Showing posts with label Mike Pence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mike Pence. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 17, 2023

Making lemonade out of the classified documents flap. Update reflecting Pence's equal mia culpa

UpdateL 1 25 2023  More evidence there needs to be a better system for keeping track of classified documents.  Such documents have now been found in Mike Pence's home and he reacted much like Biden did, though we do not know yet if there will be the drip drip release fumble that Biden's team had. The Pence discovery has all kinds of irony...first, also to make the comparison of his handling it, as Biden has had to attempt, with Trump's obstruction of justice in lies and hiding the evidence, and second, to wonder if the DOJ will also appoint a special counsel for his case. In any case, this only makes the case that there has been sloppy administration of the handling of documents in multi administrations.  If Pence can assert evidence of a lack of intent, to take the documents home by accident, so can Biden.  Once again, Pence's actions saved Biden, first denying the January 6 insurrectionists, and now, second,  this puts Biden in a better position. It makes MAGA  GOP harder to wag their tongues in mock horror at how equivalent Trump's actions were to Biden's and now Pence's.  In any case, my original posting below is still very relevant: fix the handling of classified documents in the White House.  It is a national security imperative.

No president is above the law and let the special counsel investigators of both Trump and Biden classified document handling mishaps do their jobs. This may also be a teaching/learning moment, not only about the rule of law but about the need to reform classified document handling. There may be a way to make sure this does not happen again.  That is how lemonade could be made from these bitter lemons. There is also a national security imperative to take action in how classified documents are handled. The whole world now knows that there is sloppy national security document handling, and it could be a temptation for a bad foreign actor to snag some low-hanging espionage fruit.   

My nagging question is, how did the archives know the documents were missing in order to demand Trump return them? How did it happen the archives did not know there were documents missing after Biden left the Vice Presidency? Hopefully, the answer will emerge in the investigations. It may not be an issue of behind-the-scenes subterfuge or differential treatment. If the GOP had known about the finding of those docs before the midterm elections, we would have heard about it then...to say the least. If Biden had an inkling there were such documents in his home, he was a seasoned enough politician not to wonder out loud how it could've happened when he criticized Trump. There may be some administrative process that changed between the end of the Obama administration and the Trump era. I am waiting to see if there were some changes in White House document handling in the time between the transitions. One possibility that should have been done, if it not was done, would be a highly security-cleared staffer giving every incoming document a serial number which would allow check-offs by the archives to see what was missing later. If the reconciliation showed some missing check-offs, there is a clue someone else has it.
With the House GOP bent on punishing the FBI as revenge for Mar-A-Lago and other assumed politically motivated excesses, it would be a miracle if any constructive reform of classified document management would result. Solving the problem would require admitting there was a problem. That does not seem to be the purpose of GOP-dominated House select committees or other committees under which the responsibility should fall.


Sunday, August 8, 2021

How the USA could become a banana republic

 In Central America there is a role model of bad governance we have tagged as banana republics, led by dictators and their cronies, enriching themselves while ignoring the needs of their citizens.   Those countries continue in power with inept, corrupt autocratic governance. . Military coups and violent revolutions are how regime change usually happens in such dictatorships, We ourselves came closer to becoming a banana republic within the past year in retrospect as more and more evidence of what happened emerges from both House hearings and recent books .  President Trump tried to overthrow the 2020 election so he could continue a second term.  These attempts may have failed, but they are characteristic of a wannabe dictator and there is no reason to believe that given the chance to be president again, he could become closer to achieving the power of the rule of a person instead of the rule of law.. A second term would have given him the time and ability to abuse his powers to achieve control of all three branches of government.  He would have the time and opportunity to replace the federal courts and the Justice Department with those willing to make judgment calls he favors.  If he controls both houses of Congress as well, the end of democracy as we know it, rule by the majority with rights protecting the minority, and any checks and balances on executive power, is dead.

Update 10/8Subpoenas have been issued to those key Trump figures who were in the room where it happened by the bi-partisan House Committee looking into the events of January 6, 2021. This will delay much as the subpoenas are fought in court.  However, others did testify in the Hearings to give more credence to the investigative reporting by Bob Woodward and  Robert Costa revealed in their recent book. 'Peril' Review: Bob Woodward's New Book Uncovers The Trump Era's Final Moments : NPR  For an updated post of how the US almost became a banana republic, go to the 10/8/posting with that title. https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2021/10/how-us-almost-became-banana-republic.html

 The violent overthrow of democratically elected governments is against the laws of all democracies because the right to protest and to change leaders with the ballot box is the peaceful alternative that is provided to dissidents as their civil rights are protected.   The violent takeover of governments,, however, is being openly supported by a sizeable number of the GOP..  Now, fully one-half of those who identify themselves as Republicans approve or do not care if tools are used to defy constitutional law and use violence to achieve their political goals.  Most Republicans Say Force May Be Required to Save 'Traditional' America: Poll (businessinsider.com. Fortunately for American democracy, these banana Republicans,  approving of autocracy also, are currently about 26% of the total electorate per a recent Morning Consult poll.26% of Americans Are Highly 'Right-Wing Authoritarian,' New Poll Finds (businessinsider.com)

This is what we know. A president attempted to overturn an election he lost by filing lawsuits claiming enough voter fraud to explain why he should serve a second term..While the battle cry he used to turn over the results of the 2020 election was "stop the steal" based on what he had been told was a lie ) he lost because of voter fraud) the thief was him who tried to overturn the election results. He was told by his own attorney general their own investigations found no proof of widespread fraud that would have changed the election outcome, Trump persisted knowing this.  First, he tried with lawsuits.  All such suits were thrown out of courts by 60 judges of all political stripes for lack of evidence. Update  10/8/21 Next, he tried to put in a loyalist to head the Justice Department to make it look like the allegations of voter fraud by investigating them look credible, but the entire brass of the DOJ threatened to resign.  Failing that, an attorney, John Eastman, then laid out a blueprint for how Trump could get his second term in spite of the election results, including conspiring with Vice President Pence to decertify the electoral vote count and throw the election into the House that gave one state one vote, assuring the decertifying of election and upholding Trump's second term.READ Trump lawyer's memo on a six-step plan for Pence to overturn the election - CNNPolitics. Pence, after considering that, told the president on January 5 he could not do it, even when Trump called him "no longer his friend".Pence Said to Have Told Trump He Lacks Power to Change Election Result - The New York Times (nytimes.com) The riot was supposed to give Pence the guts to make the decertifying call.  .  ,  Trump in a "stop the steal rally" in advance of the riot at the Capitol,   inspired a mob to terrify legislators into not certifying the election of his opponent. The attempt, too, failed. The election of Joe Biden was certified the night of January 6. Other efforts to upend the democratic process were tried and failed, including threatening state election officials "to go out and find" more votes for him..That conversation was recorded on tape.. We are hearing allegations by witnesses  Trump tried to enlist the active military to put down opposition demonstrators, a plan thwarted by the Joint Chiefs.

 These attempts may have failed, but they are characteristic of a wannabe dictator and there is no reason to believe that given the chance to be president again, he could become closer to achieving the power of the rule of a person instead of the rule of law.

  Trump pressure campaign: Durbin report details DOJ, White House meeting - The Washington Post    MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Why General Milley is emerging as a hero who saved democracy

Interviews with former Justice Department officials provide new details on Trump efforts to undermine election results - CNNPolitics

MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Trump's attempted coup by court has gone down in flames, as did the reputation of the GOP

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

 Usually, such coups, gradual or abrupt, peaceful or violent, changing governance from democracy to autocracy, are committed by an existing majority.  Their motivations can be racial, ethnic,  ideological, power-hunger, or financial., They consolidate power by denying rights and oppressing any challengers. Civil and human rights and means of communication and demonstrations of opposition to the ruling power are suppressed.

There is no such guarantee that those wishfully wanting an autocracy even if it would take violence or defiance of the Constitution, will be in the minority forever. These autocrats however are using the very tools they want to destroy if they got in power to advocate for their governance preference., free access to media, and protection of their civil rights to redress grievances peacefully. The history of the last century is of onetime existing western democracies taken over by one or a few actors slowly and step by step.  Rarely was there violence or a military coup.   Erdogan of Turkey's rise to a dictator is a classic example of how he fired those who were not loyal and replaced them with loyalists in the military and the judiciary. It takes time for this to happen successfully. That is one reason our own most recent wannabe autocrat failed. Trump had only four years in which to do gain control of the military, the Department of Justice, and the federal judiciary, by stuffing them with more yes men appointees   Imagine the greater success  Trump would have had another four years to gain greater control of these institutions... The leaders of those institutions held their ground and played a major role in blocking Trump's ambitions in 2020-2021,  believing their oath was to the Consitution and not to a president.   The hallmark of autocracy is that the pledge of loyalty is to the dear leader, not to any rule of law, such as the Consitution and the laws that flow from it.   

  Once hush hush agendas to establish an autocracy are now being spoken openly. Such views used to be called anti-American and dismissed as held by fringes.  . Now a  form of autocratic governance, the opposite of the kind of democracy we have had for 240 years, is even being promoted by prime-time news show talker, Tucker Carlson. Carlson is holding up the newest autocrat in Europe, Viktor Orban of Hungary, as a model Orban now controls 90% of Hungarian media and disdains "liberal democracy" that protects freedom of the press and gives civil rights to minorities. He has done this in the name of "Christianity" and "replacement" theories with ethnically pure Hungarian Christians, who are already overwhelmingly the majority of the existing population. How Tucker Carlson and the far right embraced Hungary’s authoritarian leader | Fox News | The Guardian  

 In a mammoth lack of understanding and with ignorance of  American history, those supporting such notions are wrapping themselves in American flags and calling themselves patriots restoring"traditional" democracy. There is nothing "traditional" about their interpretation of the Revolution not do their actions resemble what happened in 1776.  A tyrannical government of a King was exactly what the 1776 patriots revolted against. They instead embraced a new concept of democracy with governance determined through the ballot box by citizens and they constructed a Constitution in 1787 with a carefully orchestrated peaceful transition of power to the newly elected. Those using 1776 fighters of the American revolution to justify violence on January 6  are also ignorant of how the revolution was fought. It was not by rioters, but with contributions of regulated militias supplied by the 13 colonies under their authority and led by General Washington. Those claiming the election was stolen to justify their attempt to install Trump for a second term have failed to provide evidence of enough widespread election fraud and every single suit filed by Trump supporters has failed. The Trumpist financed "audit" in Arizona folded up its tent and quietly ended recently. This summer a federal judge dismissed a Trump-inspired class-action suit claiming election fraud as without evidence, frivolous, and "fantastical", ruling the attorneys who brought the suit had to pay millions to the extensively named defendants for their legal fees.

What can be done to prevent an American banana republic is not yet clear. Perhaps some laws and regulations may emerge but those bent on non democratic regime change have already indicated they would just ignore laws.  In the long run, it is up to those who understand the value of the kind of democracy we have had feel it is important enough to stand up and be counted to keep those anti-democracy views in a minority. We have a democracy, but only its people can keep it.

_________________________________________________________________________________

In response to the posting of the above, a Trump supporter responded that the real dictator was Biden and pointed to what they saw was his censoring the press and knocking Trump off of Facebook and Twitter. The old trope was repeated that Biden would take "my guns away".  The Trrum supportert was challenged to provide quotes of what Biden said on these issues, but could not produce them. Instead, he said, look what he has done. If that is the standard, then indeed, we will look at what Biden has done . Biden is now in office. FOX and Newsmax are still on the air. No one censored them. Biden did not yank Trump off Facebook and Twitter. The owners of those social sites did because of Trump's lies. Laws regarding gun ownership by private citizens are far more restrictive in other western democracies, but that does not  a criterion of whether they are dictatorships or not.. I still have my gun and everyone I know who has them legally still has them. Biden has not even attempted to support legislation that would do that. He has supported the law enforcement crackdown on gunrunners and urban violence.. 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Here is why I feel so strongly we should do everything to keep our  kind of  democracy as our form o governance  .I have seen it all in my lifetime of over 80 years. I lived in the burned-out, ruined aftermath of Hitler's fascism, the rise of the "dictatorship of the proletariat" which in reality was a repressive dictatorship by one strong man  Only sources of news permitted were government-approved. Individual civil rights and the ability to protest ended with opposition leaders sent to gulags or executed.  Show trials with judges loyal to their dear leader prevailed.  Even in Russia and Belarus today, poison and prison are the fate of those rallying demonstrations against the governments. My relatives by marriage barely survived the ethnic cleansing wars in the Balkans where tribalism resulted in 300 thousand victims in a population similar to current Colorado. It was famous for the mass killings of one ethnic group by another. I watched\ post-world war II   countries that emerged from communism and fascism with democratic forms of government resembling what we still call American democracy. I married a refugee from communism and. with frequent visits to his former country, I watched the transformation of the country he fled to become a democracy and their citizens prospered as members of the European Union and NATO.  This is the good news. The bad news is that all of these European countries have active fascist movements of large minorities who want to turn back the clock. They are enabled by the very form of government they want to destroy, free press, open and free elections, and the ability to assemble in protests. Sadly,  Hungary, a  Russian satellite that had embraced western democracy regressed to autocracy in the cause of racial purity as a reaction to middle Eastern refugees knocking on their doors. 

MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Why General Milley is emerging as a hero who saved democracy

Interviews with former Justice Department officials provide new details on Trump efforts to undermine election results - CNNPolitics

Opinion | Our constitutional crisis is already here - The Washington Post


Wednesday, July 1, 2020

The Colorado Senate race: Hickenlooper v Gardner. A warning to Democrats

CPR has an excellent analysis of what happened in the Democratic Senate primary.. The one bit I would add to it is the impact COVID and the police brutality protests had on the outcome. It was especially difficult for Romanoff to counter Hickenlooper's name identification and general public familiarity with his governors' record. Hick was a very well known quantity and was a generally popular governor and still in recent memory. For the pragmatists, Hick was a sure winner over Gardner in a trending blue state, and Romanoff was either too left or an unknown quantity to see him as a sure bet to beat Gardner. I thought once voters knew him better, he would beat Gardner, too. However, air time media focus was so saturated with COVID and George Floyd coverage that there was no space for much free media coverage of the Colorado Senate primary. Advertising was not enough to give a full picture of Romanoff's assets. I also noted that Romanoff managed to work the word "progressive" into his ads, positioning himself on the left in a more moderate state not yet deep blue. In addition, key national progressive leaders did not campaign on behalf of Romanoff, and in fact, supported Hick, as this CPR report noted. My concern is that the issues raised by Romanoff, Hick's ethics, environmental and racial issue stumbles, will show up in Gardner's supporters' ads. Not that such issues represent Gardner's approach, but it would serve to suppress progressives' turnout on behalf of Hick. Divide and conquer is an effective political strategy. It can be used to pit more progressive Democrats against moderate Democrats, asking what difference does it make on these issues (a plague on both of their houses). It worked really well in Trump's victory over Hillary. Imagine where this country would be on issues dear to progressive hearts if Hillary had won. Trump has set about to destroy any progress Obama had made on those issues. If there is a lesson to be learned, we should not fall into that trap of progressives not voting because they could not stand either candidate. What is at stake is way more important than being sore losers. National observers believe the winner of the Colorado Senate race will determine the slim margin of whatever party holds more votes in the Senate. What is critical above all is that Democrats must carry Colorado because the Senate makeup will depend on it. If the Senate continues as the majority in control of the GOP, even if by one vote, Biden, if elected, would have a tough time getting even a moderate agenda passed. If Trump gets re-elected, then bye-bye environment, democracy, and health care, and hello to a Trumpster dominated Supreme Court.
Imagine, too, that if Trump chickens out, fears via polls he will lose the election for sure , he announces he will not run for a second term (Lyndon Johnson did that) and leaves the field to Pence, What then? If the RNC and GOP Senators support Pence through whatever the process or timing is to replace Trump, Pence is likely to rise. The never Trumpers, Lincoln Project, moderates, are only 10 to 20% of the GOP. Pence is appearing to position himself as a person Republicans turned off by Trump's incompetence and character flaws, but not his agenda, could support with enthusiasm. Pence is making his move now. That may account for Pence's recent campaign-style and local media focused visits to red states. The race may be entirely different in November than it is now so it is important not to count on anti-trump sentiment to turn out the swing vote. Progressives staying home could also ensure a Pence victory. As Bernie Sanders said recently, not voting for Biden is irresponsible. That same statement could apply to the Democrats in the Colorado senate race.

Wednesday, October 2, 2019

Mike Pence and Trump's pro Russian policies have a history: Background

There is beginning to be rumors of differences between Donald Trump and his vice president,Mike Pence on Ukraine. The first time I spotted differences was in the 2016 Vice President debates and I have followed that as part of my fascination with US policy toward Russia, eastern Europe, and post World War II.  It has some personal interests since I had studied in pre wall Berlin in the late 1950's, married a refugee from Yugoslavia, and worried forever for the well being of my family by marriage in eastern Europe.  Here is a blog posting dating to 2017 on the  Pence differences with those in the Trump administration regarding Russian policy.

From a May 2017posting.

The question is why has Mike Pence been seemingly out of the White House loop on the Russian connection controversies?  Perhaps it goes back to the 2016 campaign when Pence parted ways with Trump on Russian policy.  Going back to two prior postings on this blog, this has a history, including the Mike Flynn/Pence flap re: Pence saying Flynn lied to him.  In these blogs are also references to the Russian connections in the 2016 campaign and possible financial entanglements  with  Russia in  the Trump administration.  Whether Pence took himself out of being involved in the Russian connection issue or if Trump did, is unknown. However, it may be Pence himself removing himself and the matter flared up when he accused Flynn of lying about the nature of his conversations with the Russian ambassador, that forced Trump to fire Flynn.

Pence also departed from Trump on Russia in his first trip abroad with a hard line approach: : http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/18/politics/pence-munich-russia-foreign-policy/,

Blog Posting Oct. 5  2016
 "One event in the Vice Presidential debate, October 4, was the position of GOP candidate Mike Pence regarding Russia.  The comments on Russia got lost in Pence's  absolute denial that Donal Trump ever said Russian President Vladimir Putin was a better leader than Pres. Obama. The quibble could be whether the correct term was "stronger". In any case, there is plenty of video available on Trump's comments which makes Pence look like a liar, albeit a smooth one delivered with conviction.

 What should also be the story is that Pence took a hard line on Russia saying we should stand up to them..  This deserves some closer scrutiny and looks like there is a division on foreign policy between the two running mates.  Take a look at the debate as can be accessed via You Tube regarding Pence's views of Russia incursions into the Crimea, Ukraine and Georgia...a great contrast from Trump's prior statements.
What does count in 2016 ,however, is Trump's position, though Pence might use his own quotes in his own future campaigns.

It stands in sharp contrast with the GOP presidential candidate himself, Donald Trump, who has been advocating a foreign policy that strangely runs parallel to the same as Russia's, from declaring NATO obsolete, not objecting to the Russian threats and incursions into Eastern Ukraine, and recognizing Russia's grab of the Crimea.  In fact, the mutual comments between Trump and Putin have been so complimentary that it has been timed a "bromance" of mutual admiration.

Not only is this a major issue in foreign policy, but in calls into question whether Trump can even negotiate with Putin in America's and our alliies' security interests without giving away the store to Russia.  Negotiation means give and take and the question remains what Trump would give away to make a deal.

http://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/trumps-foreign-policy-make-russia-great.html

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/vice-presidential-debate-putin-mike-pence-donald-trump-229147

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/28/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-quotes/ "
___________________________________________________________________________

Blog posting Feb, 14, 2017
"General Michael Flynn's departure from the White House may have much deeper roots than just his lie to both Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence about conversations with the Russian ambassador.  The conflict between the two goes back to the days of the campaign post-GOP conventions.  I noted that in a column at that time. In the Vice Presidential debate, Pence parted ways on Russia from candidate Donald Trump's line.
From my blog posting 10/5/16: (repeated above)
and continues:


"Some background:
 For some time, the question has been why has Donald Trump been so cozy with Russia? There has been a great deal of speculation ranging from Trump's debts to Russia oligarchs to blackmail, the connection with the Russian Alfa Bank, with embarrassing pictures (a victim of a honey trap).  Fingers have been pointed to influencing Trump's views of Russia was his campaign manager, who departed the campaign mid-year, Paul Manafort, who was an advisor to the ousted president of the Ukraine who sought refuge in Moscow after a coup.  Congressional investigations into Russian influence and hacking in the US elections are just getting underway.  Ukraine is involved. The Russians have conducted a stealth takeover of the eastern parts of that country and the West punished Russia with economic sanctions.  The Flynn issue involves lies about his pre- January conversations with the Russian ambassador over lifting those sanctions. The question arises was this a thank you for the role Russia played in helping Trump win by planting false news stories and by hacking and revealing damaging information regarding Hillary Clinton.



That there are many concerned about why Donald Trump only ever has kind words for Russia and their president Vladimir Putin while being critical of even our closest allies and even calling NATO, our mutual defense treaty with Europe, obsolete.  It has set our Eastern Europe members of NATO on edge and one of President Obama's departing actions was to announce the placement of US troops in Poland as a signal to Russia not to mess with our Baltic members.  Trump and others, including libertarians, had already expressed concern about going to war to support the small trio of Baltic nations in spite of their NATO membership. Russians have always seen the Baltics, with their ports to the sea, as part of theirs since there is a large number of Russians living in those areas left over from the old Soviet military occupation days when the Baltics were their satellites.  Russia has a modus operandi of using "saving discrimination against Russian minorities" as an excuse to grab territory and the Baltics are ripe targets.  Their membership in NATO has made Russia think twice. Ukraine, Crimea, and Georgia, recent targets of Russian grabs, are not part of NATO and are not under NATO's protection.  Flynn was Donald Trump's closest campaign advisor on foreign affairs throughout the campaign."




  • Taylor was also worried that Trump might be willing to trade away Ukraine's interests as part of a grand bargain with Russia, Volker told lawmakers.
  • Taylor is expected to appear before members of Congress next week.
Details: Volker told members of the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight committees earlier this month that he recommended Taylor for the job after the former ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, was removed from her position.
  • Volker said Taylor was initially “reluctant” to accept the role because “he was not sure if we would maintain as robust a support for Ukraine as we had had for the past 2 years."
  • Taylor also told Volker that he was worried about Giuliani's efforts to investigate the Bidens. "He was just worried [Ukraine] was going to get undermined at some point,” Volker added.
  • “Hanging over everyone’s head in the expert community is, is there some grand bargain with Russia where we throw Ukraine under the bus?”
  • Volker said he tried to assure Taylor that the U.S. actually has strengthened its support for Ukraine by increasing sanctions and lifting arms embargo.
  • Volker told Taylor, "Look Giuliani does not represent the U.S. government. Don’t worry about that."
  • Taylor decided to take the job but only after speaking with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for reassurance that Pompeo remained solidly in support of Ukraine.
Concerns about Giuliani's role in facilitating a relationship with the new Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, started to raise alarms.
  • Volker told committee members that he, Taylor, and acting assistant secretary of state Phil Reeker discussed their concerns about Giuliani, stating that they "were just very uncomfortable with him being active.”
  • They thought Rudy was creating “a problem,” and the problem “was that he was amplifying a negative narrative about Ukraine that was impeding our ability to advance the bilateral relationship the way we wanted.”
  • Volker said he relayed these concerns to Pompeo, and told him he was trying to "correct that impression" the president had. Pompeo said, "I'm glad you're doing it."
  • Volker said Burisma was known for years to be a corrupt company, but that didn't transfer to the Bidens. “Saying investigating Vice President Biden or his son, that is not fine. And that was never part of the conversation.”
  • Taylor specifically warned the Ukrainians not to do anything that would be seen as interfering in U.S. elections.
Volker, Taylor and the committees did not respond to a request for comment.

The Democrat's case for impeachment in simple terms: The case for impeachment in simple terms: Pres. Trump tried to shake down the Ukranian president to force him to find dirt on Hunter Biden and Joe Biden , his perceived political rival in 2020, by withholding military aid authorized by bipartisan Congress to prevent further Russian military incursion into Ukraine...and then hid the text in a separate server reserved for very  secret classified code word national security matters, not for political matters to protect the president. .

Some background: The military aid to Ukraine was supported by both Congressional Democrats and Republicans as a way to prohibit further Russian expansion into former USSR satellites..both those under mutual NATO defense and not under a mutual defense treaty like Ukraine. There is an active war in Easter Ukraine with Russia's annexation of Crimea and the Donbas region.within the national boundaries of Ukraine, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbass There is a de facto annexation by Russia and the area is occupied, Russian stealth troops. The Western world including the US had reacted with imposing economic sanctions against Putin's best friends and Russia...which became the subject described in the Mueller report. The appropriation legislation was a bipartisan agreement that it was in the US's national security interest to counter Russian threats to take control of the rest of Ukraine. It was this allocation that Donald Trump halted in spite of the legislation that allocated the aid, then asked "a favor" of the new Ukraine president to look into the business dealings of Hunter Trump as a way to hurt the strongest rival to his re-election, Joe Biden. It was not until the whistleblower's allegations surfaced that the Trump administration released the military aid. The military aid was both physical support of the western leaning Ukrainian government as well as verifying Trump's "tough" stand against Putin which was in contrast to Trump's constant bootlicking of Putin. However, instead, Trump used this aid appropriated for the sake of US national security as a bargaining chip to get Ukraine to re-open the investigation into Hunter Biden instead of caring about the national security interests of the US. In the telephone conversation at question, the Ukraine president brought up the military aid for the Javelin anti-tank weaponry and then immediately Trump asked the Ukranian president "though" for a "favor", including re-opening the investigation into Hunter Biden. The "though" is a conditional indication."..will do a favor, though, ..here are my conditions" : The next question is if the White House released "text" of the conversation had been sanitized or hidden by Trump to bury the "bargain" as a quotable and directly obvious quid pro quo. The urgency is that the aid allocation to Ukraine was scheduled to expire Sept. 30.

Was this a "shakedown" and "cover-up" as the House Intel committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff charges.? The actual recording of the conversation and the verbatim transcript has been "locked down" by the administration that has been moved per the Whistleblower complaint. However, what was "locked down" may not have anything to do with national security interests, but the political interests of the President, contrary to the usual use of that stand-alone system reserved for codeword intelligence.records. The outrage: The DNI referred the whistleblower complaint to the attorney general.Bill Barr.who was named as the president's envoy (as well as Guiliani) to follow up on president"s favor he asked: to rei-investigate the Hunter Biden and any connection with Joe Biden...as well as during that time the President had held military aid to Ukraine and joined the two issues in his telephone conversation. This was overt conflict of interest to ask Bill Barr for an opinion whether the Whistleblower complaint should be sent to Congress that includes him in the complaint.  Of course, the Whistleblower complaint text eventually was sent on the day of the hearings on the Sept 26.

 The Inspector-General interviewed witnesses that confirmed the Whistleblower complaint that there was a quid pro quo. We need to hear about what the IG found in his investigation that made the Whistleblower's allegations credible. What must also be done is to spring loose to the public the tape of the actual conversation that it was locked down after other eyes saw it.   Some of those other eyes seem to have been interviewed by the IG to come to the conclusion that the Whistleblower's complaint was credible. Following up on the IG investigation becomes even more important as a way to justify the 'locked down" should be brought into the public domain.  This a Nixon Tapes redux.  Post-hearing, Schiff affirms plans to pursue this and to see if there are any other incidences like this. 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pentagon-officials-deemed-withholding-of-aid-to-ukraine-was-illegal-090046566.html https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/read-full-text-whistleblower-complaint-n1058971


Sunday, April 2, 2017

Democrats should be careful what they wish regarding the outcome of the Russian Connections investigations


Democrats ought to be careful what they wish. Some are hoping that Donald Trump does not finish his full term because of impeachment or some other damning evidence.The Senate recently voted to permit states to refuse to use federal money to fund Planned Parenthood.  The vote was a tie and Vice President Mike Pence broke the tie.  This should be a reminder that   if Mike Pence  becomes our president because of a presidential vacancy, he is also a hard line ideologue who opposes much of what the Democratic party stands for on policy and administrative action. Donald Trump’s  ideology is more populist and more flexible, and more driven by promoting US and self aggrandizement.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/pence-casts-tie-breaker-vote-states-defund-family-planning-article-1.3013900


http://www.ontheissues.org/IN/Mike_Pence.htm

Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Tensions between Vice President Pence and Michael Flynn pre-exist the "lie" flap

General Michael Flynn's departure from the White House may have much deeper roots than just his lie to both Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence about conversations with the Russian ambassador.  The conflict between the two goes back to the days of the campaign post GOP conventions.  I noted that in a column at that time. In the Vice Presidential debate, Pence parted ways on Russia from  candidate Donald Trump's line.
From my blog posting 10/5/16:
"One event in the Vice Presidential debate, October 4, was the position of GOP candidate Mike Pence regarding Russia.  The comments on Russia got lost in Pence's  absolute denial that Donal Trump ever said Russian President Vladimir Putin was a better leader than Pres. Obana. The quibble could be whether the correct term was "stronger". In any case, there is plenty of video available on Trump's comments which makes Pence look like a liar, albeit a smooth one delivered with conviction.

 What should also be the story is that Pence took a hard line on Russia saying we should stand up to them..  This deserves some closer scrutiny and looks like there is a division on foreign policy between the two running mates.  Take a look at the debate as can be accessed via You Tube regarding Pence's views of Russia incursions into the Crimea, Ukraine and Georgia...a great contrast from Trump's prior statements.
What does count in 2016 ,however, is Trump's position, though Pence might use his own quotes in his own future campaigns.

It stands in sharp contrast with the GOP presidential candidate himself, Donald Trump, who has been advocating a foreign policy that strangely runs parallel to the same as Russia's, from declaring NATO obsolete, not objecting to the Russian threats and incursions into Eastern Ukraine, and recognizing Russia's grab of the Crimea.  In fact, the mutual comments between Trump and Putin have been so complimentary that it has been timed a "bromance" of mutual admiration.

Not only is this a major issue in foreign policy, but in calls into question whether Trump can even negotiate with Putin in America's and our alliies' security interests without giving away the store to Russia.  Negotiation means give and take and the question remains what Trump would give away to make a deal. "

http://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/trumps-foreign-policy-make-russia-great.html

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/vice-presidential-debate-putin-mike-pence-donald-trump-229147

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/28/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-quotes"


Some background:
 For some time, the question has been why has Donald Trump been so cozy with Russia? There has been a great deal of speculation ranging from Trump's debts to Russia oligarchs to blackmail , the connection with  the Russian Alfa Bank, with embarrassing pictures (a victim of a honey trap).  Fingers have been pointed to influencing Trump's views of Russia was his campaign manager, who departed the campaign mid year, Paul Manafort, who was an advisor to the ousted  president of the Ukraine who sought refuge in Moscow after a coup.  Congressional investigations into Russian influence and hacking  in the US elections are just getting underway.  Ukraine is involved. The Russians have conducted a stealth takeover of the eastern parts of that country and the West punished Russia with economic sanctions.  The Flynn issue involves lies about his pre- January conversations with the Russian ambassador over lifting those sanctions. The question arises was this a thank you for the role Russia played in helping Trump win by planting false news stories and by hacking and revealing damaging information regarding Hillary Clinton.

That there are many concerned about why Donald Trump only ever has kind words for Russia and their president Vladimir Putin, while being critical of even our closest allies and even calling NATO, our mutual defense treaty with Europe, obsolete.  It has set our Eastern Europe members of NATO on edge and one of President Obama's departing actions was to announce the placement of US troops in Poland as a signal to Russia not to mess with our Baltic members.  Trump and others, including libertarians, had already expressed concern about going to war to support the small trio of Baltic nations in spite of their NATO membership. Russians have always seen the Baltics, with their ports to the sea, as part of theirs since there is a large number of Russians living in those areas left over from the old Soviet  military occupations days when the Baltics were their satellites.  Russia has a modus operandi of using "saving discrimination against Russian minorities" as an excuse to grab territory and the Baltics are ripe targets.  Their membership in NATO has made Russia think twice. Ukraine, Crimea, and Georgia, recent targets of Russian grabs, are not part of NATO and are not under NATO's protections.  Flynn was Donald Trump's closest campaign advisor on foreign affairs thorught the campaign.

Monday, October 10, 2016

The second presidential debate was epic, alright, epic nasty

The second presidential debate Sunday October 9 was an epic one, alright, epically nasty.  The  nation and the world to which this was broadcast was on edge of their seats to see if Donald Trump would  contritely apologize for the leaked audio and video of his boasting of his conquests of groping and sexually predatory behavior toward women.  He did not.  Instead he paraded before the world and placed in the debate audience some of the women with whom Bill Clinton had had affairs. Monica Lewinsky was not among the attendees.   He justified his own behavior because Bill Clinton had spoken or done worse.
 That Trump stopped the run for the exit door of evangelical and “establishment” Republicans withdrawing their endorsement is yet to be seen.  What he did, however, was claim that he “has not groped” and he called the damning audios just “locker room” talk and awkwardly tried to switch the topic to fighting Isis. He can only hope no “groped” women come forward.
It is a good thing that Bill Clinton is not running for president this go around. His actions over twenty years ago were worthy of the consequences.  The candidate, however, is Hillary Clinton and, if anything, she showed remarkable composure, and exuded dignity in the face of Trump’s attempt to rattle her or to paint her with the sins of her husband. In the run up to the debate he had tried to make the point that Hillary was the “enabler” because she showed no respect for women because she dared to try to destroy the reputation of “the other women”.  That must be some male fantasy to expect the victim, the wronged wife, to take a kind and caring approach to the “other women” because of  some feminist ideology. Given the public focus on all of the tawdriness, I imagine not many women would have had the self-control to invoke Michelle Obama’s advice, “when they go low, we go high” as Hillary Clinton did Sunday night.  It is  her steeliness and self control under such provocations that stand in contrast to tweet happy Trump who reacts whenever his manhood or ego is stroked or offended that makes him particularly unsuited to make rational policy decisions regarding war and peace.
Donald Trump made some eyebrow raising comments, especially regarding his differences with his own running mate Mike Pence over policies toward Russia and Syria.  Like a wannabe tin pot dictator, he said he would appoint a prosecutor to put Hillary in jail for her alleged lies on the email server because he disagreed with the FBI director’s findings that she had no intent to relay material marked classified or had lied to him.  In the post-debate spin room, the shock of Trump advocating to abuse legal and due process to get rid of an opponent overshadowed his stock allegations of Clinton lies.  Trump also openly admitted he had used a tax loophole to avoid paying federal personal income taxes for years. She responded by advocating an expanded version of the original  Buffett Rule that would impose a 30% income tax on income over $1 million with her proposed additional surtaxes on the five million dollar earners. She then scored unrebutted points that Trump’s tax proposals would give enormous tax cuts to the wealthy and raise taxes on some in the middle class.


http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/11/pf/taxes/hillary-clinton-taxes/