked him.

Back to the House---the Dems can effectively shitcan any legislation coming out of the Senate if they choose to do so. They certainly can leverage the Senate if that body wants to move on something. The Dems as well have subpoena power to effectively investigate or to coordinate with the FBI in their investigations. They should also go after Republicans Steve King (Iowa-4), Duncan Hunter Jr. (CA-50) and Chris Collins (NY-27) on ethics violations and throw them right out and put those seats back up for another election.

In my own district (NY-23) Tom Reed the republican incumbent won again. His challenger Tracy Mitrano kind of made it close or a lot closer than the usual. I won't miss watching either's TV ads. Reed lying that she was an Ithaca liberal (as if being from Ithaca is a slanderous thing) and making out that she was a this a that and the next thing--couldn't be trusted. His other TV ad I guess was supposed to be more positive scripted Reed's big sister to make her sound like a kindergartner. It was nauseatingly vapid. Mitrano who is from Penn Yan and not Ithaca--it would take you about an hour--maybe even longer to get from one to the other. Her TV ad wasn't good either. It's message--Reed takes millions from this lobby and millions from that. Maybe--probably it's true but no one took any high ground. They both went low or went stupid. I voted for Mitrano in the end. I don't like Reed. I wasn't really impressed with her though either. She called herself a centrist. WTF is that?--it's kind of a conservative.

Rachel Maddow showed a chart, probably on Monday's show, possibly Sunday's. It showed the enormous uphill battle for congressional seats because of gerrymandering. It compared popular vote spreads and how many seats they should result as compared to how many they actually result. It was quite amazing. So the next focus needs to be at the state level, undoing the gerrymandering.

Several states took the initiative on that on the ballot this year, establishing fairer districting models.

>65 2wonderY: I saw that program. It made me sick what the Republicans have done. Showed what cheaters they are!

Scott Walker's governorship in Wisconsin ended. Hip-hip-fucking-hooray. Dana Rohrabacher looks like a dead whale too--not only in the wet suit they stuffed him into in his TV ad which was a-w-k-w-a-r-d a-s f-u-c-k but even more hanging onto a surf board--completely l-a-m-e and jabbering on about how he's going to protect pre-existing conditions---b-i-g f-a-t f-u-c-k-i-n-g l-i-e when he absolutely was against the ACA and absolutely for big pharma ripping everyone off. Let's get real. He made out like he had convictions and there he was in his TV ad showing he didn't.

For Trump and the republicans it's a victory in the sense that it could have been worse. Those extra Senate seats will make it easier to make more judicial appointments. It will be easier for him to fire Sessions (or others) and replace him. The replacements can still get grilled though and in the case of the Justice Dept. that replacement is going to have to answer on what his intentions are to the Mueller investigation. Winning Florida helps to maintain the status quo though the republicans did lose two congressional seats there.

Losing the House should be a two year headache for him though. I hope he has a good supply of aspirin.

Max Boot @MaxBoot | 5:33 PM - 12 Nov 2018
A rare creature these days: an honorable Republican who won’t undermine democracy to win an election.

andrew kaczynski @KFILE | 4:52 PM - 12 Nov 2018:
Wow Martha McSally has conceded.
The NRSC, Trump, and RNC wanted her to push voter fraud conspiracies. She and her campaign refused.

McSally For Senate @MarthaMcSally US Senate candidate, AZ | 4:46 PM - 12 Nov 2018:
Congrats to @kyrstensinema. I wish her success.
I’m grateful to all those who supported me in this journey.
I’m inspired by Arizonans’ spirit and our state’s best days are ahead of us.

Brave Republicans are few, but we have to note them as they dispute Trump's words.

GOP lawmaker 'disgusted' by Trump for mocking House reps

GOP Illinois Rep. Adam Kinzinger said Tuesday he was "very disgusted" by President Donald Trump for mocking House Republicans who did not back him enough during their midterm election campaigns.

"A little more grace would have been a lot better, I was very disgusted when I heard that," Kinzinger said in an interview with CNN's John Berman on "New Day." "Let's go forward and look at how we're gonna do better in 2020."
….
Retiring GOP Rep. Ryan Costello of Pennsylvania took to Twitter last week to express his anger with Trump over his treatment of GOP candidates.

"To deal w harassment & filth spewed at GOP MOC's in tough seats every day for 2 yrs, bc of POTUS; to bite ur lip more times you'd care to; to disagree & separate from POTUS on principle & civility in ur campaign; to lose bc of POTUS & have him piss on u. Angers me to my core," Costello tweeted.

>69 margd: contd. McSally's graciousness in defeat wasn't preceded by a clean campaign according to comments...sad...

Rep. Eric Swalwell @RepSwalwell https://twitter.com/RepSwalwell | 5:57 PM - 12 Nov 2018
Class.

Rep. Eric Swalwell Retweeted McSally For SenateMcSally For Senate:
Congrats to @kyrstensinema. I wish her success. I’m grateful to all those who supported me in this journey. I’m inspired by Arizonans’ spirit and our state’s best days are ahead of us.

I don't know if there is such a thing as a clean campaign anymore. I suppose Bernie Sanders had some very uplifting TV ads during his presidential run but generally speaking most of those are used to rip apart opponents with very loose standards on the truth. Just from this year in my congressional district--the incumbent republican lies in his main ad about where his opponent comes from--pretty much callls her a communist. She in turn batters him back with all the millions of $'s he's supposedly taken from large corporations--maybe true--maybe even probably true but you wonder sometimes whether it's good idea to get into the dirt because when you do you usually get some on yourself too.

Jerome Corsi, by the way, who swift-boated John Kerry in 2004, now fears indictment for his part in the Russian scandal. He could have gone another way with his life but instead became a political hack/provocateur. Was it all about the money and the lifestyle? his need to play a clown for his right wing handlers. Hard to feel sorry for someone like that if they end up in a federal pen.

Conservative Lawyers Say Trump Has Undermined the Rule of Law
Adam Liptak | Nov. 14, 2018

WASHINGTON — The annual convention of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, has long been a glittering and bustling affair. In the Trump era, though, the group has become more powerful than ever, supplying intellectual energy and judicial candidates to an assertive administration eager to reshape the legal landscape.

But as the group prepares to gather on Thursday for the start of this year’s convention, more than a dozen prominent conservative lawyers have joined together to sound a note of caution. They are urging their fellow conservatives to speak up about what they say are the Trump administration’s betrayals of bedrock legal norms.

...The group, called Checks and Balances, was organized by George T. Conway III, a conservative lawyer and the husband of President Trump’s counselor, Kellyanne Conway. In recent opinion articles, Mr. Conway has criticized Mr. Trump’s statements on birthright citizenship and argued that his appointment of Matthew G. Whitaker to serve as acting attorney general violated the Constitution.

The new group also includes Tom Ridge, a former governor of Pennsylvania and secretary of homeland security in the Bush administration; Peter D. Keisler, a former acting attorney general in the Bush administration; two prominent conservative law professors, Jonathan H. Adler and Orin S. Kerr; and Lori S. Meyer, a lawyer who is married to Eugene B. Meyer, the president of the Federalist Society.

“We believe in the rule of law, the power of truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, the imperative of individual rights and the necessity of civil discourse,” the group said in a statement. “We believe these principles apply regardless of the party or persons in power.”

Mr. Conway, who has long been a member of and contributor to the Federalist Society, said he had nothing but admiration for its work. But he added that some conservative lawyers, pleased with Mr. Trump’s record on judicial nominations and deregulation, have been wary of criticizing him in other areas, as when he attacks the Justice Department and the news media.

...Professor (Orin S. Kerr) summed up the new group’s basic point. “The rule of law has to come first,” he said. “Politics comes second.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/us/politics/conservative-lawyers-trump.html

Perhaps the old Republican Party will split. There is value in principled conservatism. Trump's party isn't that though.

George Conway, conservative lawyers form group to speak out against Trump

George Conway and 13 other self-described conservative and libertarian lawyers have formed a new group called "Checks and Balances."

Their mission statement says the members believe in the power of truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, and the necessity of civil discourse. The group aims to act as a support network for conservative lawyers who feel they want to speak out against the administration.
…
The group came about informally at first as several of the members had been speaking out independently against the administration, according to Cordero.

There are "a number of things that the President has done that he, in particular, has invigorated this group to exist," citing Trump's attacks on the Justice Department, she said.

"The group felt it was time, in a more forceful and organized way, that conservative lawyers who stand for the rule of law, and believe in an independent Justice Department speak out more loudly," Cordero, who is a national security lawyer and CNN contributor, said.

A number of the members are part of the Federalist Society and "Checks and Balances" was formed with knowing that the National Lawyers Convention would be taking place over the next three days in Washington.

Republican group runs “protect Mueller” ad on Trump’s favorite show

“We need an attorney general who doesn’t play politics,” the ad’s narrator says, urging viewers to call their members of Congress and “tell them that acting attorney general Matthew Whitaker must recuse himself from the Mueller investigation.”

Republicans for the Rule of Law, a political nonprofit, paid for the ad to run in Washington, DC, and New York City during Fox & Friends — a show the president regularly live-tweets.

Republicans for the Rule of Law is a project of Defending Democracy Together.

GOP Adviser Slams Georgia's Brian Kemp For Cheating and Undermining Democracy To Win Governor Race
Alexandra Hutzler | 11/17/18 at 3:52 PM

A top Republican adviser and political strategist slammed governor-elect Brian Kemp for cheating during Georgia’s gubernatorial race.

“This hack @BrianKempGA is the next ‘governor*’ of Georgia. But he cheated & undermined democracy every step of the way. @staceyabrams should be governor, but isn’t due to actions that can’t be tolerated. She has a bright future. We need a new, enforceable Voting Rights Act. Now!” John Weaver wrote on Twitter on Saturday morning.

Weaver was a strategist for former president George H.W. Bush and a presidential campaign adviser to the late John McCain. The Republican now works for Ohio Governor John Kasich, who is rumored to be considering a 2020 run against Donald Trump as a possible third-party candidate...

https://www.newsweek.com/gop-advisor-slams-brian-kemp-cheating-democracy-georgia...

Republicans Must Reject ‘Russia Hoax’ Conspiracies and Examine the Evidence
David French* | December 10, 2018

...As in all investigations, the FBI and every other relevant arm of the federal government should be held to account when it departs from law or policy. If elements of the Trump investigation were tainted by partisan bias, we need to know. But, at this point, claims that the investigation itself is inherently illegitimate should be dismissed.

An entirely necessary and proper investigation may well be reaching its most crucial phase. As it does, it’s time for partisans to ditch conspiracy theories and reach mutual agreement to follow the evidence and apply the law to the facts without regard for personal affection or policy preference. Any other approach — either by pundits or politicians — fails their audience or their constituents.

The Trump team has surrounded the truth of its dealings with Russia with a bodyguard of lies. Not a single American should find that acceptable or excusable. Let’s find the truth and confront it fearlessly. No other approach will provide the justice and transparency America needs.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/republicans-must-reject-russia-hoax-consp...

* a senior writer for National Review, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, and a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Women are leaving the GOP in multiples. Three, perhaps four Kansas lawmakers are switching parties this week:

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/three-kansas-lawmakers-abandon-republica...

defendingdemocracy TOGETHER

We are conservatives and Republicans standing up for the rule of law, for free trade, and for more welcoming legal immigration policies.

OUR PROJECTS

Republicans for the Rule of Law
Republicans for the Rule of Law is a group of life-long Republicans dedicated to defending our democratic institutions and upholding the rule of law. We are fighting to protect Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation from political interference.

Becoming American Initiative
Becoming American Initiative aims to counter popular misconceptions about immigrants, especially Hispanic immigrants, providing evidence of their upward economic mobility, educational achievement, language and social assimilation, and civic participation.
(New 35 second video has Reagan in front of Statue of Liberty welcoming immigrants using phrase MAGA.)

Republicans Fighting Tariffs
Republicans Fighting Tariffs exists to remind everyone why the Republican Party is the party of free trade. Free trade allows for strong businesses, good jobs, low prices, and a thriving economy. Tariffs, on the other hand, are an unwarranted tax on American businesses and families

https://www.defendingdemocracytogether.org/

Helping us to hold our representatives accountable, these two R congressmen are two top "savers" in Congress. Hope that means they likewise take hard look at tax cuts, etc.?

Justin Amash @justinamash (R-MI) | 5:45 PM - 27 Dec 2018:
I’ve long said there needs to be a revolution in Congress. Last week, @RepThomasMassie helped spark one; he demanded a recorded vote on every bill (and I filled in for him as needed). This is how the House should work—with representatives recording their votes for all to see.

Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie (R-KY), Chairman 2nd Amendment Caucus | 7:13 PM - 24 Dec 2018:
Why do so many Congressman go along to get along in DC? Turn up the volume and listen to grown adults, each paid $174,000/year, boo and groan when they are called to push little buttons and record their votes. Peer-pressure causes many votes to go unrecorded.

(See/listen to 0:13 video clip at https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie)

Mitt Romney: The president shapes the public character of the nation. Trump’s character falls short.
Mitt Romney | January 1, 2018

...I will act as I would with any president, in or out of my party: I will support policies that I believe are in the best interest of the country and my state, and oppose those that are not. I do not intend to comment on every tweet or fault. But I will speak out against significant statements or actions that are divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney-the-president-shapes-the-pub...

>81 margd:

Mitt Romney: Trump has caused worldwide dismay (BBC)

Romney and Trump have been carping at each other for some years now. Utah is republican but it's more a traditional conservatism than the kind that Trump has been spinning out of whole cloth. Romney's term is also 6 years which puts him 4 years beyond Trump if his presidency ends in 2020. So Mitt sees an opening to separate himself and remain independent from the face of his party and I think he's a lot more comfortable with that then any other Senator in the Republican party. He can walk right into John McCain's role. That's important for him but what's more important for me is how much or not he actually supports Trumps over the next two years.

>82 John5918: Interesting that Trump's reply tweet called on Romney to be a team player--must be more going on behind the scenes?
(I thought he'd ridicule Romney as sore for losing Secretary of State position to Rex Tillerson.)

>83 lriley: Every Republican who speaks up makes it easier for the next one--we owe Romney thanks for that much at least...

trump did not bad mouth Romney back because Romney supports trump's BS wall. That is the only reason.

One talking head last night on some news show said (paraphrased) that if Romney were a new republican senator from Arizona or Missouri or wherever then his mouth would just be another cock-pocket for trump's micro-penis.

trump is highly unpopular in Utah and thus Romney is doing the politically astute thing. Romney is a politician first and foremost. He worships money and power just like most of the rest of them. His religion and public commitment to integrity and character are just part of the game plan.

#84--I think eventually that will happen but that's also because the Democrats had such a bad map for the Senate this time around but that changes in the next two election cycles 2020 and 2022 when the Republicans will have to defend a lot more Senate seats than the Democrats. As it gets closer to 2020 and if this disaster of a Presidency continues I think a lot more Republicans are going to distance themselves from Trump. I don't think Trump will survive but I also think he's going to drag some of them down with him. Painful as it might seem if he does last his term out--I'd expect the Democrats to not only expand their numbers in the House but to take back the Senate and win the Presidency in 2020. Basically I see his Presidency becoming more and more toxic.

Your National Government Grid-lock At Work:

The partisan hate-driven Democratic vendetta against Trump's election grinds on...

Democrats, now bent on pay-back, amp up the House of Reps.' investigatory juggernaut designed to bring down Trump, or, failing that, to vex and try to cripple him with endless House investigations.

“Congressional committees, like the priorities of the politicians who run them, change with the times. On Wednesday morning, Eliot Engel, the Democratic congressman from New York who has just taken over the chairmanship of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, sank into an over-sized leather chair in his office and told me that his first act as chairman will be to create a new subcommittee devoted to investigating President Trump.

“After the 9/11 attacks, Engel’s predecessors on Foreign Affairs set up a new terrorism subcommittee, which underscored America’s sudden, obsessive focus on countering such threats. That is the subcommittee that Engel will now eliminate in favor of his new investigative panel. There ‘wasn’t a great clamor’ to keep the terrorism panel anymore, Engel told me, whereas there is no end to the Trump foreign-policy scandals that his members are pushing to investigate. ‘We just thought, if we’re going to do something relevant in this era where Congress is going to reassert itself, where there are so many questionable activities of this Administration vis-`a-vis foreign policy, that it made sense to have this.’ Trump, in other words, is a bigger threat than terrorism. At least for now.

"Foreign Affairs is not exactly an investigative sort of committee. In a different political moment, Engel’s top priority might be to hold hearings on the escalating conflict between Russia and Ukraine, or China’s increasingly hostile posture toward its neighbors, or the failures of American strategy in Afghanistan. Engel, who has represented the Bronx and parts of Westchester County in Congress since the late nineteen-eighties, is a relatively hawkish Democrat. He supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, though later regretted it, and has long focused on human rights and U.S. policy toward its neighbors in the Western Hemisphere.

"But this is not the moment for such subjects. Those international crises will undoubtedly soon come up in Engel’s committee. They will not, however, top its agenda, which will be dominated, as so many other areas of our public life now are, by President Trump’s uniquely chaotic and unsettling approach to the rest of the world. Engel told me that he sees Trump as a practitioner of 'fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants diplomacy' whose erratic approach to foreign policy escaped any real accountability during the last two years of Republican 'rubber stamp' rule on Capitol Hill.

"I asked for a list of what Engel proposed to investigate. It was long, although, he assured me, by no means exhaustive, since the subcommittee’s chair and membership have not yet been finalized. No matter who holds the gavel, the investigation is certain to start with the question of what, exactly, Trump agreed to at his private meeting with the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, last summer. 'It’s been many months since Helsinki, and we still don’t know what Putin and Trump talked about,' Engel said. He also pledged to look at 'the business interests of the President' and the extent to which Trump’s financial dealings with places such as Russia and the Middle East have “affected what he’s done in foreign policy.' That will be a big departure for a committee that typically examines policies, not people, and Engel will have to hold off other House committee chairs eager to encroach on what Engel views as Foreign Affairs’ turf. (Democratic sentiment on the Hill is such that 'many other committees would love to poach some of our jurisdiction,' he told me.) But a probe of Trump, Inc., given the President’s tendency to conflate his personal interests with the national interest, now seems indispensable to the foreign-policy concerns of the day, whether it’s explaining Trump’s otherwise hard-to-fathom pro-Russia tilt or shedding light on his family’s pursuit of business deals with Middle Eastern figures who are also key to Trump’s geopolitical priorities. It’s 'incumbent upon us to look at that,' Engel said.

"From there, the list of Foreign Affairs’ priorities includes North Korea and the matter of Trump’s falling 'in love' with dictator Kim Jong Un; the killing of the Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi and the Trump family’s close ties with the Saudi crown prince, whose aides appear to have carried out his execution; and the wild gyrations in Trump’s policy toward the long-running civil war in Syria, where Trump’s abrupt order, in December, to immediately withdraw the two thousand U.S. forces supporting the anti-regime Kurdish fighters led to the resignation of the Defense Secretary, James Mattis.

“ 'It’s the first time in American history that a Secretary of Defense resigned in protest,' Engel reminded me."*

By Susan B. Glasser, The New Yorker magazine, “Letter from Trump’s Washington”

_________________________________

* So much for The New Yorker's storied "fact-checking" worker-bees.

( It's a bit much in hair-splitting to insist that, since the enactment of the National Security Act of 1947, by which the chief cabinet secretary for the U.S. military was changed from the "Secretary of War," who headed the U.S. "War Department," to the "Secretary of Defense," we therefore cannot say that there have been previous resignations in protest by "Secretaries of Defense." The newly-formed "National Military Establishment" (1947-1949) succeeded the War Department, with, as the first "Secretary of Defense," James Forrestal, formerly the Secretary of the Navy under presidents Roosevelt and Truman. Forrestal served in that office from September 17, 1947 to March 28, 1949. The last-serving "Secretary of War" was Kenneth C. Royall, who served under President Harry Truman from September 18, 1947 to April 27, 1949.)
__________________________________

“Chaos in Washington as Secretary for War resigns”

Lindley Garrison had served as US Secretary for War in President Woodrow Wilson's cabinet since 1913.
(Photo: Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C. USA)

"Washington, 14 February 1916 - Deep divisions in American politics have surfaced once more with the resignation of the Secretary for War.

Lindley Garrison – commonly perceived as the most hardline member of the government – resigned because of a disagreement with President Woodrow Wilson’s foreign affairs policy.
Mr Garrison believes that America is not properly preparing for any potential entry into war."
… …

_____________________
© RTÉ 2013-RTÉ Commercial Enterprises Ltd, Registration No: 155076, Donnybrook, Dublin 4, Ireland.

So, then, 'only' two resignations in protest by Secretaries of Defense (or War)-- two, and counting.

Formally, the original Secretary at the head of the original War Department (also referred to as the "War Office"), created in August, 1789, was titled the "Secretary at War" (from 1781 to 1789) and, later, "Secretary of War" (from 1789 to 1947).

Adam Schiff: An open letter to my Republican colleagues
Adam B. Schiff | February 21, 2018

...The president has just declared a national emergency to subvert the will of Congress and appropriate billions of dollars for a border wall that Congress has explicitly refused to fund. Whether you support the border wall or oppose it, you should be deeply troubled by the president’s intent to obtain it through a plainly unconstitutional abuse of power.

To my Republican colleagues: When the president attacked the independence of the Justice Department by intervening in a case in which he is implicated, you did not speak out. When he attacked the press as the enemy of the people, you again were silent. When he targeted the judiciary, labeling judges and decisions he didn’t like as illegitimate, we heard not a word. And now he comes for Congress, the first branch of government, seeking to strip it of its greatest power, that of the purse.

Many of you have acknowledged your deep misgivings about the president in quiet conversations over the past two years. You have bemoaned his lack of decency, character and integrity. You have deplored his fundamental inability to tell the truth. But for reasons that are all too easy to comprehend, you have chosen to keep your misgivings and your rising alarm private.

That must end. The time for silent disagreement is over. You must speak out.

This will require courage. The president is popular among your base, which revels in his vindictive and personal attacks on members of his own party, even giants such as the late senator John McCain. Speaking up risks a primary challenge or accusations of disloyalty. But such acts of independence are the most profound demonstrations of loyalty to country.

...Although these times pose unprecedented challenges, we have been through worse. The divisions during the Vietnam War and the civil rights movement were just as grave and far more deadly. The Depression and World War II were far more consequential. And nothing can compare to the searing experience of the Civil War.

If Abraham Lincoln, the father of the Republican Party, could be hopeful that our bonds of affection would be strained but not broken by a war that pitted brother against brother, surely America can come together once more. But as long as we must endure the present trial, history compels us to speak, and act, our conscience, Republicans and Democrats alike.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/adam-schiff-an-open-letter-to-my-republi...

_____________________________________________________________

Former senior national security officials issue declaration on national emergency
Ellen Nakashima | February 25, 2019

A bipartisan group of 58 former senior national security officials issued a statement Monday saying that “there is no factual basis” for President Trump’s proclamation of a national emergency to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

The joint (11-page) statement ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/read-the-letter-58-former-national-security-offic... ), whose signatories include former secretary of state Madeleine Albright and former defense secretary Chuck Hagel, comes a day before the House is expected to vote on a resolution to block Trump’s Feb. 15 declaration.

The former officials’ statement, which will be entered into the Congressional Record, is intended to support lawsuits and other actions challenging the national emergency proclamation and to force the administration to set forth the legal and factual basis for it.

“Under no plausible assessment of the evidence is there a national emergency today that entitles the president to tap into funds appropriated for other purposes to build a wall at the southern border,” the group said.

...Trump’s actions are also drawing criticism from at least two dozen former Republican congressmen, who have signed an open letter urging passage of a joint resolution to terminate the emergency declaration. The letter argues that Trump is circumventing congressional authority. ( https://www.pogo.org/letter/2019/02/former-gop-lawmakers-honor-your-oath-and-pro... )...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/former-senior-national-se...

Meet the 13 Republicans who rebuked Trump over his national emergency
Feb 26, 2019

...Five lawmakers did not vote, including two Republicans: New York’s John Katko, who is one of three GOP members in districts that Hillary Clinton won in 2016 and Missouri’s Ann Wagner.

...Here are the 13 Republicans who pushed back on the national emergency declaration:

Michigan Rep. Justin Amash--The five-term congressman was the only GOP lawmaker to co-sponsor the disapproval resolution, arguing that the national emergency declaration usurped Congress’ constitutional role. Amash blasted fellow Republicans who decried executive overreach under former President Barack Obama, saying in a tweet, “If your faithfulness to the Constitution depends on which party controls the White House, then you are not faithful to it.”...

Pennsylvania Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick--...Fitzpatrick previously said declaring a national emergency “sets a bad precedent.”...

Wisconsin Rep. Mike Gallagher--Gallagher said recently that he was concerned with the precedent a national emergency would set....

Washington Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler--Herrera Beutler announced earlier this month that she did not support Trump’s move to declare a national emergency, saying it set a “dangerous precedent.” ...

Texas Rep. Will Hurd--Hurd is the only Republican representing a district along the U.S.-Mexico border. The three-term lawmaker said during a recent appearance on CBS’ Face the Nation that a national emergency to secure funding would set a “dangerous precedent” and infringe on Texas ranchers and farmers....

South Dakota Rep. Dusty Johnson--The freshman Republican, who was a telecommunications executive before running for Congress, is the at-large member for a state that Trump carried by nearly 30 points in 2016. Inside Elections rates his re-election Solid Republican.

Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie--...Massie tweeted Tuesday, “There is a crisis at our border, but it’s not an emergency when Congress doesn’t spend money how the President wants.”

Washington Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers--The former House GOP conference chairwoman bucked her party after voicing concerns about a Democratic president using national emergency powers to advance his or her agenda...

Florida Rep. Francis Rooney--The sophomore Republican represents a safe GOP seat that Trump carried by more than 20 points in 2016. Rooney, a former ambassador to the Vatican, won re-election last fall by nearly 25 points...

Wisconsin Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner--The longtime congressman recently said that Trump’s declaration sets a “dangerous precedent” for future administrations...

New York Rep. Elise Stefanik--Stefanik often sides with moderates in the GOP conference and hasn’t hesitated to buck the president and party leadership. She voted against her party’s tax overhaul in 2017.

Michigan Rep. Fred Upton--...the former chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee might decide to retire.

Oregon Rep. Greg Walden--Walden broke with his party in recent votes to open the government and said recently that he objected to a president acting outside his spending authorities...

https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/republicans-trump-national-emergency

Sen. Paul vows to vote against giving Trump 'extra-Constitutional' power
DON SERGENT | Mar 2, 2019

...In a speech to the crowd of nearly 200 Republican officeholders and supporters at Western Kentucky University’s Augenstein Alumni Center (the Republican Party cheerleading session that is the Southern Kentucky Lincoln Day Dinner), (U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Bowling Green) interjected, in a speech devoted largely to praising the work of President Donald Trump, his opinion that Trump’s declaration of a national emergency at the Mexican border is a dangerous precedent.

“I can’t vote to give the president the power to spend money that hasn’t been appropriated by Congress,” Paul said just moments after drawing applause for his praise of some Trump policies and his ridicule of some congressional Democrats. “We may want more money for border security, but Congress didn’t authorize it. If we take away those checks and balances, it’s a dangerous thing.”

...Three GOP senators – Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina – have already said they will vote to derail the emergency declaration. If Paul joins them and the Senate’s 47 Democrats, the president will need to veto the measure in order to get his emergency money...

https://www.bgdailynews.com/news/sen-paul-vows-to-vote-against-giving-trump-extr...

ChuckGrassley @ChuckGrassley | 7:13 AM - 4 Apr 2019:

I support release of the Mueller report

From The Atlantic, J. W. Verret writes:

The Mueller Report Was My Tipping Point

I was a Trump transition staffer, and I’ve seen enough. It’s time for impeachment.

Iowa's longest-serving GOP lawmaker joins the Democrats because of Trump
Jamie Ehrlich | April 23, 2019

Washington (CNN)The Iowa Legislature's longest-serving Republican announced Tuesday that because of President Donald Trump, he will be joining the Democratic Party,

...State Rep. Andy McKean, who has served in both Iowa's Senate and House chambers, identified with the Republican Party for 35 years before Tuesday's announcement and is the longest-serving Republican in the state's Legislature today, according to the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee.

"With the 2020 president election looming on the horizon, I feel as a Republican that I need to be able to support the standard bearer of our party. Unfortunately, that is not something I am able to do" ...

"He sets, in my opinion, a poor example for the nation and particularly for our children by personally insulting -- often in a crude and juvenile fashion -- those who disagree with him, being a bully at a time when we we are attempting to discourage bullying, his frequent disregard for the truth and his willingness to ridicule or marginalize people for their appearance, ethnicity or disability"...

McKean's district sits in two rural, blue-collar counties in Iowa...Iowa is both a perennial swing state and a battleground state...puts the Democrats four seats away from taking control of the Iowa House...

"I believe that it is just a matter of time before our party pays a heavy price for President Trump's reckless spending and shortsighted financial policies, his erratic, destabilizing foreign policy and his disregard for environmental concerns"...

"If this is the new normal, I want no part of it."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/23/politics/andy-mckean-iowa-gop-lawmaker-change-par...

Suddenly conservative lawyers are condemning Trump for abuses of power
Doyle McManus | May 12, 2019

...a surprising number of conservative lawyers have broken ranks and are condemning the president for abuses of power and denouncing his blanket claims of executive privilege.

Last week, John Yoo, the former Justice Department official who drafted a notorious memo justifying the torture of detainees under President George W. Bush, warned that Trump had gone too far in asserting unbridled presidential power. “That's what Nixon did... That's what other presidents who have failed have done...Impeachment is the only solution to Trump’s challenge to the constitutional order”...

...George Conway, a leading conservative lawyer (and dissenting husband of Trump aide Kellyanne Conway)...Trump is “a cancer on the presidency...Presidential attempts to abuse power by putting personal interests above the nation’s can surely be impeachable”...Last year, he changed his voter registration from Republican to “unaffiliated,” saying the GOP had become a “personality cult.”

...“The president’s conduct demonstrates a flagrant disregard for the rule of law— a disregard that is in direct conflict with his constitutional responsibilities,” 11 conservative lawyers wrote last month. They urged the House to continue its investigations, but stopped short of endorsing impeachment.

“This president is undermining the basic principle of checks and balances,” one of the 11, former Deputy Atty. Gen. Donald B. Ayer, told me. “It’s really kind of tyrannical. It’s un-American. It’s the sort of expansion of government power you would expect Republicans to worry about.”

...more than 800 former federal prosecutors, many of them Republicans, signed a statement declaring that the report by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, far from exonerating Trump, showed that he deserved to be indicted for obstruction of justice.

“It seems to me important, especially today, for lawyers to speak with consistency about the rule of law and apply it without consideration of party,” said Paul Rosenzweig, a former assistant to independent counsel Kenneth Starr in the investigation of President Clinton that led to his impeachment by the House in 1998...

...“There’s a point in the Mueller report where Trump complains that then-White House Counsel Don McGahn is always taking notes, and McGahn explains that real lawyers do that,” Ayer said. “If you want to be an autocrat, you don’t want people who care about what’s legal looking over your shoulder. They’re out to get the lawyers.”

...The president seems to think government lawyers are duty-bound to defend his every whim, and that Republican judges are duty-bound to decide cases in his favor. These GOP lawyers are reminding their colleagues — justices as well as attorneys — that their real duty lies elsewhere.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-republican-lawyers-20190512-sto...

The state that gave us Republicans such as Governor Milliken and Romney is more recently known for Flint drinking water & PFAS, gerrymandering, lame duck shenanigans, undercutting referenda, Betsy DeVos, Wayne LaPierre, Ted Nugent, etc. Heartening to read Republican from Michigan Justin Amash putting country above party:

Justin Amash @justinamash | 12:30 PM - 18 May 2019:

Here are my principal conclusions:
1. Attorney General Barr has deliberately misrepresented Mueller’s report.
2. President Trump has engaged in impeachable conduct.
3. Partisanship has eroded our system of checks and balances.
4. Few members of Congress have read the report.

I offer these conclusions only after having read Mueller’s redacted report carefully and completely, having read or watched pertinent statements and testimony, and having discussed this matter with my staff, who thoroughly reviewed materials and provided me with further analysis.

In comparing Barr’s principal conclusions, congressional testimony, and other statements to Mueller’s report, it is clear that Barr intended to mislead the public about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s analysis and findings.

Barr’s misrepresentations are significant but often subtle, frequently taking the form of sleight-of-hand qualifications or logical fallacies, which he hopes people will not notice.

Under our Constitution, the president “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” While “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined, the context implies conduct that violates the public trust.

Contrary to Barr’s portrayal, Mueller’s report reveals that President Trump engaged in specific actions and a pattern of behavior that meet the threshold for impeachment.

In fact, Mueller’s report identifies multiple examples of conduct satisfying all the elements of obstruction of justice, and undoubtedly any person who is not the president of the United States would be indicted based on such evidence.

Impeachment, which is a special form of indictment, does not even require probable cause that a crime (e.g., obstruction of justice) has been committed; it simply requires a finding that an official has engaged in careless, abusive, corrupt, or otherwise dishonorable conduct.

While impeachment should be undertaken only in extraordinary circumstances, the risk we face in an environment of extreme partisanship is not that Congress will employ it as a remedy too often but rather that Congress will employ it so rarely that it cannot deter misconduct.

Our system of checks and balances relies on each branch’s jealously guarding its powers and upholding its duties under our Constitution. When loyalty to a political party or to an individual trumps loyalty to the Constitution, the Rule of Law—the foundation of liberty—crumbles.

We’ve witnessed members of Congress from both parties shift their views 180 degrees—on the importance of character, on the principles of obstruction of justice—depending on whether they’re discussing Bill Clinton or Donald Trump.

Few members of Congress even read Mueller’s report; their minds were made up based on partisan affiliation—and it showed, with representatives and senators from both parties issuing definitive statements on the 448-page report’s conclusions within just hours of its release.

America’s institutions depend on officials to uphold both the rules and spirit of our constitutional system even when to do so is personally inconvenient or yields a politically unfavorable outcome. Our Constitution is brilliant and awesome; it deserves a government to match it.

#95--I was coming here to post something on this but you beat me to it. It is a good thing and I like how Amash spelled out why. Wish there were more like him.

Justin Amash @justinamash | 11:00 AM - 20 May 2019

People who say there were no underlying crimes and therefore the president could not have intended to illegally obstruct the investigation—and therefore cannot be impeached—are resting their argument on several falsehoods:

1. They say there were no underlying crimes.

In fact, there were many crimes revealed by the investigation, some of which were charged, and some of which were not but are nonetheless described in Mueller’s report.

2. They say obstruction of justice requires an underlying crime.

In fact, obstruction of justice does not require the prosecution of an underlying crime, and there is a logical reason for that. Prosecutors might not charge a crime precisely *because* obstruction of justice denied them timely access to evidence that could lead to a prosecution.

If an underlying crime were required, then prosecutors could charge obstruction of justice only if it were unsuccessful in completely obstructing the investigation. This would make no sense.

3. They imply the president should be permitted to use any means to end what he claims to be a frivolous investigation, no matter how unreasonable his claim.

In fact, the president could not have known whether every single person Mueller investigated did or did not commit any crimes.

4. They imply “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” requires charges of a statutory crime or misdemeanor.

In fact, “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined in the Constitution and does not require corresponding statutory charges. The context implies conduct that violates the public trust—and that view is echoed by the Framers of the Constitution and early American scholars.

Bill Kristol @BillKristol | 9:41 AM - 30 May 2019
(view 2:20 video at https://twitter.com/BillKristol )

Here it is, from Republicans for the Rule of Law*, and soon (in a shorter version) coming as an ad to TV set near you:
Senior GOP lawyers on Trump's obstruction of justice.

_______________________________

* https://www.ruleoflawrepublicans.com/

>98 margd:

The bottom line on that page is:

contact gowdy@ruleoflawrepublicans.com.

D'you think that's Trey Gowdy?

>99 2wonderY: Could be? Apparently Trey Gowdy appeared in Rs for Rule of Law ad a year ago, supporting the Special Counsel's being allowed to finish his task: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/05/30/republicans-for-th...

NewsHounds (We watch Fox so you don't have to!)

Republican Group To Air Ad On Fox & Friends Urging Congress To Hold Trump Accountable

According to Newsweek, RRL has already aired 44 advertisements on Fox News to “encourage Republicans” to speak out against Trump. According to The Hill, the group also plans to hand-deliver a copy of the Mueller report to every Republican member of Congress.

>97 margd:

"In fact, obstruction of justice does not require the prosecution of an underlying crime, and there is a logical reason for that. Prosecutors might not charge a crime precisely *because* obstruction of justice denied them timely access to evidence that could lead to a prosecution."

What the hell has happened to "liberals"? Seriously. It's a question.

How does someone stupid enough to argue the cited "point" even dress himself in the morning?

Amendment V

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Amendment VI

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense."

To whom, calling himself a political "liberal" is that a dead-letter in law!?

It is the height of circular reasoning to argue that the prosecution would know of evidence of a crime for which it seeks to prosecute an accused but for this same accused's having so successfully "hidden" that "evidence."

Seriously!? Are there readers here who are actually so stupid that they do not see the circular reasoning in front of their eyes? This is the stuff of Stalinist Russia.

You!, enemy of the People, are hiding your crimes from us! How do we know? We're unable to discover these indications! This shows you're obstructing our criminal investigations which should lead to the clear proofs of your guilt! Thus, you, obstructer-of-justice!, are under arrest for obstruction of justice. You must divulge to us the evidence of your guilt. Otherwise, it is clear that you are obstructing our criminal prosecution of you! Traitor to, enemy of the People!

The right to be free of a legal obligation to be a witness against one's self is the legal, Constitutional, form of saying that the prosecution must bear the burden of proof. This is "Civil-liberties-for-Dummies, 101," people!

No, it is the prosecution which is charged with coming up with the primary pre-charge, pre-arrest, information which justifies, for example, the issuance of a search-warrant, covert surveillance, a wire-tap, etc. Without this as a prerequisite, the state is free to simply allege, according to its whim, that anyone it designates would be charged, tried and convicted of a crime if only it were not for his having obstructed justice by suppressing evidence of his guilt.

Amash is a moron! And get this!: this idiot has a law degree, FFS!, from the University of Michigan Law School. How the hell did he ever graduate!? Do his law-school professors know he is shaming them and the reputation of the school?

Considering the Democrats

Kenneth Silber

Do I want any of them to win, or just Trump to lose?

...There’s no one among the Democratic names above who would inspire me to vote for Trump. If the Democrats somehow choose one of the outliers—Gabbard and Williamson—to be their nominee, and that person continues to seem as strange as at present, my likely course would be to vote third-party. If the nominee is Sanders or de Blasio, following the reasoning above, I’d be inclined to vote for that person even while expecting his policies to be dismal.

The other Democrats, including Warren, I expect I’d vote for, albeit with some balancing of misgivings and hopes. Whether there are any among them for whom I would feel enthusiasm is a question I can’t yet answer. If I had to choose a candidate at this moment, I’d take Harris, not because of any particular policy stance she’s stated, but because I think the nominee, and the next president, will have to be tough as hell...

https://www.splicetoday.com/politics-and-media/considering-the-democrats

Bill Kristol @BillKristol | 4:47 AM - 15 Jul 2019

Someone asked yesterday how I thought one could "save the GOP" when not one GOP member of Congress had criticized Trump.
I went into my spiel about how bad it would be simply to abandon the party to nativism and authoritarianism.
The response kept me up last night: "But not one?"

ETA (whew)_________________________________________________

Which GOP lawmakers have condemned Trump's tweet
CNN | July 15, 2019
Anchor grills Republican: Why is GOP silent on racism?

...While many Republican leaders in Congress have thus far not spoken out, some GOP members are weighing in publicly to condemn his comments. Here's what some of those Republican senators and representatives have said so far:

Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri...

Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina...

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine...

Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio...

Rep. Will Hurd of Texas...

Rep. Pete Olson of Texas...

Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan...

Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania...

Rep. Paul Mitchell of Michigan...

Rep. Susan Brooks of Indiana...

Rep. Peter King of New York...

Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio...

Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska...

Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/15/politics/republican-members-of-congress-trump-twe...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then there's

Lindsey Graham goes on fiery tirade against ‘anti-Semitic,’ un-American congresswomen — but tells Trump to ‘aim higher’
Sarah Taylor | July 15, 2019

https://www.theblaze.com/news/lindsay-graham-goes-off-on-fiery-tirade-against-fr...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeff Flake @JeffFlake | 9:09 AM - 15 Jul 2019

I’ve often said that Republican elected officials can’t be expected to respond to every comment by the President. But there are times when the President's comments are so vile and offensive that it is incumbent on Republicans to respond and condemn. This is one of those times.

It's a constant theme in the media and the halls of congress--say anything negative about the right wing Netanyahu Israeli government and you're automatically tagged as anti-Semitic. Benjamin could show up one day with Hitler's mustache and hardly anyone would bat an eyelid.

Lindsey Graham though is a suckhole. He was McCain's partner in everything for at least a couple decades and now he makes excuses for and kisses Trump's ass every chance he gets while at the same time Trump insults over and over the memory of Lindsey's dear old dead friend John McCain. WTF!--we're supposed to take this shithead seriously? He's got no fucking integrity.

Justin Amash @justinamash | 7:25 PM - 16 Jul 2019:

If you’re a Republican, please ask yourself if the party really represents your principles and values.
You don’t need to become a Democrat. Simply stand up for what is right.
America’s tradition of liberty is beautiful, and it depends on our love and respect for one another.

ETA______________________________________________________________

Wow, ~2 of ~5 are from Michigan. Maybe state's Rs are not as bad as I think?

The Republicans Who Voted to Condemn Trump’s Remarks (and Other Things to Know)
Sheryl Gay Stolberg | July 16, 2019

...Only four Republicans — Representatives

Will Hurd of Texas,
Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania,
Fred Upton of Michigan,
Susan W. Brooks of Indiana

— broke with their party to vote against Mr. Trump. They were joined by Representative

Justin Amash of Michigan,

a Trump critic who recently abandoned the Republican Party to become an independent. Each had his or her reasons.

Mr. Hurd, a former C.I.A. agent and the only black Republican in the House, barely hung onto his seat. Mr. Fitzpatrick squeaked past his Democratic opponent last year and often votes with Democrats. (He has also signed a congressional pledge to civility.) Mr. Upton, a centrist and House veteran who also advocates civility, is retiring, and thus not beholden to Mr. Trump.

...For all of the hellfire and brimstone surrounding it, the resolution itself is symbolic. Then again, in politics, symbolism matters. When the history of the 116th Congress is written, Democrats will be recorded as having condemned a United States president for the first time in more than 100 years.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/us/politics/house-republicans-resolution-vote...

Dante, Trump and the moral cowardice of the G.O.P.
Charles Sykes | July 21, 2019

..."Send her back! Send her back!”

...some Republicans were horrified. But few were willing to speak out publicly. They chose to stand apart.

This is where the G.O.P.’s Faustian bargain has led: Their moral compromises and silence have become a habit.

...Someday...They will assure us that their silence did not reflect who they really are. But it did because this was the moment when they had to make a choice.

...this is where the G.O.P.’s Faustian bargain has led: Their moral compromises and silence have become a habit. The small surrenders become larger ones until there is nothing left.

Some of them are motivated by fear of the president’s wrath or by the political pragmatism of politicians who are obsessed with self-preservation. Others simply hope to ride out the news cycle, hoping the entire incident will be quickly forgotten.

But at some level, I suspect, they know that this was a defining moment. And it reminds us that while we celebrate political and moral courage, we forget that genuine political courage is vanishingly rare...

https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2019/07/21/dante-trump-and-mora...

102: Perhaps the reason Amash has a law degree is that he understands the law, and you do not.

Your second citation only applies to criminal prosecutions, not criminal investigations. Your attempt to try to claim it provides rights and protections prior to the point that a prosecution is actually undertaken is clownish.

Your first citation only applies to a right against self incrimination, but does not cover investigations that involve others. If, for example, you direct others to hide evidence then you are guilty of obstruction, and your protection against self incrimination does not apply. There are a myriad of ways in which obstruction can be shown that don't even come close to the prohibition against self-incrimination, but you are too clueless about the law to know that. Given your usual level of intelligence displayed, you're probably not capable of understanding that, but that's par for the course for you.

>108 StormRaven: There's the old, sharp Stormy. Good legal lesson. Thanks.

Bill Kristol @BillKristol | 7:49 AM · Jul 25, 2019:
In thinking about Robert Mueller and Donald Trump, Yeats comes to mind:

"For how can you compete,
Being honor bred, with one
Who were it proved he lies
Were neither shamed in his own
Nor in his neighbors' eyes...?"

Which religious group appears to have changed the most during this Trump era?

Evangelicals!

Trump hijacked the GOP, and they together hijacked the Evangelical religion.

The Stockholm syndrome is now in play in the GOP and the Evangelical community.

Just reading through this late--I must say that Proximity would be about the last guy I'd ever look to for legal advice. He reminds of a former Union Vice President who would always tell you why you couldn't grieve this or that. He'd always bring out his copy of our Union's employee agreement with management and read out a 'pertinent' clause and 'See, there you are, you got no case'---except that some of us had our own copy and you'd go home and find out he was cherry picking and full of shit and then you'd have to find another steward at the plant or go over his lazy and stupid head or see if someone from district would help you if no one else would. My wife did that once and even though her grievance slowly wended its way through the system--maybe 6 or 7 years worth of that eventually the Post Office settled with her for about $40 K because they really tried to fuck her over that bad but our own guy wouldn't lift a finger even being the know it all expert on everything contract. But here's another thing about that case the National now uses her case as a template for other similar cases. So our guy was a tool and a sanctimonious clown besides who would have killed that just because. That's who Proximity reminds me of whenever he renders his expert legal opinions to someone.

Joe Walsh @WalshFreedom | 2:38 PM · Aug 4, 2019

For eight years, many of us on the right demanded that Obama call out radical Islamic terror by name.
Remember that?
Well, we all need to be consistent, and we must demand that Trump call out white supremacy terror by name.

Republican state lawmaker in Nebraska says his party is ‘enabling white supremacy’

In a series of tweets written Sunday night in the wake of mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton, Ohio, that left 31 people dead, state Rep. John McCollister said it pained him to share that conclusion as a lifelong member of the Republican Party.

The Nebraska Republican Party responded late Monday that McCollister “should tell the truth and change his party registration.”

114: But it is Democrats who act in "lockstep".

The 9 House Republicans who support background checks
Tal Axelrod - 08/10/19

...While Democrats have pushed for a slate of measures ranging from universal background checks to a ban on assault weapons after the shootings, Republicans have so far mostly focused on so-called red flag laws that allow law enforcement to bar those suspected of posing a threat to themselves or others from getting a weapon.

...Here are the nine House Republicans who voted in February in support of the background check legislation or came out in support of it recently:

Rep. Vern Buchanan (Fla.)

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (Fla.)

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.)

Rep. Will Hurd (Texas) *

Rep. Pete King (N.Y.)

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.) **

Rep. Brian Mast (Fla.)

Rep. Chris Smith (N.J.)

Rep. Fred Upton (Mich.)



* Not seeking reelection in 2020

** Came out in support of background checks after recent shootings

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/456947-the-9-house-republicans-who-support-ba...

Attorney General William Barr’s Personal Ties to Jeffrey Epstein
Emily Bicks | Aug 10, 2019 at 5:29pm

On August 10, Jeffrey Epstein, accused sex trafficker, financier, was found dead of an apparent suicide at...MCC Manhattan, the federal lockup where he had been held pending trial on federal sex trafficking charges

..(AG William) Barr did not recuse himself from Epstein’s current prosecution in Manhattan, and is now instructing the Department of Justice’s inspector general to open a probe into the disgraced financier’s death.

...Barr Worked at the Law Firm which Represented Epstein in 2008
In 2009, Barr joined the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, the same law firm that represented Jeffrey Epstein in 2008 which ended in a no-prosecution.

William Barr’s Father Allegedly Hired Epstein in the 1970s
...Barr’s Father, Donald Barr, once hired Epstein to teach at Dalton School, a private academy in New York City. Back in 1973, even though Epstein had not obtained a college degree, Donald brought Epstein, who was only 20 years old, and had dropped out of both Cooper Union and New York University’s Courant Institute, was brought (on) board to teach calculus and physics...

https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/william-barrs-personal-ties-jeffrey-epstein/

_________________________________________________________

Sen Ben Sasse letter to AG Barr on Epstein apparent suicide: "Heads must roll."
https://www.sasse.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/c4aa769e-3f2d-43a4-a550-e0e4c15...

Fox News Judge Napolitano is proving to be a rational voice from that quarter.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Trump violates Constitution – Spends unappropriated funds, raises taxes on own

Fox News reports

Former Bush official urges Latinos to vote Trump out, saying GOP has 'lost control of the monster they helped create'

Abel Guerra, who served as an associate director of public liaison in the Bush White House, also characterized the GOP as a party that condones racism and "looks away while the current president degrades our community and destroys America."

"I know a little about this," Guerra wrote in his piece, published Wednesday. "I am a Republican. I worked in the George W. Bush White House. And I say to my fellow Latinos: I’m not asking you to become a Democrat. But I am asking you to vote President Trump out of office."

The reader responses begin with

"They need to disclose how much the Globalists are paying him."

Bill Kristol @BillKristol | 7:14 AM · Sep 24, 2019:
1. To Republicans who have the honor (and it is or should be an honor!) of serving in the United States Congress: Now is the time to step up. Here's a new video Republicans for the Rule of Law released last night

Congressional Republicans: Demand the Facts (0:46)
https://www.ruleoflawrepublicans.com/

2. To Republicans serving in Congress.
Consider Federalist #1: "It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable...

3. ...or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force. If there be any truth in the remark,...

4. ...the crisis at which we are arrived may with propriety be regarded as the era in which that decision is to be made; and a wrong election of the part we shall act may, in this view, deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind."

5. Republican members of Congress.
Consider Thomas Paine:
"The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman."

6. Republican members of Congress.
Consider Edmund Burke:
"Certainly, gentlemen, it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents....

7. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own.

8. But his unbiassed opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution.

9. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion."

10. Republican members of Congress.
Here's the oath you take: “I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;

11. ...that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

12. Republican members of Congress.
It's time to live up to your oath, your principles, and your traditions. Not just for the sake of your country but for the sake of your party--the party of Lincoln and Reagan, of Robert Taft and John McCain--it's time to put country first.
END

‘Every Senate Republican’: Chuck Schumer led unanimous vote to demand whistleblower report
Bob Brigham | September 24, 2019
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/09/every-senate-republican-chuck-schumer-led-unani...

Bill Kristol @BillKristol | 7:55 AM · Sep 25, 2019:

So: In order to get dirt on a political opponent, the president
removed a U.S. ambassador,
used (paid?) a private citizen to threaten a foreign government,
personally called a foreign leader, and
delayed disbursing appropriated funds for that nation.

All to get dirt on Joe Biden.

Michael Steele MichaelSteele | 10:39 PM · Sep 24, 2019
Shovel. Meet hole.

Quote Tweet Andrew Lawrence @ndrew_lawrence | 9/24/2019
Rudy Giuliani: "I never talked to a Ukrainian official until the state department called me and asked me to do it"
00:32 https://twitter.com/i/status/1176684970536050689

George Conway @gtconway3d | 9:46 AM · Sep 25, 2019:
I agree with this. There may be Republican senators who won’t say a word until the moment they say “guilty” when the roll is called at the end of an impeachment trial.

Quote Tweet Tony Schwartz @tonyschwartz · 17h
Oddsmakers say Trump Republicans senators won't vote to impeach Trump. I believe all bets are off. Most Republican senators privately hate him & his power over them. If they believe, by banding together, they can push him out, I think there is a very reasonable chance they will.

David French writes for the Conservative National Review.

The Trump–Ukraine Transcript Contains Evidence of a Quid Pro Quo

I haven’t been a litigator since 2015. I haven’t conducted a proper cross-examination since 2014. But if I couldn’t walk a witness, judge, and jury through the transcript of Donald Trump’s call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and demonstrate that a quid pro quo was more likely than not, then I should just hang up my suit and retire in disgrace. Far from being “scattershot” — as my esteemed colleague Kyle Smith declares — the actual sequence is extremely tight, and the asks are very clear.

Indeed, as I also laid out today in Time and on Twitter, the sequence unfolds quite literally in consecutive paragraphs.

eta That's David A. French

from Fox News

Republican governor throws weight behind Trump impeachment inquiry, becomes first to do so

Vermont Gov. Phil Scott on Thursday became the first Republican governor to back House Democrats' call for an impeachment inquiry against President Trump.

Scott said at a news conference that he wasn’t surprised by the allegations that Trump repeatedly urged Ukraine’s president to “look into” Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden because he’s “watched him over the years.”

Joan Walsh has snark for the Republicans, calling them "the Vichy GOP."

The Republican Party Is Going Down With Trump

There have been a few signs of fracture. Human weathervane Mitt Romney, now the senator from Utah, called the transcript “extremely troubling,” but stopped short of saying what that meant. Wednesday night, patriot poseur Senator Ben Sasse insisted that “Republicans ought not to be rushing to circle the wagons to say there’s no there there when there’s obviously lots that’s very troubling there.” “Troubling” is emerging as the safe word for Republicans, though, to be fair, Senator Pat Toomey also called the president’s behavior “inappropriate.” I’m waiting for Maine Senator Susan Collins to find it “disappointing,” her trademark, but she hasn’t yet.

Chris Wallace: Whistleblower spin from Trump supporters 'deeply misleading'

"The spinning that has been done by the president’s defenders over the last 24 hours since this very damaging whistleblower complaint came out, the spinning is not surprising but it is astonishing, and I think deeply misleading," said Wallace on "America's Newsroom."
...
"I guess that’s all I’m really saying. For a lot of the efforts for a lot of people defending the president and pretending this is nothing, it isn’t nothing, it’s something," Wallace later concluded.

First House Republican backs Trump impeachment inquiry
Grace Segers | September 28, 2019

GOP Congressman Mark Amodei (Nevada)..."Let's put it through the process and see what happens...I'm a big fan of oversight, so let's let the committees get to work and see where it goes...Using government agencies to, if it's proven, to put your finger on the scale of an election, I don't think that's right, If it turns out that it's something along those lines, then there's a problem."

..."In no way, shape, or form, did I indicate support for impeachment," Amodei (later) said in a statement, adding that he did not know if Mr. Trump's conversation with Zelensky was a "smoking gun."...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mark-amodei-first-house-republican-backs-trump-impe...

(Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), a decorated Air Force veteran who served as a pilot in Iraq and Afghanistan) @RepKinzinger | 9:59 PM · Sep 29, 2019
I have visited nations ravaged by civil war. @realDonaldTrump
I have never imagined such a quote to be repeated by a President. This is beyond repugnant.

Quote Tweet Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
....If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office (which they will never be), it will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.” Pastor Robert Jeffress, @FoxNews

Duplicate.

There are little cracks and fissures here and there. Phil Scott the republican governor of Vermont supports the impeachment inquiry. We've seen Amash who became a pariah and dropped out of the party. A little bit of pushback from Romney and Sasse. According to former Senator Flake 35 or so of his former fellow republican Senators would convict him in an impeachment trial if their votes were kept secret. There are any number of current and former republicans that hate him but all in all it don't amount to very much because basically the fear of retribution they'll face and inability to stand up to this clown and act in any way is palpable.

Jeff Flake: Fellow Republicans, there’s still time to save your souls
Jeff Flake | September 30, 2019

...With what we now know, the president’s actions warrant impeachment. The Constitution of course does not require it, and although Article II, Section 4 is clear about remedies for abuse of office, I have grave reservations about impeachment. I fear that, given the profound division in the country, an impeachment proceeding at such a toxic moment might actually benefit a president who thrives on chaos. Disunion is the oxygen of this presidency. He is the maestro of a brand of discord that benefits only him and ravages everything else. So although impeachment now seems inevitable, I fear it all the same. I understand others who might have similar reservations. The decision to impeach or not is a difficult one indeed.

Now for the easy decision. If the House decides against filing articles of impeachment, or the Senate fails to convict, Senate Republicans will have to decide whether, given what we now know about the president’s actions and behavior, to support his reelection. Obviously, the answer is no.

I am not oblivious to the consequences that might accompany that decision. In fact, I am living those consequences. I would have preferred to represent the citizens of Arizona for another term in the Senate. But not at the cost of supporting this man. A man who has, now more than ever, proved to be so manifestly undeserving of the highest office that we have.

At this point, the president’s conduct in office should not surprise us. But truly devastating has been our tolerance of that conduct. Our embrace of it. From the ordeal of this presidency, perhaps the most horrible — and lasting — effect on our democracy will be that at some point we simply stopped being shocked. And in that, we have failed not just as stewards of the institutions to which we have been entrusted but also as citizens. We have failed each other, and we have failed ourselves.

Let us stop failing now, while there is still time.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/jeff-flake-fellow-republicans-theres-sti...

Compare the above with the clueless House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy's performance on 60 minutes:

Last night, the House Minority Leader appeared on CBS’ 60 Minutes to defend the president against the Ukraine scandal, but McCarthy appeared lost when Scott Pelley presented him with basic factual information.

PELLEY: What do you make of this exchange? President Zelensky says, “We are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.” And President Trump replies, “I would like you to do us a favor though.”

MCCARTHY: You just added another word.

PELLEY: No, it’s in the transcript.

MCCARTHY: He said- “I’d like you to do a favor though”?

PELLEY: Yes, it’s in the White House transcript.
……………………………………………………………………………………….
The analyst, Steve Benen goes on to say:

I don’t understand why McCarthy didn’t know that. In fact, when the House GOP leader was presented with the now-infamous quote, he reflexively assumed that the CBS News correspondent was engaged in a public deception, “adding another word.”

To put this in some additional context, McCarthy knew he was going on 60 Minutes. He knew the topic. He and his staff had time to prepare for basic questions about obvious details – such as the single most controversial phrase in the rough transcript that created a political earthquake the moment it was released. It’s only 10 words; it stands to reason McCarthy would’ve familiarized himself with it before his national television appearance.

Trying to defend Trump, GOP leader caught off guard by reality

It's about damn time!

Grassley breaks with Trump over protecting whistleblower

“This person appears to have followed the whistleblower protection laws and ought to be heard out and protected. We should always work to respect whistleblowers,” Grassley said. “Complaints based on second-hand information should not be rejected out of hand, but they do require additional leg work to get at the facts and evaluate the claim’s credibility.”

Grassley said “the distinctions being drawn between first- and second-hand knowledge aren’t legal ones.” He did not mention Trump or his attacks on the whistleblower specifically in his statement, instead asserting that “no one should be making judgments or pronouncements without hearing from the whistleblower first and carefully following up on the facts.”

“Uninformed speculation wielded by politicians or media commentators as a partisan weapon is counterproductive and doesn’t serve the country,” Grassley said. “Inquiries that put impeachment first and facts last don’t weigh very credibly. Folks just ought to be responsible with their words.”

If the House does its job, it will fall to Senate Republicans to reveal, in their decision to convict (or not),
their preferred flavor of republic: constitutional or banana.

-- Will Wilkinson, Oct 1, 2019
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/opinion/trump-impeachment-2020.html

Senior GOP senator rebukes Trump, says whistleblower 'ought to be heard out'
Haley Byrd | October 1, 2019

(CNN)Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chamber's most senior Republican and a long-time defender of whistleblowers, rebuked President Donald Trump on Tuesday when he said that the individual behind a complaint at the center of House Democrats' impeachment inquiry "appears to have followed the whistleblower protection laws and ought to be heard out and protected."

Trump and his allies in recent days have repeatedly maligned the whistleblower's motives and pushed to reveal the individual's identity...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/01/politics/grassley-whistleblower-statement/index.h...

J.W. Verret, who worked on Trump’s pre-transition team and the pre-transition team of every Republican president for over a decade, appeared on CNN Monday morning to discuss impeachment.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/09/30/j-w-verret-trump-nixon-impeachmen...

“People have made the analogy to the Nixon-era scandals and Nixon’s resignation, but this is a lot worse than that.”
“Nixon was a patriot. Of all the crazy things he did, he never would have accepted help from a foreign power for his own personal interest in an election, particularly one that would compromise the U.S.’ strategic interests. This is much worse and I think momentum continues toward impeachment.”

Verret called the White House’s attempts to conceal the Trump’s actions and the contents of the call with the Ukrainian President “bumbling,” while hailing the whistleblower as courageous. He came out in favor of Trump’s impeachment this past April after the release of the Mueller Report revealed multiple counts of Trump’s attempts to obstruct justice.

ETA: "the pre-transition team of every Republican president for over a decade" Hmmm. Who else was there besides Trump in the last decade?

Mike Levine @MLevineReports | 8:09 AM · Oct 4, 2019:

Asked on CNN about the text messages released overnight,
a Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, @WillHurd., just said,
“I think some of these things are indeed damning” and “a confirmation of some of the veracity of the whistblower’s report.”

#139--Hurd has an intelligence background and he's not running for reelection and he's not really a hardliner. There is some chance that the Democrats will win over a few republicans and he's one of them but any of those worried about their jobs or with political ambition are a long ways from abandoning Trump--they're going to continue to deny and parse all kinds of bullshit.

The GOP base is into resentment politics. That is why Trump and
they are such a perfect match. They are soul mates. Lincoln's
Grand Old Party is officially dead.

Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI)

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/10/4/20899096/ron-johnson-trump-son...

Sondland told him in August that Ukraine military aid was tied to 2016 investigation.

“Romney Is the Pressure Point in the Impeachment Process”: Mitt Won’t Primary Trump—But He’s Trying to Bring Him Down
Gabriel Sherman | October 7, 2019

...According to people close to Romney, he’s firmly decided against primarying Trump, an enterprise he believes to be a sure loser given Trump’s enduring GOP support. Romney has also told people that, as an unsuccessful two-time presidential candidate, he’s the wrong person to take on Trump. Instead, a Romney adviser told me, Romney believes he has more potential power as a senator who will decide Trump’s fate in an impeachment trial. “He could have tremendous influence in the impeachment process as the lone voice of conscience in the Republican caucus,” the adviser said. In recent days, Romney has been reaching out privately to key players in the Republican resistance, according to a person briefed on the conversations. “Romney is the one guy who could bring along Susan Collins, Cory Gardner, Ben Sasse. Romney is the pressure point in the impeachment process. That’s why the things he’s saying are freaking Republicans out.” ...

GOP elected officials and donors are privately war-gaming what an endgame for Trump would look like. “It’s clear the House is going to impeach,” the prominent Republican told me. Making matters worse for Trump, a policy wedge has opened up between Trump and the Republican Senate at a moment when he needs its support most. Trump’s surprise decision to pull back American troops in Syria and allow Turkey to take on our Kurdish allies has enraged Trump’s closest GOP allies, including Lindsey Graham. “The Syria decision is a much bigger deal,” another former West Wing official said. “No one on the inside can hold Trump accountable. The Senate Republicans are the only check on power right now.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/10/mitt-romney-wont-primary-trump-but-tryin...

Modern-day GOPers have thrown Eisenhower and Reagan under
the bus, and replaced them with a Nixon wannabee. Can this
party, which has turned into a cult, be taken seriously in the 21st
Century???

New Statement from Checks and Balances on President Trump’s Abuse of Office
October 10, 2019

Statement from co-founders and additional members of Checks & Balances:

In the past several weeks, it has become clear to any observer of current events that the president is abusing the office of the presidency for personal political objectives. Although new facts are being revealed on a daily basis, the following are undisputed, to date:

1) In a July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine...

2) Between July and September 2019, the Acting Ambassador to Ukraine, Bill Taylor, the (former) State Department Special Envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, and the Ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, exchanged a series of telephone calls and text messages...

3) On October 3, 2019, the president stood in front of U.S. press cameras outside the White House and said, “China should start an investigation into the Bidens because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine.” ...

...We believe the acts revealed publicly over the past several weeks are fundamentally incompatible with the president’s oath of office, his duties as commander in chief, and his constitutional obligation to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” These acts, based on what has been revealed to date, are a legitimate basis for an expeditious impeachment investigation, vote in the House of Representatives and potential trial in the Senate. Additional evidence that was detailed in the Special Counsel’s Report, related matters of foreign emoluments, and persistent obstructive activities should also inform these proceedings. In addition, given that some of the critical facts under consideration by the Congress have been facilitated by a complaint presented to the Inspector General of the U.S. Intelligence Community, any efforts by U.S. government personnel to inappropriately pressure, intimidate or expose the whistleblower or future whistleblowers who follow the procedures provided by law are contrary to the norms of a society that adheres to the rule of law.

As we said in an April 2019 statement, “free and fair elections, without foreign interference, are at the heart of a healthy democracy.” The Special Counsel’s report revealed, among other things, that the Trump 2016 campaign was open to and enthusiastic about receiving Russian government-facilitated assistance to gain an advantage in the previous election. The report was not only an exposition, it was a warning. The present circumstances are materially worse: we have not just a political candidate open to receiving foreign assistance to better his chances at winning an election, but a current president openly and privately calling on foreign governments to actively interfere in the most sacred of U.S. democratic processes, our elections. These activities, which are factually undisputed, undermine the integrity of our elections, endanger global U.S. security and defense partnerships, and threaten our democracy.

Jonathan H. Adler
Donald B. Ayer
George T. Conway III
Carrie F. Cordero
Charles Fried
Stuart M. Gerson
Peter D. Keisler
Orin S. Kerr
Marisa C. Maleck
Trevor Potter
Alan Charles Raul
Jonathan C. Rose
Paul Rosenzweig
Andrew Sagor
Jaime D. Sneider
J.W. Verret
...

https://checks-and-balances.org/new-statement-from-checks-and-balances-on-presid...

Bill Kristol @BillKristol | 6:51 PM · Oct 17, 2019:
Here's a new ad from Republicans for the Rule of Law,
responding to Trump's putting the G7 at the (sadly bedbug-infested) #Doral in order to enrich himself.
The ad will run digitally this weekend and air on Fox and Friends Monday.

https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1184965083555946496

Ohio is important state in presidential elections:

John Kasich now says President Trump should be impeached
Savannah Behrmann | Oct. 18, 2019

Former Ohio Governor and 2016 Republican presidential candidate John Kasich said Friday he now supports impeaching President Donald Trump...it was White House acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney admitting there was a quid pro quo between the United States and Ukraine that “pushed me really across the Rubicon.”...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/18/john-kasich-president-tr...

Florida republican congressman Francis Rooney seemed real wobbly on CNN regarding sticking with Trump. He's kind of close to Romney. He's also considering not running again.

Alaskan Senator Lisa Murkoski who has defied Trump before also seems not very pleased with this shadow Ukraine thing. Even if the Republican controlled Senate saves Trump from removal from office---if Romney and Murkoski are willing to vote for removal it gives cover to others like Collins, Burr, Tillis, Gardner to join them. The more that do the stronger the rebuke and should be damaging.

Trump’s Conviction Is More Likely Than It Appears
Tyler Cowen | October 27, 2019

It all depends on how Republican senators see impeachment affecting their chances of re-election. (Nixon aftermath, Trump outrages)

...applying game theory.

...How can (senators at risk of losing their jobs) possibly check Trump? The threat of impeachment is their most potent weapon...the Senate does not have too many policy sticks and carrots to keep Trump in line.

...the only way for Senate Republicans to threaten impeachment is to actually take some modest steps in that direction. That means a certain reticence to side unconditionally with Trump, periodic acts of criticism and dissent, maybe even an occasional suggestion that a Republican is considering voting to convict.

...Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is widely considered one of the most acute strategists in Washington. If anyone is capable of coordinating some Republicans to follow this strategy, he is...McConnell’s power over the president is growing...

...(critical) signals sent (Trump's) way might enrage him or raise his stress level to the point where he behaves less rationally than usual. Then the Senate will have to work all the harder to constrain Trump, thereby upping the stakes — and the stress — once again.

...As some Republican senators send signals to Trump, those signals will themselves draw public and party reaction...if Mitt Romney...did not experience major protests from within his own party, at least not at the expected scale...everyone would see that his support was weaker than expected — maybe not among die-hard Republicans, but with independents and swing voters. If senators see their re-election chances slipping away, they might stage a rebellion...

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-10-27/trump-s-conviction-is-more...

‘It feels like a horror movie’: Republicans feel anxious and adrift defending Trump
Robert Costa and Philip Rucker | Oct. 28, 2019

...In hushed conversations over the past week, GOP senators lamented that the fast-expanding probe is fraying their party, which remains completely in Trump’s grip. They voiced exasperation at the expectation that they defend the president against the troublesome picture that has been painted, with neither convincing arguments from the White House nor confidence that something worse won’t soon be discovered.

“It feels like a horror movie,” said one veteran Republican senator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to candidly describe the consensus...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/it-feels-like-a-horror-movie-republicans...

Right now Romney might be the only republican Senator that's a decent bet to remove. His seat is safe until 2024. The next two election cycles though in 2020 and 2022---the republicans have a lot more seats to defend in each of those elections than the democrats. Hanging tough with Trump very well might mean losing control of the Senate in 2020. Despite Trump's malarkey about winning back the House--the signals that are out there--with GOP congressmen continuing to retire in significant numbers are 'not good'.

Republicans made a mistake in 2016. They don’t have to repeat it in 2020
Jeff Jacoby | October 26, 2019

...Under Trump, GOP prospects have grown so bleak, and the party’s image so tarnished, that dozens of Republicans in Congress have opted not to seek reelection. Young people are fleeing in droves. The “Never Trump” Republicans — or “human scum,” as the president charmingly describes them — are gone too. As of last summer, registered Democrats outnumbered registered Republicans by 12 million.

...For principled conservatives and loyal Republicans, the Trump presidency has delivered some undeniable benefits: two Supreme Court justices and multiple appellate judges, a significant tax cut, the repeal of the Obamacare mandate, abrogation of the Iran nuclear deal, and meaningful regulatory relief, all accompanied by impressive economic growth and record-high employment. But those gains have come at a terrible price: three years of immigrant bashing and chaotic trade wars, of ugly fights with foreign allies and sucking up to hostile dictatorships, of nonstop Twitter insults and falsehoods large and small, of unprecedented turmoil within the White House and unhinged encounters with the press.

...The Republican Party desperately needs a new standard-bearer. In 2016, the GOP allowed itself to be taken over by an unworthy and indecent scoundrel. Now, following an endless train of scandals and abuses, that scoundrel is about to be impeached. This would be a good time for his party to jettison him, as Republicans jettisoned Nixon. America is blessed with many honest, admirable, competent conservatives. The Republican Party ought to nominate one of them for president in 2020. One term of this exhausting, disordered, toxic administration is enough. What is needed now is a candidate who can make America normal again.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2019/10/26/republicans-made-mistake-they-don...

Judge Napolitano has been refreshingly clear on camera about his opinion on the impeachment inquiry.

Today he wrote an opinion piece that Fox News posted:

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Proof of Trump’s impeachable offenses plain to see

Repubs have moved from "Honest Abe" in the mid 1800s to
present-day "Dishonest" Donald. Half of today's Repubs don't
believe that Trump is honest.