Showing posts with label treason. Show all posts
Showing posts with label treason. Show all posts

Thursday, July 15, 2021

Why General Milley is emerging as a hero who saved democracy, updated 8/9/22 . 9/28/23

Update September 28. 2023Gen. Milley, retiring speech: “We are unique among the world’s militaries,” Milley said. “We don’t take an oath to a country, we don’t take an oath to a tribe, we don’t take an oath to a religion. We don’t take an oath to a king, or a queen, or a tyrant or a dictator.”

“And we don’t take an oath to a wannabe dictator,” he spat. “We take an oath to the Constitution and we take an oath to the idea that is America – and we’re willing to die to protect it.”

Update August 9, 2022

This resignation letter which was never used fortifies my belief that the democratic governance of the US was saved by two heroes: One, General Milley who refused to let the active military become a personal weapon of the president in a political matter, and Mike Pence, who risked his life on January 6 to uphold the Constitution. Milley took his stand after he was bamboozled to appear in uniform as the president cleared Lafayette Square to make a political photo op on the steps of the church while holding his bible upside down. Milley seriously considered resigning and drafted this letter. He instead resolved to remain in his position, even if he risked court martial...to defy any future attempt by the president to abuse the Constitutional intent by treating the generals as loyal to him as is the personal domestic political hammer. Pence saw the mob chanting "hang Mike Pence" for not going along with the president's coup attempt but refused to be driven away by the Secret Service, recognizing if he did, the coup would have succeeded without his ability to reassemble Congress to certify the electoral college vote. He returned to the Capitol and danger.

Update 5/6/22:   As the January 6 committee finalizes its report, one of the most explosive findings would be public testimony of verification of Trump attempting to plan and execute a coup using what he thought was his command of the US military.  The role of Gen. Mark Milley in thwarting that attempt was key if that is what the Jan.6 committee finds and presents witnesses in planned June 6 public hearings. Books are not enough to sway public opinion.. Sworn testimony by witnesses in public hearings attesting to this could be  political dynamite .  Gen. Milley is not the only hero defending democracy in this drama of Trump's attempt to stage a military coup  or to abuse his power as commander in chief throughout his time in the White House. . Esper book details Trump rage at Pence and proposal to hit Mexico with missiles | Donald Trump | The Guardian   Mark Esper, Secretary of Defense had restrained Trump from abusing the military several times ..  Trump once asked  Esper if the military could shoot demonstrators in the legs, for example..  In the history of violent coups, the military is usually the one who commits one. In 2020-2021, in the US, the military may have saved democracy.  Esper was replaced with Trump's yes men near January 6 and it is believed by some this was part of Trump's coup plans. What Trump failed to accept, was that both Esper and Milley took their oath office to defend the Constitution, not the person sitting in the oval office.  Trump then tried to replace the civilian leadership at the Pentagon that was loyal to him, not to the Constitution.  

Uda;ted 9/15/21 Bob Woodward's and Bob Consta's newest book reports that Milley feared that TruItmp might start a war after the election and around January 6 as a way to stay in power and General Milley took measures. 'Peril,' by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, reports Gen. Mark A. Milley called a Chinese general twice to pledge the U.S. wouldn’t strike - The Washington Post          

In response, some in the GOP call Milley's action treason and call on Biden to fire him.  Mark Milley Accused of Treason As Republicans Urge Joe Biden to Fire Him (newsweek.com   That Milley said he would call the Chinese in advance if the US would strike caused the right-wing media to hyperventilate and Biden foes to call what Milley did was treason.  No, what Milley did was to prevent a misreading of January 6 by the Chinese that there was a real coup happening and that Trump would try to divert public attention from the failure by starting a war.

 Updated 9/20/21 Milley had intelligence reports that the Chinese were preparing for war against them because of some US military exercises in the South China Sea area and Trump's belligerent recent remarks regarding China. Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Defends His Call To A Chinese General : NPR

 Why would the Chinese even think that? Because that is what happens in most countries in the world when a coup fails and the leader in charge fails to stay in power via a violent act.,he rallies the country to back him in a war he initiates.  This is the wag the dog scenario. The Chinese considered Trump unstable enough to try it. What the Chinese did not understand because they are not a democracy, is that the institutions in a democracy that are strongly established as ours is, can stop violent coups and rogue presidents, as it did.  Milley had the task and the ability to reassure the Chinese he would give them a heads up, and hope the Chinese would not conduct a pre-emptive strike themselves.. If there were not two nuclear powers involved with the ability to destroy civilization, the issue would have been serious enough, which, but there was far more at stake... accidental self-destruction by nuclear war.   Woodward/Costa book: Worried Trump could 'go rogue,' Milley took secret action to protect nuclear weapons - CNNPolitics

.  When a president like Trump is viewed by our adversaries as an unstable madman doing all he can do to stay in power,  such misreadings can happen with dire results, and Milley did what he could do to minimize the danger. He made a promise he never believed he would have to keep: to give the Chinese a heads up if Trump gave the order..  It was his way of saying the US would not strike and putting the Chinese at more ease who were in danger of a serious misunderstanding. In fact, Milley himself feared Trump was unstable per the Woodward//Costa book.   Milley never had to act on his words. However, to make sure Trump's flunkies he had just put in key positions in the Defense agencies, Milley then called in the top brass and reviewed the Constitutional and laws governing the pulling of the nuclear trigger that would keep him in the loop.   In all cases, Milley's acts adhered to the law and the Constitution to which he had sworn to defend.  To avoid being insubordinate, reports are the generals would resign rather than execute orders Trump would issue to keep himself in power regardless of the vote of the people and the electoral count certification.  

First posted 7/15/21 follows: 

 There is good reason to believe that Milley is the hero who saved democracy. Milley remembered his sworn oath to defend the Consitution. The oath he took was not to defend the president whoever it was.   It was those with loyalty to Trump the person who were attempting to overthrow the outcome of the popular and electoral college votes to keep him as president for a second term  These same are still perpetuating the lie that there was such fraud in the 2020 election that such violation of the democratic process was justified even though they could not produce evidence that the election was stolen when testifying in 60 courts under oath.  Those who accuse Milley of treason, who voted to decertify the election on the night of January 6,.  and who gave moral support to the violent rioters of January 6 who intended to terrify Contresspeople with threats of bodily harm into voting against certification need, to look in their mirrors. Other reports have emerged that in order to avoid an outright subordination to a commander in chief should Trump indeed \refuse to leave office, they would resign one by one.   Top generals planned to resign en masse if Trump refused to leave office: reports (militarytimes.com)  

Below are an update of a July 15, 2021, and a November 12,  2020 posting...and a series of blog postings beginning mid-2020 during the George Floyd protest period that tracked Gen. Milley's public pronouncements

.  Woodward and Costa's book only fortifies my belief in mid-2020 that a military coup would not happen thanks to Milley's adherence to the Constitution/. Even before the November 2020 elections fears had been expressed then that Trump would attempt a coup, using the civil unrest as an excuse to bring in the active military to put it down for political gain.    I had followed Milley's public statements looking for clues of where he stood in 2020 and posted them, duplicated below.

This is an update of a November 12 posting that explains why Pentagon generals were making public statements about the proper role of the military in our democracy and why they would not participate in an insurrection even in advance of the election.  Now, with the publication of books about the last days of Trump's presidency, we have a clearer picture of the role General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,  played in stopping what he feared was going to be an attempted coup by Trump if he lost the election.  Not only did Trump fail to enlist the military to be part of an insurrection, many thanks to Gen. Milley,  he lost every case in court in an attempt to overturn the election.  January 6  should not have been a surprise.

A couple of books published in July 2021 by respected reporters tell about the last months of Trump's time in office.  One, in particular, recounts Milley's role at that time.."I alone can fix it",. The new book reveals what was going on in the Pentagon as generals feared a coup after November 2021 General Milley is emerging as a hero who saw a repeat of a Nazi-style takeover and who saved democracy.

Many of these books published in July 2021 have attributions but also they quote unnamed sources. It will be interesting to see how many witnesses will appear before the special select committee of the House holding hearings beginning the end of July and swear to tell the truth. That will be the value of the House hearings. We can expect complaints that this is a partisan group holding the hearings with control over subpoenas. True, but the Republicans refused to support a bipartisan commission with both political parties able to issue subpoenas. That was their choice and strategy. The GOP members appointed by the GOP leadership will have to resort to table-thumping, hostile cross-examinations to register their objections. Perhaps the bi-partisan commission will be revised, yet. Brace yourself for a lot of Sturm und Drang.

New book shows top US generals planned ways to stop Trump in case of coup - YouTube 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ_cUbiYdfM

https://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-donald-trumps-last-days-in-the-white-house-and-plans-for-a-comeback-11625759920

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/12/books/review/michael-wolff-landslide-trump.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/15/mark-milley-feared-coup-after-trump-lost-to-biden-book.html

This explains why beginning in Nov. 2020 the Pentagon issued statements regarding Trump's intent to use the military to keep power.  Trump's attempted to seize control of the military by replacing as many in the Pentagon he could with political loyalists.  January 6 could be seen as an attempted coup by the nonmilitary. That one also failed.  Democracy prevailed.

The question remains did Trump plan to have the January 6 rally attendees turn violent.  The Leonig/Rucker book reports that Trump first reveled in the mobs' Maga hats and Trump banners, but when it turned violent, he muttered "Oh Crap".  However he did nothing to stop the violence after that for hours and even then it was I love you, go home message. That he inspired the violence is the least of his role, but so far there is no evidence that he organized the violence-ready terrorists to turn up January 6. . That he lied about the outcome of the election and he was irresponsible and reckless in his words is more obvious.

 Below: my posts during the fall 2020 period regarding public statements from Gen. Milley, as it appeared to me to indicate a break with Trump on the use of the military in domestic political demonstrations.   Even then, questions emerged which can be answered by these recent books.about what was going on behind the scenes in the White House and Oval Office at the same time.  

__________________________________________________________________________________Why did Trump purge civilian leadership at the Pentagon? Updated July 2021 The heroism of Gen. Milley



Why did Trump purge civilian leadership at the Pentagon? There is a great deal of speculation about why Trump did that. The most disturbing was the speculation that Trump fired Esper because he intended to use the active military to put down demonstrations against him post-election... calling it an "insurrection".

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-pentagon-trump/after-esper-firing-white-house-moves-trump-loyalists-into-key-pentagon-jobs-idUSKBN27Q3F6

My observation: Joint Chiefs, in the wake of this summer's demonstration from Lafayette Square to those on the west coast, had made it clear they would not intervene in domestic political affairs. https://www.axios.com/milley-military-election-trump-biden-7b448425-07c0-4c43-b03b-96ba8d741f84.html :


Later October 11, https://www.npr.org/transcripts/922827554

Per Gen. Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs:"“I believe deeply in the principle of an apolitical U.S. military,” Milley said in written responses to questions from two Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee, according to AP.
  • “In the event of a dispute over some aspect of the elections, by law U.S. courts and the U.S. Congress are required to resolve any disputes, not the U.S. military. I foresee no role for the U.S armed forces in this process.”
  • When asked whether the armed forces would reject a presidential order to use military force for political gain, Milley said, “I will not follow an unlawful order.”

The big picture: This marks the second time that Milley has recently stressed the nonpartisan nature of the U.S. military.

  • He apologized in June for attending Trump's photo op at St. John's Episcopal Church, saying, "I should not have been there. My presence in that moment and in that environment created a perception of the military VWell, I've reminded people of that for years, you know, for four years as the chief of staff of the Army and in many years before that during reenlistment ceremonies, promotion ceremonies. I always talk about the Constitution and its importance to us as a military in that we - of all the countries in the world, I think that we are the only one - or at least one of the very few - that swears an oath of allegiance to an idea that's embedded in a document called the U.S. Constitution. We don't swear an oath of allegiance to an individual, a king, a queen, a president or anything else ....We don't swear an oath of allegiance to a country, for that matter. We don't swear an oath of allegiance to a flag, a tribe or religion or any of that. We swear an oath to an idea or a set of ideas and values that are embedded in our Constitution. And we, the U.S. military, are willing to die for - to preserve those ideas and values. And we're willing to die in order to preserve them and pass them onto the next generation. So - and they're all in the Constitution. They're all fundamental to the Constitution."
  • October 11, 2020, interview on NPR  https://www.npr.org/transcripts/922827554 ""This isn't the first time that someone has suggested that there might be a contested election," Milley said. "And if there is, it'll be handled appropriately by the courts and by the U.S. Congress. There's no role for the U.S. military in determining the outcome of a U.S. election. Zero. There is no role there."
That Joint Chief declarations also is relevant to the question of whether Trump could stage a coup. Answer: No so long as Gen. Milley has a say.. In the next 70 days, this aspiring autocrat of a President is taking revenge on the disloyal and may even try to start a war against Iran (for intervening against him in the elections), though I cannot imagine a Pentagon able to make such preparations for such an attack on such short notice, except for a bombing run. Removal of troops from Afghanistan is more likely, those our allies there say it would be turning the country over to the Taliban. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/10/08/taliban-cheer-trump-tweet-promising-early-us-troop-withdrawal-from-afghanistan/ That he as put incompetent and Muslimphobes in key positions in the civilian control positions of the military is unnerving if any of this is on his agenda. The most benign reason might be incriminating document destruction.

The "insurrection" rationale depends upon whether Trump believes he is the state and demonstrations against him is an insurrection. The oath of office military take is allegiance to the Consitution and they do not have to obey illegal orders. From my Sept. 8 blog post: Can the president invoke the insurrection act to force the active military to put down post-election demonstrations? President Trump recently called for that. This apprentice dictator had better be able to tell the difference between protest riots and insurrection because the difference is already established case law. If he has fantasies of a military coup to keep him in office, he may be asking the military to commit an illegal act to overturn a constituted government. Ironically,  what is possible is that the insurrection act could be applied to organized militias and established right-wing terrorist groups who would foment violence if Donald Trump lost and tried to stage a "coup".  That would turn supporters of right-wing advocates calling for insurrection on its head, making them vulnerable to being charged with insurrection instead of left-wing demonstrators. Advocates of invoking the insurrection act ought to be careful what they wish. Riots and peaceful protests are not the same as acts of insurrections that could justify active military intervention per https://definitions.uslegal.com / "insurrection refers to an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government. It is a violent revolt against an oppressive authority. Insurrection is different from riots and offenses connected with mob violence. In insurrection, there is an organized and armed uprising against authority or operations of government whereas riots and offenses connected with mob violence are simply unlawful acts in disturbance of the peace which do not threaten the stability of the government or the existence of political society. The following is a case law defining Insurrection: Insurrection means “a violent uprising by a group or movement acting for the specific purpose of overthrowing the constituted government and seizing its powers. An insurrection occurs where a movement acts to overthrow the constituted government and to take possession of its inherent powers.” [Younis Bros. & Co. v. Cigna Worldwide Ins. Co., 899 F. Supp. 1385, 1392-1393 (E.D. Pa. 1995)]" I note proven or unproven claims of voter fraud are not cited as a justification for an insurrection in the definition. 

Sunday, September 8, 2019

What with Ukraine is up Trump's sleeve? Dirty tricks. or treason?

Update 9 22 19 and 9 23 19   9 25 2019 9/26/19

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/25/us/politics/ukraine-transcript-trump.html

https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2019/09/25/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-us-aid-package-to-ukraine-that-trump-delayed/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-anticorruption-effort-in-ukraine-overlapped-with-sons-work-in-country-11569189782?fbclid=IwAR3owMjRnSUY2ipHy-ntdeK7rdmeYk3HHXghsmaHMksyfhWQGLdfTbrkTo0

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/09/26/trumps-false-claims-about-hunter-bidens-china-dealings/?fbclid=IwAR3pr9uam66Td56asMe8mZX-MEO8steMpdWC59XyQE0M9bAkKQoAX38FvcsBut Hunter Biden did not raise money for the fund; instead, he was on a board that advised potential investors. He did not obtain an equity stake until after his father was no longer vice president — and that investment of less than half a million dollars has not yet yielded a payoff for Hunter Biden, according to his attorney.
Trump earns Four Pinocchios

In May this year, Rudi Guiliani had announced a trip to Ukraine to the purposes of "investigating" Biden's son, Hunter, for having a relationship with an oil and gas company and an oligarch.  The purpose of this, if successful, could be used against Biden or as a way to blunt criticism of Trump for either his son or himself or his campaign associates could be accused of having business dealings with suspicious foreign entities.   It is his usual pot calling the kettle black campaign strategy, even if equivalencies are false. The uproar over this was so loud, Guillani announced he would not go on the "fact-finding" trip because the Ukranian government was full of anti-Trump sentiment and it was a "set-up". 

The difference between the acts of possible collusion explored in the Mueller Report and the Ukranian matter as outlined in the WSJ report that Trump asked Ukraine to reopen an investigation into Hunter Biden is that Trump in the Russian  2016 interference situation was more passive and the invitation was also  public while in this Ukrainian attempt to convince the country to interfere  in 2020 was Trump's initiative and he was pro-active.  If he actually threatened to withhold foreign aid if Ukraine did not do Trump's bidding, it is extortion, bribery, abuse of power,  and other impeachable high crimes. The link is already there by the circumstance of Trump's and Guiliani's admission by both they did make the request of the Ukrainian government which would hurt Joe Biden's challenge in 2020.  The smoking gun of extortion and bribery may lie in the whistleblower's complaint.  This may explain why Trump and Barr are willing to violate the whistleblower statute requiring the complaint to be turned over to Congress because the complaint could contain that smoking gun.

Per the Wall Street Journal, Joe Biden and the entire Western community and the International Monetary Fund had threatened to withhold a large loan to Ukraine as a way to get a prosecutor fired for not going after companies, hard enough, for corruption, including the company with which Hunter Biden had a relationship. It was NOT because the prosecutor was too soft.  That the exact opposite what Guiliani is claiming.  Biden as VP was part of the Western governments' actions to force stronger prosecution of corruption, including the gas company, as well as the then government of Ukraine's turn to Russia, at the time.  https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/23/politics/fact-check-trump-ukraine-hunter-biden-joe-biden/index.html  The Wall Street Journal also reported that Trump had tried 8 times to force Ukraine to reverse their earlier decision while Guiliani was trying to get Ukraine to dig up dirt on Hunter Biden that Hunter Biden was exonerated of wrongdoing. This is vintage Trump...white is black...and his arrogance that he is above the law when colluding with foreign leaders to influence our democracy on Trump's behalf.  If threatening to withhold foreign aid to force Ukraine to dig up dirt on Hunter Biden is not just colluding, it is an attempt at extortion of Ukraine to benefit his (Trump's) reelection in 2020.  This way beyond "Russia if you are listening; find Hillary's emails" and looking the other way as Russia did interfere with the 2016 election to help Trump.  This action is not just colluding, either.  It is using his powers to force another government to interfere in the elections to help him   So what's wrong with that he asks? numerous times saying if a foreign government had dirt on an opponent, of course, he would welcome it?   How about out and out conspiracy to force a foreign government to help him win an election?  This makes denial and passive encouragement and ignoring  Russian interference as investigated by the Mueller report look like a pattern of behavior. Now that Guiliani and Trump attempt to put the screws on the foreign government has gone beyond abuse of power to, as GOP opponents to his re-election, call treason.  If the House inquiry does not pursue this, they have made a mockery of their Constitutional duties and have indeed rolled over and contributed to aiding  Trump's claim he is above the law.   So far as Trump's foreign policy to Make Russia Great Again by doing whatever Putin would hope also fits into Trump's scheme of things.  The last thing Russia wants is Wester military aid to make the current Western-leaning government, recently elected, stronger to resist Russia's further attempts to annex more of Eastern Ukraine, post their grabbing Crimea and launching a stealth operation in Ukraine's eastern region.

What is missing is the smoking gun:  did Trump's request to the Ukrainian president and his eight conversations include a threat to withhold military aid if Ukraine did not re-open its investigation into Hunter Biden.  That whistleblower's complaint which the Trump administration is refusing to turn over to Congress in defiance of the law may contain the smoking gun.


Update: 9 20 19;

 the Ukrainians government to investigate Joe Biden's son Hunter regarding business dealings there. After that, the President held back over $200 million in military aid for Ukraine in a July 25 conversation and the questions did the president use the aid as a bargaining chip to force Ukraine for administrative reasons or to force Ukraine to undertake the investigation of Hunter Biden that Sir Rudi tried to get them to do. Very recently, the aid was released to Ukraine. Here is the problem: was the pressure on Ukraine done to benefit the campaign of Donald Trump in 2020 to tarnish the family of his most likely opponent Joe Biden or was there a legitimate public policy issue.. In the memory of any old hand intelligence, there never had happened that such an urgent whistleblower complaint ever been kept from Congress. ..and the identity of the whistleblower is not known, much less the details of the conversation. If the purpose of Trump's withholding military aid from Ukraine in order to benefit his 2020 campaign, that would be criminal behavior and would feed the impeachment inquiry. Short of years of litigation, there is no way to force the DOJ to forward the Inspector General's report to Congress even though the stonewalling action violates the law. What is left to reach the truth is leaks to Congress or the press. True to form, Trump calls this fake news and an attack from a partisan. even though he does not know who the whistleblower is..It appears to be a career service professional on loan to the National Security Council in the White House with access to the conversation at the question. If indeed that Trump was using military aid to extort Ukraine to force them to benefit his campaign for president, that would be the ultimate abuse of power and the readout of the July 25 conversation itself may not be the smoking gun to see if there was an illegal quid pro quo. Without the DOJ releasing the Inspector General's report to either the public or to Congress, we cannot know for sure. The Whistleblower complaint was filed in mid-August; Trump restored military aid to Ukraine per a September 12  as Congress applied pressure on him to do so, but also as the whistleblower complaint was referred to the DOJ per requirements by law. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2019/09/12/white-house-releases-250-million-in-ukraine-military-aid/  The sequence of events adds to suspicions that the whistleblower complaint had something to do with this restoration of aid to Ukraine.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-asked-ukraine-president-to-probe-hunter-biden-eight-times-in-one-call-wsj

https://www.apnews.com/d7440cffba4940f5b85cd3dfa3500fb2

 Stay tuned. Deep throat may be at work again.


POLITICO.COM
“So you did ask Ukraine to look into Joe Biden?” CNN’s Chris Cuomo asked Giuliani.


Rachel Maddow has noted that the money diverted from the US military budget to build Trump's treasured wall at the border included funds for defense against Russian further grabs of their country.  Parallel to this, Trump holds up $250 million in military aid to Ukraine.  This Trump kick in the pants to the western leaning Ukrainian government has two connections. One, the stall on Ukranian aid and diverting aid from NATO allies in jeopardy from Russian encroachment suits  Putin's foreign policy goals to weaken NATO and their defense against Russian designs on former USSR satellites. The other is to develop dirt against the candidate Trump fears the most as his 2020 opponent, Joe Biden.

In May this year, Rudi Guiliani had announced a trip to Ukraine to the purposes of "investigating" Biden's son, Hunter, for having a relationship with an oil and gas company and an oligarch.  The purpose of this, if successful, could be used against Biden or as a way to blunt criticism of Trump for either his son or himself or his campaign associates could be accused of having business dealings with suspicious foreign entities.   It is his usual pot calling the kettle black campaign strategy, even if equivalencies are false. The uproar over this was so loud, Guillani announced he would not go on the "fact-finding" trip because the Ukranian government was full of anti-Trump sentiment and it was a "set-up".  However, at the end of August, it was reported by media he had tried again to discuss with Ukraine the hope that the Ukrainian government would launch an investigation against Hunter Trump and his business dealings.  With Trump's Wall raid on military funds to build the wall, hidden in that was the removal of military improvements to counter Russia's aggressive behavior toward NATO countries. While Ukraine is not a member of NATO, also the Trump administration was stalling on promised military aid to Ukraine. The purpose of the aide to Ukraine approved by Congress was to bolster their forces against Russia's grab of eastern Ukraine.   The stall may be a permanent punishment of Ukraine by the Trump administration since the agreement dies for lack of action on September 30.  Could it be that the Ukrainian government refused to play along with Guiliani's dirty tricks initiatives?? Naaahhh.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/21/politics/giuliani-ukraine-lawyer-meeting/index.html

https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2019/09/05/trump-drains-us-spending-in-europe-to-pay-for-wall-with-mexico/

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/28/trump-ukraine-military-aid-russia-1689531

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/rudy-giuliani-cancels-ukraine-trip

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/wapo-trump-leveraging-ukraine-military-aid-for-dirt-on-biden-68407365909

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/may/07/viral-image/fact-checking-joe-biden-hunter-biden-and-ukraine/

https://popular.info/p/massive-i-love-america-facebook-page?fbclid=IwAR3w2fQ0nVbran5mcdoubpyKOCNnY7XRZVWxo64ELsGPKNTGXoXs3qAmA

https://www.vox.com/2019/3/13/18264011/paul-manafort-mueller-sentence-amy-berman-jackson

Friday, May 24, 2019

GOP and Democrats switch roles in the Trump era

A version of this was published in the Sky Hi News, June 5, 2019
https://www.skyhinews.com/opinion/democrats-and-gop-switch-roles-in-the-trump-era/


Watching an interview with the new Democratic Congressman Jason Crow from Colorado's 6th, a Denver suburban district that flipped from red to blue in 2018, brought home how strange life has become in the Trump era. The Democrats and the GOP have reversed their traditional roles in many ways.

  Crow,  an army ranger combat veteran who rose from a private to a captain with multi tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan is no oddity in the Democratic House caucus. Now, Congress has many Democrats, ten of the 67 elected in 2018,  men and women, who have had combat experience or who were intelligence officers, and who have brought their views to Congress of respect of the military and wisdom about war.  Once respect for the military was a GOP patriotic thing, salute the flag, patriotism,  and honoring those who sacrificed their lives to keep America free. All of those traits were a  guaranteed flag waiver.  Democrats after Viet Nam were less supportive of the military and were skeptical of sentiments hyper-patriotism.   The generals who had joined the administration's White House staff are long gone after daring to advise the President in ways that were contrary to his misconceptions.   However, Democrats have been the ones who now have their ranks including military veterans and who often cite departing, disillusioned military advisors like the ones who represented forces keeping the President's worst impulses in check.   How times have changed as Democrats view military brass and veterans as forces for good as Trump sheds or fires his military White House advisers.

Once upon a time not so long ago Conservatives and the GOP were seen as defenders of the original intent of our founders in writing the constitution. The executive powers were checked and balanced by the legislature and the Supreme Court in sheer fear some future politician would rise to be King not subject to the same laws as those he governed, free to undermine and trample and interpret laws to promote his retaining power.  Now the Trump administration is the one advocating a "strong" leader and stonewalling and subverting the attempts of Congress to hold him accountable. Through appointments of federal and supreme court judges and an attorney general who has a record of advocating the supremacy of the presidency, the Trump administration is proclaiming its power to be above the law and above the ability of Congress to hold the president accountable. On the other hand, it is the Democrats who have become the champion of the original intent of our founders and the constraints on the executive branch as they interpret the meaning of the provisions of the Constitution. It is the Democrats who are supporting the mantra that no one is above the law and upholding the separation of powers as they rail against Trump's tendency to act like an imperial president.

Once upon a time, the FBI was seen as the ultimate law and order enforcer in the US, admired as macho heroes who went after terrorists and mob bosses with dogged devotion to acting on behalf of the rule of law and order, saving our freedom from the USSR aggression. Now, the integrity of the FBI is under attack by the President, who is engineering a special counsel to investigate the investigators, claiming their Republican-affiliated staff leaders were out to get him. The FBI was the GOP's good guys in the months leading up to the 2016 campaign when they announced on again and off again criminal investigations into Clinton's alleged misuse of emails and possibly disclosing classified information.  Their actions may have been the ultimate factors in her defeat though Russian interference that painted Clinton in a bad light via bots and disinformation may have played an equal role. That GOP love affair with the FBI went south in 2017 when it became common knowledge the FBI was looking into the Russian connections of Trump and his campaign associated and Donald Trump fired James Comey, the former admired FBI chief whose actions helped Trump get elected.  The Democrats emerged as the champion of the FBI and US intelligence services and the rule of law.

Upside down and changing places are partisan attitudes toward Russia. The FBI and our intelligence services kept us safe from the Soviets in the Cold War, when Russians were viewed as our sworn enemies.  The Democrats are now the ones viewing Russia as an enemy and the GOP is either in denial the Russians interfered with the 2016 elections or asking, so what is wrong with that?  In spite of the post-Soviet era thaw, the rise of former KGB operative Vladimir Putin to near dictatorial control of Russia and looking to reassemble the former Soviet influence in East European border states, has resulted in the US intelligence agencies considering Russia an adversary. On the other hand,  Donald Trump sees Russians as a trusted ally with their foreign policy goals worthy of his support. Trump in Helsinki publicly has proclaimed he trusted Putin and Russian intelligence services over our own and after other secret meetings with Putin, he took Putin's word for it that denied Russians interfered in the 2016 elections. Trump has taken actions to lift sanctions on Russians for their expansion into Ukraine, Crimea, and interference in the 2016 elections and advocated measures to weaken NATO's mutual defense function that is keeping Russians from advancing their control of NATO members. Turning a blind eye to any evidence of Russian interference presented by Mueller, the GOP seems not to care that Russians attempted to twist the minds of US voters with their use of social media and advertising, subverting US democracy's purpose of our freedom to reflect the will of our own citizens and to destroy our trust in democratic processes.


____________________________________________________________________________

Donald Trump's strategy to protect his presidential power is to investigate the investigators.  His goal is to destroy the credibility of the Mueller report without having to provide evidence refuting its findings. He wants voters to consider the motivation of the investigators as disloyal to him and to ignore the facts and conclusions. To rationalize his goal, his view is that law and order mean whether the enforcers and the intelligence services are loyal to him instead of whether they are loyal to the United States and to the Constitution to which they swore to defend when they took office. These intelligence and law enforcement agents did not pledge allegiance to the president,  or the institution of the presidency.  A dictator demands loyalty to himself, not to the impartial rule of law.  Once the GOP were the law, order, and strict  Constitution folks. How times have changed with Democrats as the ones citing the original intent of the Constitution, assuming the mantle of defenders of the rule of law, and opposing the expansion of executive powers over the legislative branch.

 Last week Trump accused those investigating him as committing "treason" against him.  He has claimed the FBI was engineering a coup against his presidency.  He believes he is the person to whom we pledge allegiance, not the United States and the democracy for which it stands. He is above the law, he thinks. Those are the words and thoughts worthy of a dictator. Treason is an accusation Trump has recently been throwing around as a way to charge his enemies with not pledging allegiance to him. Treason has two elements: working with a foreign enemy against the interests of the United States with a foreign power with which we are at war. .That definition does not include working against the interests of the president in power.

 Even more frightening, Trump is ordering all of the US intelligence services and federal law enforcement to cooperate with an investigation to see if "treason" was committed against him by beginning the investigation into Russian interference in 2016. Trump's loyal Attorney General Bill Barr has appointed a special counsel to investigate the investigators and the president granted him powers to declassify classified information, possibly exposing to our adversaries sources and methods. At the same time, the Trump administration is stonewalling sharing with Congress all of Mueller's underlying evidence and the unredacted version of the redacted report and forbidding across the board any of his administration testifying before House committees.  Last week two separate federal judges ruled against Trump's stonewalling tactics, as the conflict between Trump and the House now moves to the courts.

 Since Mueller found no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt the Trump campaign intentionally coordinated or conspired with the Russians to fix the 2016 campaign, Trump himself was exonerated of criminal conspiracy. The service to US security the Mueller report and the text of indictments provided was to lay out measures the Russians conducted to shape the 2016 election to serve their national interests, not ours.

  However, Robert Mueller cited ten examples with evidence Trump endeavored to obstruct justice ( aka the investigation) including ordering his subordinates to lie and cover-up.  Mueller also wrote he could not indict a sitting president of a crime per department rules and he plainly wrote he did not exonerate him of those violations. Trump's lawyers tried to contend that Trump failed in executing obstruction so he committed not a crime, but federal statutes only require that he ""endeavored, not that he had to succeed.   Trump's loyal AG Barr tried to deceive the public by claiming Trump was exonerated of "collusion". Mueller never looked at the more passive campaign actions of publicly encouraging, ignoring or denying, aiding and abetting,  and receiving information and intelligence, popularly called "collusion", because there is no such term in the criminal code or a provision to prosecute collusion as a crime.

 ________________________________________________________________________________
More on treason From the US Federal code: "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason".  If there were suspicions anyone was working on behalf of a foreign government, it was Trump himself and the over one hundred contacts of his campaign and White House associates had with the Russians.  Little did Donald Trump know until later that the FBI had launched a  secret counterintelligence investigation a July 31, 2016, alarmed by the frequent contacts Trump's campaign staff had with Russian operatives and evidence of advance information a campaign official had of Russian hacking.   All of the upper echelons of the FBI were registered  Republicans and of the law and order traditions, and many were veterans of the Cold War, aware that Russia was an adversary, not a friend, of the United States. In early January 2017, US intelligence agencies warned Trump of Russian activities in the 2016 election, which he questioned and then ignored. That was even before Trump demanded loyalty from FBI Director Comey and fired him over "this Russian thing", later firing Flynn.  Trump even fired Sally Yates, the acting attorney general who warned him of the  Russian connections of Mike Flynn, his national security advisor, who was vulnerable of blackmail. Flynn later "resigned" and pled guilty of lying to the FBI. That was even before Trump demanded loyalty from FBI Director Comey and fired him over "this Russian thing".



________________________________________________________________________________



18 U.S. Code § 2381.Treason "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/03/599120190/madeleine-albright-warns-dont-let-fascism-go-unnoticed-until-its-too-late?

fbclid=IwAR35fL5KyaCKmm12Y1TFgdMsNGQstMobekUoHIp0xqCAFdrkb4oM2jT2GZA
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/acting-attorney-general-fired-trump-set-testify-russias/story?id=47263460

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/us/politics/russia-hack-report.html
__________________________________________________________________________________
           .

.







Tuesday, May 21, 2019

AG Bill Barr's slick lawyer's tricks on collusion will haunt him.

Updated May 26, 2019, to include comments on treason.
A version of this was published in  the SkyhidailyNews.com May 30, 2019



AG Bill Barr's slick lawyer's tricks on collusion will haunt him. Trump's loyal Attorney General Bill Barr was very deceptive and fooling the American public when he screened the Mueller Report before it was released to the public, giving him a chance to spin his tale and trick the voters. 

Now, the President has granted the same Bill Barr access to all classified findings of any US intelligence agency, the FBI and the CIA,  and the power to declassify them if he wishes,  as his newly appointed special counsel conducts an investigation of the investigators. So now we are supposed to believe the same AG Barr in the future who now has a proven track record of deception. Barr will now be able to screen any classified findings by any of our intelligence agencies, the CIA, and the FBI and then cherry pick which phrases that make his point, regardless of the context or the qualifiers and once again spin another tale.

Barr has lost his credibility. We have been down that road with his slick lawyer trick of claiming his client, the president, is exonerated of" collusion" which Mueller did not even investigate. Mueller exonerated Trump of conspiracy, which is quite a different thing, requiring much more convincing proof and, unlike collusion, is a crime named in the criminal statutes. Conspiracy and collusion are not the same. Conspiracy  is the same as intentionally getting together,  planning actively with Russians. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required in convicting someone of a crime. Collusion is .just aiding and abetting and receiving information. without actively conspiring and planning. Collusion could still be an article of impeachment since the House can define what is meant by high crimes and misdemeanors. To be impeached, the president does not have to have been indicted or found guilty of a crime first.

 Here is Mueller from the report:
"In evaluating whether evidence about the collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of “collusion.” In so doing, the Office recognized that the word “collud[e]”…has frequently been invoked in public reporting about the investigation. But collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law."

Barr's client, the President, has his own view of the investigators who investigated him. Barr will have a heck of a time trying to defend and spin Trump's newest charge that those who investigated him committed treason or that the Mueller investigation was an illegitimate "coup".  Last week Trump accused those investigating him of committing "treason" against him and he called them out by name. Those are the words and thoughts worthy of the dictators Trump so admires. Treason laws are designed to protect his power and longevity in office, he thinks. 

Trump has charged the FBI with engineering a coup against himself. As he claimed in his angry and defiant rant last week,  the FBI was working against the "wrong person". This is the same person who meets Putin in secret with whom he shares classified information,  and whose campaign associates had over 200 contacts with Russians, eight of whom have been indicted and some in jail,. This is a person whose fondest dream before and while a candidate is to do the biggest business deal of his life in Russia.  He believes he is the person to whom we pledge allegiance, not to the United States and the democracy, its laws, and national security interests. 

Here is why Donald Trump's bluster and threats against those on his enemy list will go nowhere. Treason has two elements in the Constitution and federal statutes. : 1.working against the interests of the United States 2.with a foreign power with which we are at war. .That definition does not include working against the interests of the president himself.   We have not declared war against Russia, though we consider them our adversary working actively to undermine our democracy and to shape our foreign policy to suit their national interests which are contrary to ours.

 Barr has appointed a special counsel to investigate the investigators to discover whatt led to the Mueller investigation. His challenges are many.in this new investigation.  If claiming the Mueller report and investigation was a "coup", a hoax,  and an illegal witch hunt undertaken by  FBI agents  "out to get him" and not loyal to the president  (other Trump attack lines),   a federal appeals court  in the Roger Stone trial already ruled that the special counsel's appointment was legitimate.  If there was smoke, fire was found. Russian interference in the 2016 election was laid out in vivid detail in the Mueller Report, resulting in numerous indictments of spies and GRU operatives. Five of Trump's campaign associates and three others have already pleaded guilty, mostly for lies and cover-ups of Russian and foreign contacts (including national security advisor Lt.Gen. Mike Flynn),  but also for witness tampering.and bank fraud ( Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort) and a Russian operative Maria Butina for spying.. Trump himself was conspirator person number one in another case of election finance violations which landed his personal attorney, Michael Cohen, in prison for three years.

18 U.S. Code § 2381. Treason "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-doesn-t-understand-what-treason-means-n1009636

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/special-counsel-robert-muellers-appointment-is-valid-federal-appeals-court-rules/2019/02/26/5c28505c-fd5a-11e8-862a-b6a6f3ce8199_story.html?utm_term=.d353d22560f9

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/31/fox-news-viewer-surprised-that-mueller-hadnt-exonerated-trump-obstruction/?utm_term=.696a8646a726