Abuse of power: another article of impeachment?

A version of this was published in the Sky Hi News, June 13-14, 2018
https://www.skyhinews.com/news/muftic-abuse-of-power-another-article-of-impeachment/

A new term is creeping into the impeachment vocabulary thanks to recent media focus.  It is abuse of power , the  second article of impeachment against Nixon in the Watergate scandal. Reminders of this are  good reasons to  take a  deeper dive into where we stand today on impeachment and what articles of impeachment could be brought  if Donald Trump were to be the subject.

 First, impeachment of Trump is unlikely but possible. What is different from Watergate  is that Democrats held the majority In both House and Senate and  controlled the House impeachment process when GOP Nixon was president.  Today, President Trump’s party is the majority in both House and Senate. Even then, it would take a vote of 2/3 of the Senate to convict even if  the  House of Representatives  turns blue in 2018 and begins the impeachment process.  Chances are slim  that Donald Trump would be impeached while the Senate is likely to be still  too closely divided to convict. The House or Senate  could gain a Democratic majority in 2018, and do damage to the GOP/Trump in 2020 by holding hearings, though.   A  damning report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller or Trump’s firing of the investigators investigating him  might even  give a GOP Congress  enough of  a backbone to proceed. So far Trump has been told by Mueller  he is a subject, but not the target of his criminal  investigations, yet. Impeachment articles are as the House defines them.  Much could  fall under the Constitution’s   high crimes and misdemeanors clause.

 Nixon resigned  before impeachment.  We still have the articles of impeachment to compare and contrast.  The  first article of impeachment against Nixon was obstruction of justice. White House tapes showed he lied about his part in the coverup.  In Trump’s case , Mueller must show  Donald Trump’s criminal intent was to obstruct the Russian investigation when he fired  FBI Director James Comey. Impeachment articles do not need  a prosecution’s criminal findings, though.  In December Trump wanted to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the chief investigator investigating him, and Mueller’s boss, Rod Rosenstein, before they have made their final report. He claims often they are on a witch hunt. He has  backed off when GOP senators said that would be obvious evidence of  intent to obstruct  justice. Some witches have been found already in Trumps immediate circle and some are  Russians. Many  are under Mueller’s gun, some  already charged, indicted,  pleaded, out on bond,  or in jail

 Other possible impeachment articles authorized  in the Constitution are bribery and   treason, neither in Nixon’s articles. Treason could  be  more politely defined  as (collusion)  conspiring with a foreign government (Russia)  to help his  election and their national interests, a major focus of the Mueller investigation.  Connections between the Trump business organization and Trump himself benefiting from recent real estate loan deals with China coinciding with lifting sanctions on a Chinese telecom are raising eyebrows, not to mention violation of Constitutional emoluments clauses.

  In the Nixon case the abuse of power charge was based on his ordering  the IRS  to go after those on his enemies list, including the LA Times and their owners.  Trump’s repeated  demands  of  the semi autonomous  postmaster  to increase postal rates on Amazon, is suspected abuse  because its owner, Jeff Bezos, also owns the Washington Post, Trump’ chief media critic. Trump  has tried to argue Amazon pays   too low  postal rates which causes USPS deficits, but obvious evidence is  that deficit is caused by pension funding. Trump’s role in the denial of the Time Warner ATT merger that would have helped CNN is once again under scrutiny.  To be subject to impeachment and  prosecution,  the threat does not need to be carried out. Update June 12, 2018  Courts OK Time Warner ATT merger:https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/12/att-time-warner-merger-approved-642333

___________________________________________________________________________________

 To write this blog, I drew on so many source and documents, and my own research for prior posts on the impeachment procedure,  there are too many to list. However, I am particularly indebted for MSNBC’s  Rachel Maddow’s calling thoroughly documented  attention to the history of the Nixon impeachment’s article 2 in a recent broadcast and the implication of Trump’s demand on the US Postal Service

An update: Trump refuses to provide information about how he has  persoally profited during his tenure...another example of both abuse of power and thumbing his nose at the emoluments clause:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/trumps-company-isnt-tracking-all-the-money-it-gets-from-foreign-governments

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/15/media/trump-jessica-rosenworcel-nbc-license/index.html

http://fortune.com/2018/05/12/rudy-giuliani-trump-att-time-warner-merger/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-11/trump-threatens-nbc-tv-licenses-after-story-on-nuclear-buildup

BBC reports Cohen took Ukraine bribe money to arrange meeting with Trump http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44215656

https://www.yahoo.com/news/anything-stop-foreign-government-favors-trump-043850542.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/10/us/politics/trump-sought-to-fire-mueller-in-december.html

https://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/criminal-law/violent_crimes/criminal-threats.htm

Articles of impeachment against Nixon regarding abuse of power: . ”repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice in the conduct of lawful inquiries, of contravening the law of governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposes of these agencies. ...”   

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/02/trump-amazon-jeff-bezos-stock-value-495803

As I noted in a prior Facebook posting that this threat against Amazon shipping rates  is really  stupid  on Trump’s part. Amazon can switch to Fed Ex and UPS with which they already have contracts avoiding the Post Office and this will spur Amazon’s stated plans to short cut all of these services by moving up the time line in establishing their own delivery service, already in the works. The only people punished by this will be us consumers and million customers of Amazon who will pay higher shipping rates or they will be absorbed by Amazon until their own service is on line or they use UPS and Fed Ex instead.  The financial loss will be USPS’.

  Full disclosure: I am the owner of a small cosmetic company which is an Amazon seller and I am a customer, too.  I live  an hour and a half way from major retailers so I depend on ecommerce.  Even when my own web ecommerce site sells the same items at a lower price also  including shipping, customers prefer to order the same ones offered  on Amazon because they trust their guarantees and policies made to Prime customers and prefer  the user friendliness  of their technology.  I imagine  Donald Trump is neither an Amazon  seller nor a customer so he has no clue other than  thinking this is a way to punish a media outlet owner by trying to damage his  other business’ investors’ stock prices. This action if implemented  is likely to end up in civil court anyway over  contract matters.

Give me a break: one year is long enough for the Mueller investigation?

A version of this was published in the Sky Hi News, June 19-20, 2018
https://www.skyhinews.com/news/muftic-give-me-a-break-the-fat-lady-has-not-yet-sung/

This falls into the give me a break category. The Trump White House launched ,a "wrap it up" campaign; "one year of the Special Counsel  Mueller probe is enough, it has found nothing,  and he works for us" the line goes.The fat lady has not even begun to sing in the last act of  this historical opera and the White House  hopes to shut her up and give her a bad review before the end of the first act.  They must fear the rest of the performance will not be music to their ears. There is much of the performance  plot  they and  we the public do not know yet nor do we know  what other characters have already sung. 

Trump constantly claiming Mueller is on a witch hunt because there is no there there  ignores the witches bagged to date:  20 individuals and three businesses that have either been indicted or admitted guilt and a total of 75 charges ,25 of them against Paul Manafort,  Trump’s former campaign chairman, now in jail for witness tampering. Other.charges  against Manfort  include conspiracy and financial crimes.  59% of Republicans do not know about Mueller's actions per a recent poll.75% of Republicans believe Trump's  slogan that the Mueller probe is a witch hunt, and 53% of all voters think the probe is politically motivated.   .But this is only Act 1 

For the Trump White House to claim Mueller has no proof of collusion, (or obstruction, or financial crimes) is premature and empty propaganda coming  from the White House mouths, to say the least, since no one yet knows what closed lip Mueller knows and he has not made his reports. Nonetheless, Trump continues the attack on the credibility of the FBI, Mueller, and negative press reports: As he said to Leslie Stahl" he bashes to press to discredit negative stories". 

It took three years of Watergate  probes into Richard Nixon's cover up,  four years of Benghazi Congressional  hearings and FBI reports  to fail to pin it on Hillary Clinton,  and three years from Whitewater to Monica Lewinsky's blue dress for these investigations  to play out in the Bill Clinton scandal.. A year seems more than a bit short for these kinds of matters, doesn't it? 

  The Trump White House  mimics the same claim made by Richard Nixon in his State of the Union two years before he was impeached. A year is enough, Nixon  said about the special counsel investigation into Watergate, we turned over all documents, and they have found nothing. The break in occurred in 1971.and after special counsel and Congressional investigations,that  impeachment was begun and Nixon  resigned in 1974. Three years was way too long  for Nixon. 

 Benghazi happened in 2012 and the GOP House and Senate dominated hearings kept the issue alive to skewer Hillary Clinton and never could prove she  herself was at fault. The final report was issued in the summer of 2016. For the GOP then four years was just fine; it kept questions about her character alive.

 Aside from the irony of the Nixon propaganda parallel, the GOP House investigation run by a Trump loyalist, Rep. Devin Nunes,  into the Russian connection was a farce and did not call essential witnesses to testify, concluding there was no there there.

 However, the Senate investigation continues and has found there was there there. In their report May 16, they conclude Russians interfered in 2016 to help Trump's campaign, as the result of their findings into the key meeting in the Trump Tower in June 2016 between  Trump cohorts and a Russian agent regarding emails of Hillary Clinton. The suspicion is that the Trump minions hoped to get the dirt on Clinton in return for lifting sanctions imposed on the Russians for past bad behavior . The quid (offer to provide missing emails)  was there but the quo was not discussed.   Whether or not Trump himself was a part of this  is yet to be seen. He was in the building and may have been receiving  telephone calls.  Was the meeting truly a "nothing burger" or there were other events follow ups ,and  other meetings  that would be evidence of conspiracy? What Mueller knows about any of this we do not know ourselves yet, either.

 In  the   released Senate hearing transcripts regarding the Trump Tower meeting. The angle still unknown is much like Watergate, what did the President know and when did he know about the Trump Tower meeting .We know the meeting  was not about Russian adoption as the Trumpsters claimed, but about  dirt on Clinton's emails.   Donald Trump Jr who organized the meeting  was in emails leading up to the meeting  eager to seek information from foreign governments that would help his father get elected. 

The investigation by Special Counsel Robert  Mueller is about  Trump cohorts, with Trump assured  by Mueller he is  a subject in  the investigation  but not currently  a target of a criminal investigation ,  but  it is Trump and his cohorts that say a year is enough. For Trump to fire Mueller  would also be the ultimate evidence  of obstruction of justice seen as a way to stop the investigation about them  before it was finished. Unfolding now is  Act II,  the maneuvering around whether Donald Trump will ever testify to Mueller in any form about what he knew and when did he know it.

_______________________________________________________________________________

 We have deduced  something about what Mueller is finding  and investigating from all of the texts of the indictments and participants  turning states' witness pleading guilty for lying  about their Russian contacts. Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort  and his partner have been hit for money laundering and working for a foreign government. Thirteen Russians were indicted for active measures interfering in the 2016 campaign.   While none of the charges so far  yet confirm Trump and his cohorts "colluded" with the Russians, proof of  obstruction of justice and financial crimes are still charges that we know nothing  about what Mueller knows. That those  related areas of investigation are within the scope of Mueller's authority to investigate  were confirmed in  a judge's ruling concerning  Paul Manafort's indictment May 15 and the authorization for the probe by the Department of Justice in a document issued in 2017.

https://www.courthousenews.com/poll-most-americans-want-mueller-to-continue-investigation/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/06/08/muellers-witch-hunt-snags-another-witch

https://www.vox.com/2018/5/23/17384096/mueller-investigation-poll

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/why-don-t-americans-know-111950565.html


 https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury

https://www.vox.com/2018/5/10/17340200/poll-republicans-trump-fbi-mueller-witch-hunt

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/22/trump-told-lesley-stahl-he-bashes-press-to-discredit-negative-stories.html?__source=twitter%7Cmain

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/05/08/most-americans-think-the-mueller-investigation-is-politically-motivated-poll-finds/

http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-manafort-indictment-moves-forward-2018-5

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/05/17/us/politics/document-Robert-Mueller-Special-Counsel-Russia.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mueller-told-trumps-attorneys-the-president-remains-under-investigation-but-is-not-currently-a-criminal-target/2018/04/03/d7832cf0-36c1-11e8-acd5-35eac230e514_story.html?utm_term=.025fbe46c959

Why firing Rod Rosenstein would be like firing Robert Mueller

Now the House Freedom Caucus is trying to "fire"Rosenstein: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Tuesday compared articles of impeachment drafted against him by members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus to an extortion attempt.

“There have been people who have been making threats privately and publicly against me for quite sometime and I think they should understand the Department of Justice is not going to be extorted,” he said speaking at The Newseum’s Law Day event. “We are going to do what is required by the rule of law and any kind of threats anybody makes are not going to affect the way we do our job.”

The House Freedom Caucus, which is chaired by Rep. Mark Meadows, North Carolina Republican, have drafted eight articles of impeachment against Mr. Rosenstein, multiple media outlets reported late Monday. Those drafts reportedly accuse Mr. Rosenstein of abusing his authority when he renewed a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant on Trump campaign aide Carter Page ahead of the 2016 presidential campaign.

From the Washington Times, May 1, 2018

https://www.c-span.org/video/?444870-1/justice-department-extorted-articles-impeachment-rosenstein

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/07/trumps-power-pardon/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nixon

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-leak-mueller-questions-experts-906857

This post was written the last time rumors were Donald Trump was threatening to fire those investigating him, but it is a relevant now as rumors are rampant now, 4 11 18
Revised February 8, 2018

Update: April 20, 2018: AG Sessions threatens to quite if Rosenstein is fired:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/384221-sessions-warned-white-house-he-could-quit-if-trump-fired-rosenstein

Why do some in Congress equate firing Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein with the same importance as  firing  Special Counsel Robert Mueller? We know the Deputy Attorney General has the power to fire Mueller and the President must go through him to do it, but whoever sits in the Deputy Attorney General's chair also  has the ability  to influence the outcome of the Mueller investigation even if Mueller is not fired. The Deputy AG has the power to limit the  scope of the investigation and to make  the  decision whether  to release the Mueller report in some form to the US public.  

Rosenstein's tenure is in jeopardy. CNN quotes  President Trump as having said of Rosenstein, “Let's fire him, let's get rid of him,” but was talked out of it.  Soon after the Nunes memo came to the public's attention, it was seen by critics as an attempt to create a pretext for the President to fire him. Mr. Trump revived the possibility. When asked if he would fire Rosenstein,  Trump  answered "you figure it out".  In a letter to President Trump, Democratic Congressional leaders wrote "Firing Rod Rosenstein, DOJ Leadership, or Bob Mueller could result in a constitutional crisis of the kind not seen since the Saturday Night Massacre." They were referring to  similar actions Richard Nixon took in Watergate. Even Paul Ryan, House Majority  Leader, said : "Rod Rosenstein is doing a fine job."  

Donald Trump has his own self-interested reasons to want to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Assuming President Trump believes firing Special Counsel Robert Mueller would certainly trigger serious impeachment attempts, firing Rosenstein would be a tempting alternative. Rosenstein has already indicated he was not a Trump team player when his Department of Justice  objected to the release of the Nunes memo.The Nunes memo was also  viewed by many as an attempt to provide  Donald Trump with a public rationale  to fire Rosenstein  for alleged “deep state bias” and  for  FBI alleged  incompetence in a single  court filing to renew a FISA warrant for surveillance of Carter Page. The Nunes memo was also seen as an attempt to damage the credibility of the FBI so that their findings would be viewed as biased. Polls show that strategy is working with the GOP rank and file

Some senators have warned him firing Rosenstein also could backfire on him just as did the the firing of FBI Director James Comey. Comey was investigating President Trump's associates' with contacts with Russians. That firing resulted in the appointment of Mueller to investigate if the President or his associates were obstructing justice or they conspired with Russians to interfere in the 2016 elections, or even if financial crimes were committed, all possible impeachable offenses.

Another possible temptation for Donald Trump to fire Rod Rosenstein would be to limit the scope of Mueller’s report. The Deputy AG has the power to put the report in a desk drawer if he does not see release of it would be in the public's interest, whatever that means. A new deputy AG could take money laundering off the table or out of the report, for example. Mr. Trump has made it clear that subject was a red line he thought Mueller should not cross.

The game could then become delay, delay, delay until after the November Congressional elections. Firing Rosenstein and replacing him with a Trump loyalist could a result in drawn out court challenges, congressional hearings, and a confirmation vote of the Senate, though it would not halt the investigation since it could continue under Rosenstein's deputy. Donald Trump could also contend his reason try to avoid testifying to the Mueller team or taking the 5th was that the FBI was too politically biased against him. That issue could also be tied up in the Courts past the November 2018 election.

Win or lose the court challenges, resulting delays could benefit the GOP and President Trump. The GOP fear is the 2018 midterms could flip control of the  House that  has impeachment powers to Democrats. The GOP now has the majority in the House and while they have control, it is realistic to believe they would not impeach their President. Delays would give Donald Trump an opportunity to keep up the morale of his base through November and keep Congress in GOP hands. It might work. In the midst of Watergate, Nixon was re-elected to a second term by a large majority. It was not until after that  election he was forced by the courts to release the tapes that his role in the Watergate cover up was revealed to the public and impeachment was begun.

There are two unforeseen circumstances that could change this scenario: the Mueller findings could be
so explosive even House Republicans could not ignore them and would proceed with impeachment or
that Mueller would indict the president and shortcut impeachment proceedings. Whether he has the power to do the latter is an unsettled legal matter and would depend upon a Supreme Court ruling..

____________________________________________________________________

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/12/republicans-quietly-warn-trump-dont-fire-mueller/

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2517

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/12/mueller-trump-deutsche-bank

https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/26/politics/donald-trump-rod-rosenstein-frustration/index.html

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/02/democrats-trump-obstruction-386078

http://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/372215-house-intel-gop-rep-memo-doesnt-give-trump-reason-to-fire

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-gop-leaders-hold-weekly-press-conference-ahead-of-sotu-live-stream/

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/02/qa-nunes-memo/

http://www.businessinsider.com/mueller-threatened-to-subpoena-trump-over-negotiations-for-interview-2018-5

 From factcheck.org    https://www.factcheck.org/2017/05/special-counsel-qa/

“What happens when the special counsel’s investigation is complete?

Rosenstein’s order notes that if Mueller deems it “necessary and appropriate,” he is “authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.” The federal code states that at the conclusion of a special counsel’s investigation, he must provide the acting attorney general with a confidential report explaining decisions about whether or not prosecutions are warranted. The acting attorney general could decide to make that report public. According to the code, the “Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions.”

Trump attorney claims Trump above the rule of law

http://thehill.com/…/363069-trumps-lawyer-claims-president-…

"President cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer under [the Constitution's Article II] and has every right to express his view of any case," attorney John Dowd told  Axios."

Of course, this was Trump's attorney speaking, not the president himself. Besides, Trump not only expressed his opinion, he fired Comey, later stating he had the Russian probe on his mind at the time. Trump's recent tweet, allegedly written by his attorney, he fired Flynn because he knew Flynn had lied to the FBI has become another possible indication of his intent to obstruct justice since he knew Flynn had committed a crime of lying to the FBI and asked Comey to go easy on him.   http://www.cnn.com/2Fl017/05/12/politics/trump-comey-russia-thing/index.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-s-lawyer-claims-responsibility-trump-s-problematic-tweet-n826036

Nonetheless, Dowd's comments  reminds me of Richard Nixon's famous 1977 interview with David Frost in the midst of Watergate, the last time a President overtly claimed his actions were above the law. ".when the president does it, that means it's not illegal". The issue over turning over the tapes that would incriminate him went to the US Supreme Court, which ruled that Nixon's privileges did not extend to this issue. The situation is different here, but if Watergate set the precedence was that Nixon was not above the rule of law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/nixon-thought-he-was-above-the-law/2013/01/18/20ed22cc-5e7f-11e2-8acb-ab5cb77e95c8_story.htmlhttps://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/evidence/evidence-keyed-to-waltz/governmental-priveleges/united-states-v-nixon/

Nixon's lawyers argued that this was a dispute between   parts of the executive branch over which he had control.  That did not fly.  The Court ruled that while the president had many powers, he could not claim that when other parts of the Constitution were involved, such as the right to a speedy trial. The facts are difference in Trump's case, but the principles are similar.  We do have a different balance in the Supreme Court, too,  with the appointment of Neil Gorsuch. It tilts right. If this ever ends up in the Supreme Court, who knows. Obstruction of justice was the prime charge  that resulted in the Watergate impeachment action.The same defense approach was tried by Bill Clinton in his House impeachment trial, and it, too, failed, though he was acquitted by the Senate for other reasons..

 More than likely, with the House in the hand of the GOP, and the House has to initiate the impeachment process, nothing will happen.  However, this could be the chief Democratic attack in 2018 that could result in a change in House leadership and a Democratic majority.  Aside from the pain certain constituents will feel due to the "tax reform" bill or the failure of "trickle down", I can see Democrats arguing if you want Trump impeached, vote for the Democrat standing for Congress and/or if you want to check the failed absolute rule of the GOP of all branches of government, vote Democratic.  All House seats are up for election in 2018 and there is a numerical chance the House could flip.  That chance does not exist for the Senate in 2018, because only one/third of seats, mostly Democratic, are up for grabs. However, 2020 could see a backlash in both the Senate and White House.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/richard-nixon-bill-clinton-faced-impeachment-obstruction-justice/story?id=47460022

Is it time to talk impeachment?

Published in all editions of the Sky Hi News  5/19/17

The goings on in Washington, D.C. this past week with the firing of FBI Director James Comey have rekindled the talk of impeachment of a president. Often  in media discussions there have been historical references to the Watergate Scandal, a potentially similar situation , 1972-1974, it resulted in the resignation of Pres. Richard Nixon.. The issue of obstruction of justice could be what the cases have in common.

Unlike Watergate where an actual crime had been committed for which Nixon was charged with a cover up and  obstructing justice,   this year there  has been no  evidence presented to the public that a crime had been committed by a US person. All intelligence agencies do  agree the Russians had interfered in the 2016 elections.   The Trump administration is leaving the impression that it is covering up something and trying to end the Russian investigation quickly by intimidation with threats of and/ or firing and replacing those leading serious investigations with his preferred
picks.. .

.

For those of us who remember  Watergate and the resignation of Nixon in face of certain impeachment,  the political atmosphere  has the same feel now as it did then in the early stages of Watergate .  The public is on the outside looking in and trying to connect dots, wondering   whether there is no there there as Trump claims.   Or is there is a possibility there is evidence not yet uncovered that could lead to impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump himself? Before impeachment, convincing evidence   must be found that he is  culpable of high crimes and misdemeanors , including obstructing justice by misleading or quashing an investigation. That was the first article of impeachment which brought Nixon down.

Whether or not Trump tried to intimidate FBI Director Comey at a dinner or whether the conversation constituted obstruction of justice sufficient to impeach ,the timing of Comey’s firing  is enough to raise suspicion that there is something damaging there yet to be discovered that could implicate Donald Trump himself. The action of firing Comey is intimidating by itself  to  investigators. It sends the message "if you  show you are not on Trump’s side, you can get fired ".. The investigation last week was at a critical juncture. Grand jury and congressional bodies  investigating the Russian connection began  issuing subpoenas and a report from the Financial Crimes unit of the Treasury department was due to the Senate intelligence committee concerning money laundering,  Trump had already replaced Preet Bharara,  the  federal  district  prosecutor .who had been investigating US and Russian  money laundering activities. The head of the FBI was fired just as he was asking for resources to expand the investigation.

The political reality is that Republicans  control whether impeachment proceedings will happen, since they have the majority in both Houses of Congress and the House initiates impeachment (Indictment) whille the Senate holds the trial and convicts with a 2/3 vote.  The Senate approves the appointments of the Attorney Generaland the FBI. going forward. The Deputy Attorney General , Rod Rosenstein, has now appointed a special counsel to conduct an investigation of the Russian connection, taking the control out of the hands of both the Justice Department and the White House. The Justice Department is the only entity with the power to appoint a special prosecutor.

Who may be other participants in this historical drama?  As in Watergate, it will be a free, courageous  media  and   whistle  blowing Deep Throats  that can contribute their findings.  Voters still wield power at the ballot box with the ability to change the majority in the House in 2018..

__________________________________________________________________________________

What seems to me most likely is that Trump's business dealings with Russia, loans and investments in his businesses, may have compromised Trump himself, opening him to blackmail.  That could also explain his “bromance” with Putin and his campaign advocacy for policies in synch with  Russia’s, denial that there was any Russian interference in 2016 elections in spite of all intelligence agencies testifying to the contrary. It also explains why he as taking been great pains to keep his tax filings secret.

________________________________________________________________________________
Rachel Madow in her MSNBC show Thursday, May 11, speculated that either Mike Flynn or Paul Manfort could be "flipped" by the FBI to become witnesses of any of Trump's collusion with Russia during the campaign.. They would be in a position to know if such happened.

James Clapper on Jake Tapper's interview Sunday, May 24: "our instutions are under assault by Trump", referring also to checks and balances, and he said he did not even know the FBI had an investigation into the Russian connection or campaign collusion in 2016 until FBI Director Comey verified it before the House committee March 22. In his position of DNI, the focus was not on that issue so he could not attest to whether it was true or not.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/11/us/politics/trump-comey-firing

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/11/us/politics/trump-comey-firing

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/333081-trump-warns-comey-better-hope-there-are-no-tapes-of-our-meeting

https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/98-806.pdf

http://usanewspost.com/key-witness-in-preet-bhararas-russian-probe-just-fell-from-fourth-floor-of-building/

http://www.history.com/topics/watergate

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/10/21/17-intelligence-agencies-russia-behind-hacking/92514592/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/financial-crimes-monitor-to-share-records-in-trump-russia-probe-1494625140

http://www.newyorker.com/business/adam-davidson/the-senate-starts-to-look-at-trumps-businesses

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/05/trumps-nothing-see-spin/

Since so much of the news reports about Watergate dribbled out for 2 and a half years, as I lived through those times, I did not fully grasp the significance of the scandal untill I put it all together by reading the book All the President's Men by the investigative reporters who blew upen and reported it. The movie based on the book I found to be a very accurate recounting as desribed in the book by the same name, For those who want a greater understanding, required reading would be the book,

All the President's Men

by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein

avaailable on Amazon in a variety of devices and in paper.

and the movie based on the book. it can be streamed with a subscription on Amazon.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-73-back-independent-probe-russian-election-interference-n750161

Hyping the scandals is not a game changer

The “scandals”  seem to be heaped one on top of another on the White House lately.   While there is some fire in the substance, the hyperventilated, over the top smoke  blown mightily   by the GOP   is also about the 2014 midterms. It is a political strategy that is  sound and fury likely to signify little in the end.

 The GOP seems determined to pin the problem on Pres. Obama, best if he can be found to be the actual perpetrator (and so far they have failed to do that), or at least the head of   an overreached, out of control, incompetent administration.  Therefore, the GOP hopes the President will be so wounded,  Congressional and Senatorial elections will go their way as voters become disgusted with anything tied to him.

The GOP views the  rollout of Obamacare   like a fox salivating at the possibilities of catching chipmunk in a rock garden.  They hope Obamacare will fail miserably.  They have laid the groundwork to self  fulfill their prophecy.    Whenever  some southern and Midwestern  governors and state legislatures were in  GOP control, they have refused to set up the state managed exchanges…resulting in the mistrusted feds having to do it for them and leaving a gap of millions who would not have access to expanded Medicaid or Obamacare. They have cut out funds slated  to encourage  currently uninsured into subscribe to  the subsidized exchanges,  hoping if  they built it, no one came.

Except where they have tried to sabotage the roll out, the GOP is taking a risk.  The roll out might work…because California, Colorado, and Massachusetts, and New Jersey  and Pacific Coast states are well prepared . The cost of the subsidized premiums in California have come in much lower than actuarial studies predicted.  Colorado is well ahead of the game, already testing  technology and with 17 private insurers signed on to participate.

 Where the GOP will be able to howl in protest and point to failure will be in states where they are  already  strong. All politics in electing representatives and s enators are local.  They will be preaching to their  choir,  safe  in gerrymandered non competitive  districts.    Any failures of the roll out could blowback on the GOP when the successes in other states could be contrasted with the bungling in the purposefully unprepared states.

The GOP has tried to inflate the “scandals”  by painting them as “Nixonian”.    In their zeal to try to draw  comparisons  of Obama with Nixon they  fall very flat.  Nixon himself  ordered the IRS to  audit politicians, groups and journalists on his enemies list.  It was not a case of  bungling by career service bureaucrats  and an overprotective White House staff, as it appears involved in  this current “scandal”.

 The attempt by Nixon  to hush up the Washington Post was not because the CIA or national security was  jeopardized by their reporting. The Watergate coverup was his directed attempt to cover his role in a criminal act. However, it  was AP’s and Fox’s reporting of the leak  that blew the cover off covert action against Al Qaeda in Yemen, endangering our war against terrorists, that triggered the Attorney General’s investigation.  

Nothing this year equals the Iran Contra Scandal in which the Reagan administration  skirted laws to run  Central American covert actions,  or the revenge seeking W Bush administration blowing CIA operative Valerie Plame’s cover.

As a strategy, even these more substantive  scandals have  not  changes the  party domination in the immediately following elections in the past. Economic issues were always larger factors.

So…fire away GOP.  Voters will begin asking where  is  your replacement  for Obamacare or what you will do about employment and the disappearing middle class. A GOP  blocking immigration reform will only feed  Democrats’ winning demographics.  Those are the real game changers.

For more, visit  www.mufticforumespanol.blogspot.com

This is a version of my column that will appear in the Sky Hi Daily News this week.