;)
The Commentariat -- September 26, 2019
"Treason, Bribery, or Other High Crimes," Ctd.
A Portrait of Perps. These are some of the known high-profile perps. New York artwork.
Late Morning/Afternoon Update:
Basically, that person never saw the report, never saw the call, he never saw the call -- heard something and decided that he or she, or whoever the hell they saw -- they're almost a spy. I want to know who's the person, who's the person who gave the whistleblower the information? Because that's close to a spy. You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart? Right? The spies and treason, we used to handle it a little differently than we do now. -- Donald Trump, to staffers at the U.S. Mission to the U.N. (link is to a Guardian liveblog @13:40) ~~~
~~~ Trump Tells Diplomats Whistleblowers Should Be Shot. Maggie Haberman of the New York Times: "President Trump on Thursday morning told a crowd of staff from the United States Mission to the United Nations that he wants to know who provided information to a whistle-blower about his phone call with the president of Ukraine, saying that whoever did so was 'close to a spy' and that 'in the old days,' spies were dealt with differently. The remark stunned people in the audience, according to a person briefed on what took place, who had notes of what the president said. Mr. Trump made the statement ... at the event intended to honor the United States Mission. At the outset, he condemned the former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.'s role in Ukraine at a time when his son Hunter Biden was on the board of a Ukrainian energy company. Mr. Trump repeatedly referred to the whistle-blower and condemned the news media reporting on the complaint as 'crooked.'... The event was closed to reporters, and during his remarks, the president called the news media 'scum.'..."
Zachary Cohen of CNN: "The acting US spy chief broke with ... Donald Trump and some Republicans who've criticized and questioned the motives of an intelligence community whistleblower who filed a complaint against the President, when Joseph Maguire said Thursday that he believed the 'whistleblower did the right thing' and 'followed the law every step of the way.' Maguire, the acting director of national intelligence, also acknowledged at a public hearing before the House Intelligence Committee that his office consulted with White House counsel after receiving a complaint detailing allegations about Trump's communications with Ukraine, because calls with foreign leaders usually fall under executive privilege. Maguire repeatedly defended his handling of the complaint, telling lawmakers he followed the law in an 'unprecedented' situation despite claims to the contrary by Democrats that he infringed on their right to review the allegations."
Nicholas Fandos of the New York Times is liveblogging impeachment updates. Here are portions of a few entries: "Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday accused the White House of engaging in 'a cover-up' of the Ukraine affair, citing a whistle-blower complaint that said Trump administration officials worked to 'lock down' all records of a call between President Trump and Ukraine's president.... The use of the word cover-up seemed designed to hark back to the era of Richard Nixon, who resigned rather than face impeachment." AND "Joseph Maguire, the intelligence chief at the center of the fight over a whistle-blower complaint about President Trump's dealings with Ukraine, said the whistle-blower 'acted in good faith' and called the case 'unique and unprecedented.'... He told Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi, Democrat of Illinois, that he would not have accepted the post of acting director of national intelligence if he knew of the case."
Oh, Great. Dana Bash, et al., of CNN: "Corey Lewandowski ... has had conversations with White House officials in recent days about potentially taking a position inside the administration to help the President confront a looming impeachment fight. The discussions, including a Thursday afternoon meeting at the White House, reflect the growing recognition among Trump's allies and advisers that he is without a clear strategy for managing the crisis, which exploded in stunning fashion this week. Trump's 2016 campaign manager would be in a crisis management type role, and the idea as it currently stands would be for Lewandowski to assemble a team that mirrors the one that existed in Bill Clinton's White House when he was facing his own impeachment."
Here's a Surprise. Michael Warren of CNN: "Rudy Giuliani tells CNN he has 'no knowledge of any of that crap' in the newly released complaint from an American intelligence community whistleblower. Asked Thursday morning about details from the complaint that multiple US officials were 'deeply concerned' about his activities speaking with Ukrainian officials and nationals, Giuliani called the charge 'total nonsense.' Giuliani spoke to CNN multiple times on Thursday morning from what he said was his room at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, DC."
Susan Glasser of the New Yorker: "On Wednesday morning, [Donald Trump] released the full White House account of his July 25th phone call with the Ukrainian leader, Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump, his allies, and his advisers ... insisted [the account] would undercut the impeachment inquiry into the Ukraine matter before it eve started.... Instead, the document released by his own staff added new information to the scandal, revealing that Trump had not only requested an investigation of Biden and his son Hunter but had specifically asked Zelensky to coöperate with his private lawyer, Rudolph Giuliani, and the Attorney General, William Barr, on it. The President's language was hardly subtle.... 'I would like you to do us a favor though,' the President said, in a line that seems destined to land in the history books.... Trump added later in the conversation, 'it's very important that you do it.' This was not the exculpatory moment that Trump had claimed it would be. Impeachment may have been an uncertain outcome before 10 A.M. on Wednesday. Afterward, it was a near-certainty.... The next season of the Trump show has begun."
Jordain Carney of the Hill: "The Senate passed a stopgap spending bill Thursday, days before the deadline to prevent a government shutdown. Senators voted 82-15 on the continuing resolution (CR), which will fund the government through Nov. 21. Lawmakers had until Monday night to prevent the second funding lapse of the year. The measure, which passed the House last week, now heads to President Trump's desk, where White House officials have said they expect him to sign it." ~~~
~~~ Erica Werner of the Washington Post: "The Senate passed a stopgap spending bill Thursday to keep the government open through Nov. 21, punting tough decisions over President Trump's border wall and other funding disputes until just before Thanksgiving."
Mike Schneider of the AP: "The gap between the haves and have-nots in the United States grew last year to its highest level in more than 50 years of tracking income inequality, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures released Thursday. Income inequality in the United States expanded from 2017 to 2018, with several heartland states among the leaders of the increase, even though several wealthy coastal states still had the most inequality overall, according to the figures.... Even though household income increased, it was distributed unevenly, with the wealthiest helped possibly by a tax cut passed by Congress in 2017, said Hector Sandoval, an economist at the University of Florida."
~~~~~~~~~~
** Eileen Sullivan of the New York Times: "President Trump used the power of his office to try to get Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election to investigate a political rival, according to an explosive whistle-blower complaint released on Thursday after days of damning revelations about Mr. Trump's dealings with Ukraine. Attorney General William P. Barr and the president's personal attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani were central to the effort, the complaint said[.] In addition, the complaint says that whistle-blower, an unidentified intelligence officer learned from multiple American officials that 'senior White House officials had intervened to "lock down" all records of the phone call, especially the official word-for-word transcript of the call that was produced as is customary by the White House Situation Room,' the complaint said. 'This set of actions underscored to me that White House officials understood the gravity of what had transpired in the call.'" Politico's story is here. ~~~
~~~ ** The full complaint released by the House (so not firewalled) is here.
Peter Baker of the New York Times has a pretty good summary of yesterday's developments related to the impeachment inquiry, and he covers some issues & reactions not mentioned in the articles linked below.
Ashley Parker, et al., of the Washington Post: "The helter-skelter way the administration handled the aftermath of the whistleblower complaint could be a harbinger of the coming impeachment fight, with the White House scrambling to respond to a mercurial and frustrated president, who is increasingly sidelining his aides and making decisions based on gut instinct."
Devlin Barrett, et al., of the Washington Post: "The whistleblower complaint focuses largely on the July 25 call between Trump and Zelensky..., according to a person who has read the complaint.... But the complaint also broadly alleges an effort by Trump and his personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, to pressure Ukrainian officials over time, not just on the July 25 call, this person said. The whistleblower paints a picture, also using public news reports, to suggest that Giuliani pressured Ukrainian officials to further Trump's interest in investigating his political opponents. The complaint also alleges a pattern of obfuscation at the White House, in which officials moved the records of some of Trump's communications with foreign officials [-- including those related to the July 25 phone call --] onto a separate computer network from where they are normally stored, this person said. The whistleblower alleges that is what officials did with Trump's July 25 call with Zelensky...." This is a significant update of a story linked below.
** The whistleblower complaint has been declassified. I encourage you all to read it. -- Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) in a tweet @ 10:37 pm ET Wednesday
As far as I can tell, the complaint has not been released as of 11:30 pm ET. Update: NBC News said it has been declassified "with minimal redactions" and will be released Thursday morning. -- Mrs. Bea McCrabbie
There's obviously lots that's very troubling there. -- Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), after reviewing the complaint (Sasse's full remarks at the link)
Charlie Savage, et al., of the New York Times: "The intelligence officer who filed a whistle-blower complaint about President Trump's interactions with the leader of Ukraine raised alarms not only about what the two men said in a phone call, but also about how the White House handled records of the conversation, according to two people briefed on the complaint. The whistle-blower, moreover, identified multiple White House officials as witnesses to potential presidential misconduct who could corroborate the complaint, the people said -- adding that the inspector general for the intelligence community, Michael Atkinson, interviewed witnesses.... Mr. Atkinson also found reason to believe that the whistle-blower may not support the re-election of Mr. Trump and made clear that the complainant was not in a position to directly listen to the call or see the memo that reconstructed it before it was made public.... The officer heard about the call secondhand from unidentified White House officials who expressed concern that Mr. Trump had 'abused his authority or acted unlawfully in connection with foreign diplomacy.'... [The complaint's] allegations were 'deeply disturbing' and 'very credible,' Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, said after emerging from reviewing the complaint." ~~~
~~~ Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) said on MSNBC that the whistleblower's complaint was "explosive." "I was stunned by the breadth of the complaint & the details with which the whistleblower detailed his concerns," she said. This is the first time this inspector general ever found a whistleblower complaint "urgent," she said and described the term "urgent" as being term specified in the Whistleblower Protection Act, but that it also "speaks to the impact on national security & the risk to the United States." She also said that it was likely that "a good portion" of the complaint would be made available to other Congressional members and to the public. She said most of the complaint referred to non-classified matters. ~~~
~~~ Justin Wise of the Hill: "Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said Wednesday that the whisteblower complaint concerning President Trump's interactions with the leader of Ukraine is 'deeply disturbing.' The Illinois congressman made the comments shortly after the House Intelligence Committee reviewed documents from a whistleblower at the center of an escalating controversy within the Trump administration. Appearing on CNN, Quigley said that the complaint was the 'political equivalent' of Trump saying during the 2016 campaign that he could 'shoot somebody on the street and his base would stay with him.' 'I guess what I read to me was the political equivalent of that. Defying the constitution. Committing a criminal act, and thinking I can get away with it,' he said. Quigley noted that the documents were still classified and he could not offer any specific details regarding its contents. But he added that the complaint was 'extraordinarily detailed' and 'very well done.'"
Juliegrace Brufke of the Hill: "The House overwhelming passed a measure Wednesday demanding the Trump administration provide the whistleblower complaint that has sparked scrutiny of President Trump's interactions with a foreign power. The chamber passed the non-binding resolution in a 421-0 vote, with Republicans joining Democrats to demand the administration hand over the document filed by a member of the U.S. intelligence community. Two lawmakers voted present. The House measure had been amended to mirror the resolution that passed the Senate by unanimous consent on Tuesday. The vote Wednesday evening came as lawmakers began to receive information about the complaint.... Democrats said they are looking to ensure the administration provides Congress with both the unredacted whistleblower complaint and an inspector general report surrounding the complaint."
House Hits the Magic Number. J.M. Reiger, et al., of the Washington Post: "Now, 217 House Democrats and one Independent member say they support at least opening an impeachment inquiry into whether the president committed 'high crimes and misdemeanors.' Of those, 25 have gone a step further and said they support impeaching the president. The ranks of Democrats calling for an impeachment inquiry into President Trump swelled in the past week, culminating on Sept. 24 when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced a formal impeachment inquiry. All impeachment efforts begin in the House, which the Democrats control. If articles of impeachment are reported to the full House, a simple majority (218 of them) must vote to adopt any articles, which would then be sent to the Senate. A two-thirds majority of the Senate would have to vote to convict and remove the president from office." Emphasis added. "The report lists representatives & what measure each supports. ~~~
~~~ Update: NBC News has the number at 220 as of Wednesday at 11:00 pm ET.
Greg Miller, et al., of the Washington Post: "The acting Director of National Intelligence [Joseph Maguire] threatened to resign over concerns that the White House might attempt to force him to stonewall Congress when he testifies Thursday about an explosive whistleblower complaint about the president, according to current and former U.S. officials familiar with the matter. The revelation reflects the extraordinary tensions between the White House and the nation's highest-ranking intelligence official over a matter that has triggered impeachment proceedings against President Trump.... Maguire denied that he had done so.... The White House also disputed the account.... But other officials said that Maguire had pushed the White House to make an explicit legal decision on whether it was going to assert executive privilege over the whistleblower complaint...." TPM has a related story here.
Mrs. McCrabbie: If I looked for it, I could find a regular news report on Trump's bizarre low-energy press availability. But Charles Pierce's observations seem more accurate than any dry account might be: ~~~
~~~ Charles Pierce: "The president* closed his busy news day with a press availability at the United Nations.... He was just as dishonest and calumnizing as he usually is, but he did it with an affect, and in a voice, that made him look as though he were a basset hound on Quaaludes. Almost without looking up, he lugubriously tossed Mike Pence under the bus by telling congressional Democrats (and the press) to 'look at Mike Pence's phone calls.' Which, I assume, will now happen.... But, to me, the moment of all moments came when we had what the indefatigable Daniel Dale of CNN calls a 'Sir Story,' one of those fables in which a man — and it's almost always a 'big, tough man' -- comes up to him with tears in his eyes and thanks him just for being president*.... 'So many leaders came up to me today and they said, "Sir, what you go through, no president has ever gone through. And it's so bad for your country."' Nothing remotely like this, of course, ever happened. Think about that long enough, and it stops being funny."
When Trump Met Zelensky
Peter Baker of the New York Times: "President Trump on Wednesday adamantly denied that he pressured Ukraine to investigate one of his leading Democratic rivals despite the newly released record of a call in which he asked the country's president to look into Democrats as 'a favor' to him. Mr. Trump received some backing from the president, Volodymyr Zelensky, who by chance met with Mr. Trump on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly at the same time the House was gearing up for impeachment proceedings stemming from the interaction between the two leaders. Sitting side by side with Mr. Trump in their first face-to-face meeting, Mr. Zelensky told reporters that he wanted to stay out of United States politics but provided a benign interpretation of the July 25 call in which Mr. Trump asked him to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and any Ukrainian ties to Democrats during the 2016 campaign." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Donald Trump -- Russia's Ambassador to Ukraine. Scott Bixby of the Daily Beast: "... in his first in-person appearance with the leader he allegedly pressured to investigate his political rivals, Trump appeared ... interested in matching Zelensky up with another unlikely ally: Russian President Vladimir Putin. 'I really hope that Russia -- because I really believe that President Putin would like to do something -- I really hope that you and President Putin can get together and solve your problem'" Trump said at the United Nations on Wednesday, as Zelensky sat stone-faced. 'That would be a tremendous achievement, and I know that you're trying to do that.'... The prospect of such a friendship is, in a word, unlikely. Ukraine and the Russian Federation have been engaged in a slow-motion war since Putin's invasion and subsequent occupation of the Ukrainian region of Crimea in 2014, which has resulted in the displacement of 1.5 million Ukrainians and thousands of deaths. Speaking at the United Nations, Trump said that while he thought that Ukraine should possess Crimea, he blamed the loss of the region on President Barack Obama. 'It's just one of those things,' Trump said of the annexation." ~~~
~~~ Lawrence O'Donnell had a very good discussion with Wendy Sherman & Ben Rhodes on Trump's U.N. meeting with Zelensky & their phone call. Sherman & Rhodes get to the heart of Trump's ludicrous, dangerous Ukraine "policy": ~~~
~~~ ** Patrick Reevell & Lucien Bruggerman of ABC News: "... after weeks of discussions with American officials, Ukrainian officials [in the new Zelensky administration] came to recognize a precondition to any executive correspondence, [an] adviser [to Zelensky] said. 'It was clear that [President] Trump will only have communications if they will discuss the Biden case,' said Serhiy Leshchenko, an anti-corruption advocate and former member of Ukraine's Parliament, who now acts as an adviser to Zelenskiy. 'This issue was raised many times. I know that Ukrainian officials understood.'" ~~~
~~~ Mrs. Bea McCrabbie: Leshchenko's assertion is backed up by the memo summarizing the Trump-Zelensky phone call (pdf linked below). When Trump brings up the fake Biden scandal, he never mentions who Biden is or who is son is. One would not expect a non-politician, suddenly thrust into politics in an eastern European country, would know who "Biden" -- a former vice president -- was. While Zelensky responds vaguely, there's no indication in the memo that he asks who Biden is & what the issue is regarding Biden. It's possible the summary memo omits parts of the conversation where Trump IDs Biden or Zelensky asks who he is, but I doubt that.
** "I Would Like You to Do Us a Favor, Though." Devlin Barrett, et al., of the Washington Post: "President Trump told his Ukrainian counterpart to work with the U.S. attorney general to investigate the conduct of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and offered to meet with the foreign leader at the White House after he promised to conduct such an inquiry, according to a newly-released transcript of the call.... In late August, intelligence officials referred the matter to the Justice Department as a possible crime, but prosecutors concluded last week that the conduct was not criminal, according to senior Justice Department officials." Mrs. McC: Yeah, I'll bet they did. Bill Barr's dirty fingerprints are all over this. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ ** Maggie Haberman, et al., of the New York Times: "President Trump urged the president of Ukraine to contact Attorney General William P. Barr about opening a potential corruption investigation connected to former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., according to a transcript of a July phone call at the center of accusations that Mr. Trump pressured a foreign leader to find dirt on a political rival. 'I would like you to do us a favor,' Mr. Trump said in response to President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine raising the prospect of acquiring military equipment from the United States. The president then also asked for another inquiry: that the Ukrainians examine an unsubstantiated theory about stolen Democratic emails." Update: digby republishes some of this report. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Caitlin Oprysko of Politico: "Trump pressed the newly elected leader to work with Rudy Giuliani ... and Attorney General William Barr, on an investigation into the former vice president and his son Hunter. 'There is a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that,' Trump told Zelensky, according to the White House transcript. 'So whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great.'... Trump added later that he would have Barr get in touch with Zelenksy and that 'we will get to the bottom of it.' In a statement Wednesday, the Justice Department said that it was unaware of Trump saying he would involve Barr in the matter until 'several weeks after the call took place,' when it learned of the whistleblower complaint.... Trump does mention numerous times how the U.S. spends "a lot of effort and a lot of time" assisting Ukraine." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: The DOJ's claim that Barr had no idea Trump had given him the task to contact Zelensky is not credible. Either the DOJ statement is a lie -- or the Trump White House is unbelievably incompetent. Everyone knows you have to copy principals mentioned in a letter or other communication, unless the boss specifies not to do so. You certainly have to copy someone who has to follow up in some way on the communication.
If this 'transcript' is supposed exoneration of Trump, can't imagine what the inculpatory evidence looks like[.] Bottom of p2 -- Ukraine Pres says Ukraine ready to buy more Javelins (weapons). Very next line: 'I would like you to do a favor THOUGH' & then goes into his Biden request -- Neil Katyal, in a tweet
"Though," in this context, puts conditions on Zelensky's request to acquire more weapons. The conditions: get together with Bill Barr & Rudy Giuliani to "investigate" the DNC break-in (and maybe Hillary Clinton's fake "missing" emails) and Joe & Hunter Biden. -- Mrs. Bea McCrabbie
~~~ Poppy Harlow of CNN: Every American should read this five-page transcript. (This is the White House copy of what is actually a memo, not a verbatim transcript. And there are, um, mysterious elipses, even then.) Mrs. McC: Trump's part of the conversation sounds just like the movie version of mob-speak. He makes an unmistakable ask, and he tells Zelensky why Ukraine has to deliver: "... we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time." Quid Pro Quo. ~~~
~~~ Charlie Savage, et al., of the New York Times: A "Justice Department memo, which was signed by Steven A. Engel, the head of its Office of Legal Counsel..., dated Sept. 24, said in a footnote that [the memcon released Wednesday] was a revision of an original from Sept. 3, and that the department had 'changed the prior version to avoid references to certain details that remain classified.'" (This is a detail from the same report linked above.) ~~~
~~~ Adam Schiff gives a good synopsis of the transcript notes (and he agrees that the notes reflect a "classic mafia-like shakedown of a foreign leader":
~~~ Greg Sargent of the Washington Post: "Schiff [also] noted a glaringly absurd aspect of acting director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire's decision to withhold the whistleblower complaint from the congressional intelligence committees.... As Schiff pointed out, you would think that securing our elections against outside interference would relate to activity that falls under the supervision of the DNI.... Remember that Trump fired the previous DNI -- Daniel Coats -- who actually did see defending our elections against outside interference as an extraordinarily serious aspect of his mission.... To recap: Trump fired his last DNI, who took defending our political system against outside attack seriously, and replaced him with another 'acting' official -- one who received a whistleblower complaint about exactly this topic, and (at the urging of Trump's Justice Department) worked hard to keep Congress in the dark about it, in potential violation of the law."
Ken Vogel, et al., of the New York Times: "... for President Trump, Ukraine has been an obsession since the 2016 campaign.... Mr. Trump ... [was] angry over what he sees as Ukraine's role in the origins of the investigations into Russian influence on his 2016 campaign.... And Mr. Trump has put the powers of his office behind his agenda: He has dispatched Vice President Mike Pence and top administration officials with thinly veiled messages about heeding his demands about confronting corruption, which Ukrainian and former American officials say is understood as code for the Bidens and Ukrainians who released damaging information about the Trump campaign in 2016.... Within hours of [Volodymyr] Zelensky's victory [on April 21, 2019], Mr. Trump placed a congratulatory call as he was en route from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida to Washington. He urged Mr. Zelensky to coordinate with Mr. Giuliani and to pursue investigations of 'corruption,' according to people familiar with the call, the details of which have not previously been reported. Four days after this first call, Mr. Trump said on Sean Hannity's Fox News program that he 'would imagine' that Attorney General William P. Barr would like to review information about Ukraine's actions in the 2016 election. On Wednesday, the Justice Department said that the official named to review the origins of the counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Trump's campaign, John H. Durham, is looking into the role of Ukraine, among other countries."
Matt Zapotosky & Devlin Barrett of the Washington Post: "Justice Department officials took less than a month to abandon an inquiry into President Trump's communications with his Ukrainian counterpart about investigating former vice president Joe Biden -- reigniting concerns among Democrats and legal observers that the law enforcement agency is serving as a shield for the commander in chief.... Department officials and career public integrity prosecutors reviewed a rough transcript of the call and verified its authenticity, but -- because a case was not opened -- took no other steps, such as conducting interviews.... They looked only at whether Trump might have violated campaign finance laws, not federal corruption statutes, even though some legal analysts said there seemed to be evidence of both.... The officials said [Attorney General William] Barr was 'generally knowledgeable' of discussions about the Office of Legal Counsel decision, but was not involved in making the call not to move forward with an investigation. Legal analysts and Democrats said Wednesday that Barr should step aside from the matter entirely.... Richard L. Hasen, a ... professor specializing in election law..., said he thought the Justice Department's determination that Trump's request could not be quantified was 'laughable.' 'You're talking about information on a potential rival that could be used in a presidential campaign ... which likely would run into the billions of dollars,' Hasen said. 'I don't think there's any question that a prosecutor could go forward with the theory.'"~~~
~~~ Katie Benner of the New York Times: reports on the same DOJ cover-up, but her report is less clear. ~~~
~~~ Josh Gerstein of Politico: "... the revelation that Trump pressed Ukraine's president to work with [Attorney General William] Barr to probe [Joe] Biden is putting a harsh new glare on the attorney general and the Justice Department, as critics questioned whether both have been irreparably tarnished under Trump. With the White House deciding to release notes showing Trump invoked Barr's name at least twice during the pitch to get the Ukrainian leader involved in digging up dirt on Trump's political rival, the Justice Department quickly offered assurances that Barr hadn't been drawn into the effort.... Despite the denial, suspicion of Barr continues to run deep, particularly among Democrats who have accused the attorney general of acting more as an advocate for Trump than for the institutional interests of the Justice Department. 'The President dragged the Attorney General into this mess. At a minimum, AG Barr must recuse himself until we get to the bottom of this matter,' House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler said on Twitter." ~~~
~~~ As Rachel Maddow pointed out, two Trump regime officials -- DNI Joseph MaGuire & Inspector General Michael Atkinson -- sent the whistleblower's complaint to Bill Barr's "Justice" Department for review, knowing as they did that Barr himself was "up to his neck" in the scandal itself. Uh, and it somehow got to the White House, too, which -- in collusion with the DOJ -- put the kibosh on sending the complaint to Congress, as required by law. ~~~
~~ AND Ben Wittes said on the teevee that Barr not only should have recused himself; he should have resigned when he found out Trump had implicated him in gross abuse of power with a foreign government. Mrs. McC: Sorry, Ben, the Trump regime is a treasonous mob, & Barr is its consigliere. (P.S. That's pronounced "cone-sill-yair-ay," not "cone-sig-lee-air-ay." ~~~
~~~ All the President*'s Co-conspirators. Darren Samuelsohn of Politico: "... an investigation into allegations that Trump pressured his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate Joe Biden is hardly the kind of thing to be embraced by the wider world around Trump, a growing list that includes Vice President Mike Pence; some of his most important Cabinet officials such as secretary of state Mike Pompeo, attorney general Bill Barr and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney; and his own personal attorney at the center of it all, Rudy Giuliani. They all face a long road ahead with the prospect of hefty legal bills, reputational scars and damaged political prospects hanging over them for years."
Sheryl Stolberg of the New York Times: "... at a deeply divisive moment in American politics, [Nancy Pelosi] is confronting the president yet again, by drawing on something Mr. Trump does not have: an intimate knowledge of the intelligence community, gleaned from 10 years on the panel and 15 more as an ex officio member, by dint of her position in leadership.... Ms. Pelosi, Democrat of California, joined the intelligence panel in 1993, just six years after she won a special election to fill a vacancy.... In 1998, she helped write a law protecting intelligence community whistle-blowers -- the same law that Democrats argue that Mr. Trump is flouting.... Ms. Pelosi's tenure on the panel unfolded in a very different era, when the Intelligence Committee was known for working in a bipartisan way. She was ranking Democrat in 2001, at the time of the Sept. 11 attacks, and was instrumental in creating a joint House-Senate committee to investigate the intelligence failures that led to them. In 2003, when Mr. Bush sought authorization to go to war with Iraq, Ms. Pelosi voted against it, saying repeatedly that she did not believe the intelligence supported Mr. Bush's contention that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: One thing that makes a good negotiator is understanding one's opponent. So ~~~
~~~ Kaitlin Collins & Jim Acosta of CNN: "... Donald Trump was incredulous Tuesday as he sat in Trump Tower and watched House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announce she was launching a formal impeachment inquiry against him, sources familiar with the moment say.... Trump said he couldn't believe it, he later told people. He had felt confident after phoning Pelosi earlier that morning.... He figured he could de-escalate tensions by speaking with her directly. It was after that call that Trump made the decision to release an 'unredacted' version of the transcript of his July call -- against the advice of aides such as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who warned him it would set a risky precedent. Trump wanted to undercut the argument from Democrats that he acted inappropriately, he said, and felt he had nothing to hide. But when the announcement he would release the transcript did little to quell the growing calls for his impeachment, Trump was in disbelief." (Also linked yesterday.)
Robert Costa of the Washington Post: "Several Senate Republicans were stunned Wednesday and questioned the White House's judgment after it released a rough transcript of President Trump's call with the Ukraine president that showed Trump offering the help of the U.S. attorney general to investigate Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden. One Senate Republican, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak candidly, said the transcript's release was a 'huge mistake' that the GOP now has to confront, even as they argue that House Democrats are overreaching with their impeachment effort.... 'It remains troubling in the extreme. It's deeply troubling,' Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) told reporters Wednesday, when asked about the transcript.... But other Senate Republicans, allied with Trump, were dismissive. 'Wow. Impeachment over this?' Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) tweeted. 'What a nothing (non-quid pro quo) burger.' While many Republicans continue to dismiss Democrats' impeachment efforts, cracks have begun to emerge privately as GOP lawmakers have discussed Trump's conduct and their party's political standing -- and those fault lines could foreshadow how Senate Republicans ultimately handle a trial, should the House impeach the president, according to several lawmakers and aides." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: It's not unreasonable to think that Trump has a unique view of transactional discussions. That is, he thinks a quid pro quo is only demonstrated if you say, "I will give you $400 million of American taxpayers' money if your government brings a corruption charge against my chief political rival. If you don't finger him, you get nothing." But since he "coded" the transaction in mafia-speak, Trump thinks the notes of his conversation with Zelensky are "nothing" and their little chat was "perfect."
Jonathan Chait: "The scandal is much more than [a single phone call]. The call is a snapshot, a moment in time in a months-long campaign that put American policy toward Ukraine at the disposal of Trump's personal interests and reelection campaign.... A series of reports have revealed how many other government officials were involved in the scheme. When Trump ordered military aid to Ukraine to be frozen, he went through his chief of staff and budget director Mick Mulvaney.... Lawmakers and State Department staffers were asking why the money hadn't gone through. They were given [a series of] cover stories.... Lots of officials were involved in disseminating these cover stories to hide the fact that Trump held back the aid to leverage Ukraine to investigate Biden. One of them was Mike Pence, [whose comments made clear he knew what was going on].... Ukraine got the message. Its officials 'expressed concern to U.S. senators that the aid had been held up as a penalty for resisting that pressure' to investigate Biden, reports the Wall Street Journal."
In Trump's Defense. Felicia Sonmez of the Washington Post: "In the hours after the release Wednesday of the rough transcript of President Trump's July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the White House circulated an email with proposed talking points for Trump's defenders. Unfortunately for the White House, the email was mistakenly sent to not only Republicans but also Democratic lawmakers and their staff.... Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (N.J.), shared the full talking points in a tweet, calling them 'complete Orwellian lies and toxic trash.' 'But maybe you'd like to read them to appreciate their corruption! Hazmat suit possibly required,' he said.... Several Democratic Hill staffers said they had received the talking points as well as a follow-up email recalling the message."The Hill's story is here. ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: MSNBC ran a mash-up of Republican legislators repeating the talking points nearly word-for-word.
Steve M.: "We live in an era when quite a few people get their news mostly from headlines.... The headlines from the major news outlets [on the Trump-Zelensky call] are unambiguously bad for the president. I can't blame Trump and his team for expecting better press -- at key moments, they've gotten it. They're not getting it now. This time is different."
Conservative Philip Klein in the conservative Washington Examiner: "The release of the transcript of President Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was not the dud that Trump and his allies have been presenting it to be. It's very bad news for Trump. The defense of Trump is that yes, he may have asked a foreign leader to investigate his political rival, Joe Biden, but that there was 'no quid pro quo.' While at no point did Trump explicitly say, 'investigate Biden or else,' Trump does state quite clearly all of the great things that the United States does for Ukraine before transitioning into his asks, among which are that Zelensky investigate Biden. Reading the full transcript, and understanding the broader context, it's hard to avoid the conclusion that Trump was using the power and influence of the U.S. to advance his own political interests rather than the national security interests of the nation." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Conservative David French of the conservative National Review lays out the quid pro quo evident in the Trump-Zelensky phone conversation. "... right near the beginning of the call, President Trump signals his displeasure with Ukraine. He notes that while the United States has been 'very good' to Ukraine, he 'wouldn't say' that Ukraine has been 'reciprocal' to the United States.... It's plain that Trump wants something from Ukraine.... Zelensky responds with the key ask. He wants more Javelin missiles, an indispensable weapon system in Ukraine's conflict with Russia.... The next words out of [Trump's] mouth are, 'I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it.' He raises Crowdstrike, the firm the DNC used to investigate the Russian election hacks. From context, it seems as if Trump is asking for additional assistance in investigating the 2016 election-interference scandals." Trump continues his ask, urging Zelensky to investigate Biden's son & coordinate the "investigation" with U.S. AG Bill Barr. "Zelensky pledges that the new Ukrainian prosecutor will be '100 percent' his person and that 'he or she will look into the situation.'"(Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Note that Trump is still trying to exonerate Russia for its interference in the 2016 presidential election. (Even today at his press conference, Trump mentioned his big Electoral College win.)
Mrs. McCrabbie: Now, I don't recommend this & it's only funny if nobody got hurt. ... BUT ... "A hacker broke into an electronic road sign in Seattle on Wednesday, changing the message to read 'Impeach the Bastard.'"
Juliet Eilperin, et al., of the Washington Post: "Trump officials will notify California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) on Thursday that the state is 'failing to meet its obligations' to protect the environment, just days after the president mocked its biggest cities for their 'tremendous pollution.' The unusual move by the Environmental Protection Agency ratchets up the Trump administration's ongoing battle against the nation's largest state, a multi-pronged assault that Newsom has described as 'weaponizing' the federal government. The fight extends from immigration to environmental policy and involves agencies ranging from the Justice Department to the Department of Homeland Security and EPA. In an oversight letter, EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler cites multiple instances of California failing to meet federal water-quality standards, attributing this in part to the state's homelessness problem.... In recent weeks, Newsom and other top California officials have denounced Trump for targeting the state on several fronts. In the past month alone, the administration has moved to revoke the state's long-standing right to limit air pollution from cars, began investigating an agreement with four automakers for possible antitrust violations and threatened to withhold federal highway funds if California does not do more to clean up its air." Thanks to Ken W. for the link. See also his comment below. ~~~
~~~ The Hill's story is here.
Ian Duncan of the Washington Post: "Under questioning from lawmakers Wednesday, the Federal Aviation Administration's second-in-command strongly disputed the conclusions of an internal government watchdog that safety inspectors who worked on training requirements for Boeing's 737 Max were underqualified. Deputy FAA Administrator Daniel K. Elwell also rejected the watchdog's finding that his agency had misled Congress over the issue.... Elwell acknowledged there was ambiguity in certain agency training rules that could have been a problem for a different aircraft. But he told members of a House Appropriations subcommittee that making any connection between that problem and the 737 Max was 'simply not accurate.' 'Absolutely no pilots working on the 737 Max certification were unqualified,' Elwell said. 'They were all fully qualified for their activities.'"
Presidential Race 2020
Tulsi Gabbard Should Change Parties. Tess Bonn of the Hill: "Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) said Wednesday that the partial transcript of President Trump's call with Ukraine's president released by the Trump administration doesn't show a 'compelling' case for impeachment." Mrs. McC: I'd suggest she primary Trump, but she might beat both him & the eventual Democratic nominee.
Marianne Levine of Politico: "The Senate voted Wednesday for a second time to block ... Donald Trump's emergency declaration, rebuking the president over his attempt to fund a border wall without congressional approval. In a 54-41 vote, the Senate approved a resolution to disapprove of Trump's emergency declaration, including 11 Republicans. The vote comes after the Trump administration announced it would divert $3.6 billion in military construction funding from several states to build his border wall. The president will surely veto the resolution, as he did in March. Under federal law, Democrats may bring up the emergency vote every six months." (Also linked yesterday.)
Way Beyond the Beltway
Say What? Isabel Kershner of the New York Times: "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been chosen to try to form Israel's next government, the Israeli president's office announced Wednesday, offering the longtime leader a potential political lifeline even as he faces a looming indictment for corruption. President Reuven Rivlin chose Mr. Netanyahu of the conservative Likud party over his chief opponent, Benny Gantz, a former military chief and the leader of the centrist Blue and White party. The Sept. 17 election left the sides essentially tied but Mr. Rivlin said that Mr. Netanyahu's chances of forming a government were greater than Mr. Gantz's 'at the moment.' But Mr. Netanyahu faces a stiff challenge: He has 28 days to assemble a majority of at least 61 seats in the 120-seat Parliament and no clear path to that number. The parties that have endorsed his bid for another term won 55 seats." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Josef Federman of the AP: "President Reuven Rivlin announced his decision late Wednesday after a second meeting aimed at brokering a unity deal between Netanyahu and Gantz ended without an agreement.... Rivlin said his decision was not a solution and that both candidates were responsible for resolving the political impasse." (Also linked yesterday.)
News Lede
New York Times: "Jacques Chirac, who molded the legacy of Charles de Gaulle into a personal power base that made him one of the dominant leaders of France across three decades and a vocal advocate of European unity, has died. He was 86.... At his death, he was most remembered for his defiant stand against the United States-led war in Iraq, his ability to preside over a state in which power was divided between the left and the right -- comity that is hardly imaginable today -- and his championing the European Union."
Share Article
Reader Comments (19)
I'm waiting for the Turtleman to lash out at Democrats with something
like "you should reach across the aisle and help us advance our agenda
to help the people of the United States instead of this 'witch hunt.'"
To translate his words would be something like "we need this dear
leader to enrich ourselves and our billionaire friends and donors."
I see where one of the Orange Traitor’s acting flunkies is scheduled to start lying in about an hour or so. “Whistleblower? What whistle? I play the kazoo. How much time do we have? I’ll play you my rendition of the ‘1812 Overture’.”
Aaaannnndddd...if I were one of the gang of crooks and traitors involved in this Ukrainian borscht, I’d start lookin’ for flights out of the country. Fatty has already begun the second chapter of his playbook for what to do when caught doing something illegal, (right after Deny Everything), which is start tossing anyone standing nearby overboard. Oh yes, he’s already piling them up like sandbags against the flood. The half pence, Barr, Crazy Rudy, there’s sure to be plenty of other sandbags soon to be stacked up to protect his Royal Heinie.
But this is what happens to fellow crooks, conspirators, obsequious lap dogs, and those whose moral fiber has all the texture of straw already igniting.
Ah, me. I’m going to thoroughly enjoy the coming evisceration, but to concur with many others, here’s hoping that the Democrats don’t screw this up.
In the meantime, little donnie, oh look, over there. Water rushing in through a big hole in the wall. And look who just walked in! Old Mick Mulvaney. I bet he’d make a good sandbag. C’mon in, Mick. Now lie down right here...that’s a boy.
Not sure what the next chapter in the playbook says, but don’t be surprised if there’s a little wagging of the dog in our near future.
For an administration which has proven time and again that it has no idea whatsoever that such a thing as irony exists this headline from the WaPo is something to behold.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/epa-tells-california-it-is-failing-to-meet-its-obligations-to-stem-water-pollution/2019/09/26/b3ffca1e-dfac-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html
Even if the body of the article is firewalled, the lede alone is enough for me.
Shouts a loud invite to the likes of Charlie Pierce. Hope he accepts.
Reading Comprehension: Treason Edition
So…I’m reading, with increasing incredulity (don’t ask why the incredulity at this late date, but still…), the right-wing interpretations of the little king’s phone call with the president of Ukraine during which he demands dirt on another American he hopes to squash in an election in return for money and missiles, and friendship to Ukraine as long as they kiss his ring and call him “Godfather”.
This is the only way to understand this storyline. Instead, wingers and confederate pols pretend there’s nothing at all like that going on. If they’re not lying (a Mt. Everest size “if”), the only conclusion one can make is that these people seriously flunked fourth grade reading comprehension. The basic synopsis of this phone call is:
US president* demands dirt on a rival in exchange for money and weapons.
But the standard winger synopsis is:
Great leader has harmless chat with Ukraine guy who is grateful for nice words.
Ummm….okay. Reading comprehension: F. No, sorry, can there be something below F? Can we give them a Z?
Which gets me to wondering how they did on synopsizing other famous texts. Let’s see, shall we?
Moby Dick:
A boy goes fishing. Comes home okay.
The Great Gatsby:
Rich people avoid a murder charge. (They’re so smart!)
Madame Bovary:
Married lady can't balance her checkbook.
The Iliad:
All this for a chick?
The Odyssey:
Weird Greek dude goes sailing. Why does it take so long?!
To Kill a Mockingbird:
Nobody kills a bird. This is stupid.
Gone With the Wind:
Black people are funny. There’s a fire. And really great clothes.
2001: A Space Odyssey:
There’s music in space? Huh. Never knew that.
Pride and Prejudice:
Dumb-ass girl won't marry rich guy. I don't get it.
Ulysses:
Ahhhh……ummm....well...
US Constitution:
Guns, guns, guns. Oh, and Trump can do whatever he wants.
I'm not even gonna ask about Proust.
The mere fact that records of this phone conversation were transferred to a separate computer system speaks volumes. Those people knew damn well what they had a double handful of and wanted it somewhere more secure from search.
While the focus of the media will be on the big names involved, some attention should be cast on the "loyal" workers who dutifully tried to bury the evidence.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-09-26/resnicks-donate-750-million-climate-change-research-cal-tech
Generosity from the Sacklers of CA water.
I can never tell if these immensely rich folks are a) feeling guilty, b) trying to gild their essential piggishness, or c) just dumb.
What strikes me -- among other things -- is that about a dozen people, some of them top officials, had direct knowledge of Trump's illegal proffer to Zelensky. Even more officials, again some of them in high-level jobs, were read in on the notes that revealed Trump had attempted to shake down Zelensky. Even more people within the intel community knew about & were gossiping about Trump's threat to Ukraine's security. (And let's not forget the people tasked with hiding records of the phone call.) And only one of these several dozen people, all sworn to uphold the Constitution & the laws, raised the alarm. And that is genuinely alarming.
One other thing: I re-read the phone conversation slowly, as if I were reading aloud, and it took me about 6 minutes. The conversation has been reported to have lasted 30 minutes. Let's assume that Trump spoke in English & Zelensky spoke in Russian or Ukrainian. So translators would eat up another 6 minutes. Let's leave room for some pauses & ums & ers. So 15 minutes, or half the time the conversation actually lasted. Some classified matters may have been removed from the telcom, so we'll be generous and add another 5 minutes for whatever that was. That still leaves 10 minutes of conversation that isn't recorded in the notes. I think there's a good chance that some significant -- and not necessarily classified (or reasonably classified) remarks -- are missing from the notes made public.
@Ken, or d) want a tax write-off.
@ unwashed
Have to cop to a little c) of my own. Shouda thought of that.
Thanks.
@Bea
Good analysis. Thanks.
Reminds me of the missing 18 minutes on that infamous tape from long ago.
Suspect there will be other reminders.
Shoot 'em, he says.
The Don is out of the Pretender closet, in full display.
No wonder those who would blow the whistle on this administration might be a little worried about possible reprisals.
Someone called in to the WGBH show this afternoon, parroting the “spy” line. “I was raised a Democrat but...” “How can the president conduct policy when spies are ready to pounce?” Smoke and mirrors and bullshit.
Yikes! I just heard Adam Schiff slip & reveal the name of the whistleblower. The networks are admirably ignoring that, but I'll be surprised if that holds for right-wing media.
Perhaps a little dull because it has nothing directly to do with the drama of the day, but a good overview of the Pretender's notion of governing, which as we know is to use all the tools you have (the apparatus of the entire government) to reward your supporters and punish your enemies.
https://www.freep.com/story/money/business/john-gallagher/2019/09/24/farmer-bailout-payments-china-trade-tariffs/2418676001/
Sound economics? Whoever heard of that?
@Bea, a stupid question, I'm sure, but, in the post above by Susan Glasser the word cooperation has an umlaut on the second "o". I use them when writing in Swedish or German but never in English. Any idea why are they appear? I've seen them on other sites from time to time.
How is it pronounced with the umlaut?
Someone please remind the Orange Moron of the punishments that have been doled out to traitors. Hanging for treason in the US was only abolished in 1998. During the Revolutionary War, General Washington, being presented with deserters, ordered them propped up against a tree and summarily shot. He didn't have time for that bullshit.
But death for traitors is still in effect in many cultures. I find it funny to read that capital punishment has been set aside in Russia. Yeah. The court sez life in prison. Trump BFF Uncle Vladya sez "Death by injection of radioactive isotopes, or until your face falls off".
In ancient Rome, capital punishment was largely restricted to one crime: treason. So here's the thing, you fat fuck, you'd be lucky to end your days eating prison gruel, and begging for fellow inmates not to sell you into sexual slavery, so shut your noise you treasonous prick.
@unwashed: I think @Akhilleus would tell you "because New Yorker." Ergo, we shall go to Mary Norris of the New Yorker for an explanation:
"Those two dots, often mistaken for an umlaut, are actually a diaeresis (pronounced 'die heiresses'; it’s from the Greek for 'divide'). The difference is that an umlaut is a German thing that alters the pronunciation of a vowel (Brünnhilde), and often changes the meaning of a word: schon (adv.), already; schön (adj.), beautiful. In the case of a diphthong, the umlaut goes over the first vowel. And it is crucial. A diaeresis goes over the second vowel and indicates that it forms a separate syllable. Most of the English-speaking world finds the diaeresis inessential. Even Fowler, of Fowler’s 'Modern English Usage,' says that the diaeresis 'is in English an obsolescent symbol.'...
"[W]e use the diaeresis for the same reason that we use the hyphen: to keep the cow out of co-workers.”
This reminds me of way back when I was in the second grade and learning to read. I think we were just getting into two-syllable words, and the group first came upon the word "nowhere." We all read it as "now here." The teacher kept coaxing us to come up with a "real word," and finally it dawned on me to rethink the syllable break and blurt out "no where." I probably got a gold star.
Unwashed,
That umlaut you see (mostly in the New Yorker) over the second "o" in cooperation, is not technically an umlaut, it's a diaeresis, which indicates a new syllable. Otherwise, it might be pronounced co-ih-peration, or something like that.
Dang...(däng?), Marie beat me to it.
Anyway, what she said...