Trump is the (unintended) beneficiary of the long-game Charles Koch and friends have waged to reshape the U.S. government into a body that will tirelessly protect the liberties and privileges of our most privileged.    Attaining this “business friendly” government has been the death of a thousand cuts.   A series of Supreme Court decisions now clarifies the high bar for corruption in a federal court:  proof of an actual quid pro quo in public corruption cases. (It’s worth a click, if you’re interested, Zephyr Teachout does a great job explaining the problematic series of unappealable holdings about corruption). 

This weakening of anti-corruption laws was one of the deepest of the thousand cuts hacked into our democracy by a corporatist Supreme Court made possible by the indoctrination of literally dozens of Koch-funded institutions, including the famous Federalist Society, a national fraternity of lawyers and judges committed to the conservative/libertarian project of preserving the status quo and making it eternal.   In post-Citizens United America, if you can’t show that there was an actual negotiated deal involving you scratching my back in exchange for me scratching yours, and a formal exercise of governmental power involved in my scratching, you haven’t proved shit as far as corruption.  

So let’s say Trump didn’t tell Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick “Koch-funded Tea Party government shut down patriot” Mulvaney [1] to withhold $400,000,000 in military aid to besieged Ukraine until he spoke to the new comedian president of the Ukraine, Volodymyr (that’s kind of funny already) Zelensky, about getting dirt on the allegedly corrupt son of Trump’s possible sleepy rival for the presidency in 2020.    Let’s say Trump just called Zelensky and told him he needed dirt on the son of his adversary, to discredit the corrupt father and help Trump win reelection in 2020, without holding withheld military aid over Zelensky’s head.   No quid pro quo, nothing to see.   Just two guys being guys.

In other words, if the Trump-hating Washington Post hadn’t reported the other day that Trump ordered Mulvaney to place a hold on the promised $400,000,000 in military aid to the Ukraine back in July nobody would have been aware of the leverage Trump was exerting on the new Ukrainian president when he asked him for a perfectly normal favor — help from the Ukrainian justice department in discrediting a political rival here in America.   The real culprit here?   The liberal media again: enemy of the people.  So unfair!

The drumbeat is getting louder for impeachment of this arguably corrupt, arguably unimpeachable singularly Unitary Executive.   Senator Elizabeth Warren has been outspokenly for impeachment since the Mueller Report was released in redacted, hard-spun form more than five long months ago.   That report was a long-winded blueprint for impeachment, even as it reached no conclusions other than that the president could not be exonerated, based on the impressive evidence of his obstruction of justice.   The other day Warren used Twitter to challenge the inaction of Congress:

In yesterday’s New York Times Michelle Goldberg had some excellent insights on the current Mexican standoff over impeachment.   After quoting from Nancy Pelosi’s arduously worded letter of “warning” to fellow House Democrats:

“If this administration persists in blocking this whistle-blower from disclosing to Congress a serious possible breach of constitutional duties by the president, they will be entering a grave new chapter of lawlessness which will take us to a whole new stage of investigation.”

Goldberg wrote of Warren’s tweet:

Well said, sister.

[1]  Wikipedia:

During his time in the U.S. House, Mulvaney aligned himself with the Tea Party movement.^[36][37] He was a founding member of the Freedom Caucus.^[38]

He opposed gun control initiatives and the Affordable Care Act.^[39][40][41] In response to criticism for meeting with the extremist John Birch Society in July 2016, Mulvaney said, “I regularly speak to groups across the political spectrum because my constituents deserve access to their congressman. I can’t remember ever turning down an opportunity to speak to a group based on the group’s political ideology.”^[42]

and

According to The New York Times, Mulvaney took “a hard line on spending during President Obama’s term, vowing not to raise the nation’s debt limit and embracing the term ‘Shutdown Caucus’ because of his willingness to shut the government down instead.”^[40] In 2015, Mulvaney voted against a government-funding resolution, which would have prevented a government shutdown, in part because it included funding for Planned Parenthood.^[44] Explaining his vote, Mulvaney said, “This is not about women’s health. It’s about trafficking in pieces of dead children.”^[44] After his appointment as head of the OMB in 2017, he reiterated his conditional position of support for a shutdown.^[45]

This odd picture should really speak for itself.  Of course, it won’t, it’s got to be a fake picture, with its low rent set-up fit for the president of a small town PTA, certainly not our gold-plated POTUS.   I will let the man who is now obstructing the acting Director of National Intelligence from doing his duty under the law (supported by the cunning Jesuit legal contortions [1] of the unimpeachable William “Bagpiper Bill” Barr) explain.    

Today Mr. Trump is doing what he does so well, aggressively getting out in front of the story, claiming he had a “perfect”conversation with the comedian and TV star who is the Ukraine’s new president.   It was perfect because Mr. Trump has “the best words”.   He did not, of course, ask the president of the Ukraine to investigate the corrupt son of the sleepy Democratic presidential frontrunner with the capped teeth, hair plugs and nice, recent face lift that makes him look so deceptively youthful.  No matter what a so-called traitor “whistleblower” might have supposedly reported about the innocent, the perfect, chat.

fToday Mr. T is assuring everyone that his call to the Ukrainian president was perfectly cool, nothing to see but hysterical fake news spewed by the dangerous enemies of the people, after him as always.  Ho fucking hum.  This is a genius tactic for staying in front of a story:  I never screwed that porn actress right after my final son was born, I paid her $130,000 to shut the fuck up and we had an ironclad legal deal that she’d stay silent, in consideration of that fat check I had the liar Cohen give her, but she tried to rat me out like you’d expect a disloyal bitch like that to do. You can’t trust most people, which is why everyone I work with is sworn to silence and why we have courts, to enforce the deals against those lying shit heads.

A few days ago, when the story broke about Trump possibly asking the president of the Ukraine to dig up some dirt on Sleepy Joe’s son (and why is he working, at $50,000 a month, for Ukrainain petrol oligarchs anyway?), and people became incensed that the whistleblower’s urgent report about likely presidential impropriety was being kept secret, instead of having its details reported to the appropriate House committee (as the law requires)  Mr. Trump did what only someone of his genius can do.  He tweeted the “obvious”:

Obviously, you know, the president knows that people from the Deep State and other disloyal and dangerous people are listening in when the president calls a foreign leader.   That’s why when you have an important conversation with a world leader, like, say, Vlad Putin, you do it face to face, no witnesses, no notes, no transcripts, full and total confidentiality. privilege and immunity.   That’s when you can say all the inappropriate things you want.    Though, of course, you never would!   Certainly not on the phone.

Seriously, though, since Trump has so far never been held accountable for anything he’s done in his life — his youthful bullying, his father’s criminal tax evasion schemes that he was a partner in and the biggest beneficiary of ($403M), his reckless squandering of over a billion dollars in a decade, his idiotic hubris in borrowing $750,000,000 to build the mother of all Atlantic City casinos which put the two highly profitable Trump casinos in the same town out of business, along with the shabby new “Taj Mahal”, his serial bankruptcies, having a network of scumbags — starting with the King of Scumbags, his long lost mentor the disgraced Roy Cohn (who Trump abandoned when Cohn was dying of AIDS, disbarred and under indictment) — pulling strings for him (several are now in prison in connection with the rendering of shady services to Mr. Trump), paying $280,000 in hush money, on the eve of the vicious 2016 election, to two women he had sex with while married to his third wife (all of whom he committed adultery against), his lifelong reliance on nondisclosure agreements, lying, attacking, mocking, his open hatred of non-whites, of Rosie O’Donnell,  his nonchalant misogyny, his brutal child-separation policy — carried on in contempt of court orders, the forced shuttering of his fake charitable foundation,  the huge ($25M) payout he made to settle the suit against his fraudulent “university”, his imbecilic insistence that he has never in his life done anything wrong, his brazen policy of staffing crucial government posts with unconfirmed interim loyalists who do his bidding on pain of being easily fired at will, the more than a hundred coordinated actions between his campaign and Russia (“Russia, if you’re listening, LOL!”) that, largely because of his obstruction of the witch hunt investigation, did not rise to the level of provable criminal conspiracy, his ongoing obstruction of justice, his braying about COMPLETE AND TOTAL EXONERATION by the “conflicted” liberal partisan Bobby Three Sticks, his absenting the US from this week’s UN Climate Action Summit  — the list is too long to compile here — why would he care about new accusations?   

My point is, since he has never been held accountable for even his most despicable acts (how about all the Atlantic City businesses he stiffed for huge bills when the Taj Mahal and his other two casinos went under, contractors and other small businesses who, saddled with uncollectible Trump debts, then went out of business?) he has no fear of ever being held to account for anything.   He’s like a gigantically fat rat with no natural predators.

In office, so far, he has committed more impeachable offenses than the combined high crimes and misdemeanors of  Nixon, Clinton and Johnson in their most fevered wet dreams.   What was the crime that brought Nixon down?  He obstructed justice, tried to cover up his crimes by hiding evidence and firing a series of justice department officials who were on his trail.    Clinton lied under oath, about a blow job, but still — arguably a disgusting thing for a president to do, even if the effort to impeach him was 100% partisan.   Andrew Johnson, in a way, may have been the closest to Trump, he simply behaved like a dictator, ignoring Congress, the Constitution and the results of the Civil War, he was just not going to carry out laws made overriding his veto, laws that favored the accursed Negro over the superior white man.  His attitude was the same as Trump’s “make me, asshole.”  In the end Congress impeached him as the only way of “making him”.  After the impeachment, though he narrowly stayed in office, he was done.

Is anybody dumb enough to believe that Transactional Trump won’t always do what he thinks is best for himself and his wealth?   He has monetized the presidency (genius move, really) and has been openly enriching himself since he came into office, while claiming that his generous public service is costing him billions in lost business opportunities (only fair he get to make a measly few million from his hotels and resorts).

Let me try to be fair.   Admittedly, he did give all Americans the low-cost health care he promised, a plan that is so much better than the complicated mess Obama passed into law.   Admittedly, his trillion dollar tax gift to the wealthiest US persons and “persons” has led to massive prosperity for all Americans, as the benefits trickle down to all of us in that time tested way they always do when the rich get to keep even more of their own money.  Admittedly, he has laid the unappealable legal groundwork to protect the inalienable rights of American fetuses and embryos, come what may.    Admittedly, he has convinced at least 38% of 55% of active American voters that this easily observable Climate Catastrophe business is complete bullshit — no regulation of anything is necessary.   Admittedly, he has crushed terrorist networks worldwide, made us all safe and the United States is no longer a laughing stock.  A pariah, perhaps, but nobody is fucking laughing.

Which leads to one last point.  What is wrong with the Democratic party, the “Democrat” party, as it is disparagingly called with that dismissive echo of old time Southern Dixiecrat-speak?    The timid, calculating opposition party of a powerful political boss who wrings her hands and wastes month after month of dwindling time as she sniffs the political winds and insists only she sees the bigger picture — the 2020 election.   What the hell is wrong with you, girl?   The Constitution has only one mechanism for holding a rogue president accountable for the corrupt use, the open abuse, of his enormous powers.   Nobody is more corrupt that this man, born with the soul and temperament of a slave holder angry to be living in a land that has largely abolished slavery.  If not him, who?  If not now, when?   History will not paint a pretty portrait of the iron-willed near-octogenarian party boss who singlehandedly prevented the only action that could have saved what is left of our democracy.

Anybody dumb enough?   Show of hands, come on.

[1]   The Jesuits, famous for their rigorous intellectual tradition, educated Barr and Boof Kavanaugh.   While the Kavanaugh confirmation freak show raged I read up on the Jesuits’ beliefs.  Apparently their cardinal belief is that whenever you speak to another person you must recognize them as an expression of godliness.  The God in you speaks directly to the God in them.  A beautiful idea, similar to one I read about in Jewish mysticism and other faiths.  

In fact, I was impressed when the American Jesusits took a principled stand, right before Kavanaugh disgraced himself and everybody else by delivering a snorting, tearful, disqualifyingly partisan temper tantrum in response to a credible account of a long ago playful, drunken sexual assault he probably honestly didn’t even remember.   The Jesuit magazine urged him to withdraw his nomination, on the eve of Christine Blasey-Ford’s testimony.   I was impressed with their stance and their reasoning.  It made no difference, of course, but I thought their principled withdrawal of support for their fellow Jesuit, based on a hideously believable appearance of impropriety (the foreshadowings of his Trumplike conduct at the hearings), was admirable.

I mentioned the Jesuits to a Catholic friend in France and he began to laugh.  He told me to look up their origins.   Whoops.  They were (I had forgotten) formed as the zealous lawyers for the Spanish Inquisition, fanatical defenders of the faith.   It might seem terrible to burn people alive for refusing to believe that all-forgiving Jesus Christ is the Son of God and belief in Him is the only path to salvation, but how does that compare to the eternal hellfire that awaits the nonbeliever?   The Jesuits made vigorous arguments that the auto de fe was an expression of God’s will.   They, in the persons of guys like Bagpiper Bill, Boof Kavanaugh and the late, great Antonin Scalia, make those kind of irrefutable God-based arguments today.   They can’t be wrong, you dig, because Jesus tells them what to do to defend the faith.  God’s will on earth and nothing less, my brothers and sisters.  Hallelujah!

I see Corey Lewandowski, former campaign manager for Donald Trump, finally arrived to answer questions at the House of Representatives impeachment inquiry.   His session in front of the House Judiciary Committee is being streamed live as I tap here, though I doubt many Americans are watching it.   Corey was the loyal soldier Trump called to take dictation, to do what Don McGahn and others had already refused to do — get Sessions to “unrecuse” and end the Mueller probe.   You can read all about Lewandowski’s role in Trump’s numerous attempts to end the witch hunt against him in the Mueller Report, he’s mentioned, quoted or cited more than 100 times.

Lewandowski (who tweeted an announcement of his possible 2020 senate run during a long ‘five minute’ break in the hearing) arrived voluntarily  (pursuant to an August 15, 2019 subpoena) according to his Republic(an) colleagues.   Voluntarily pursuant to a subpoena… but still.   His attendance was ‘voluntary’, as his Republican colleagues keep reminding us and he is voluntarily testifying under oath before the House now for the third time (later referred to as the fourth time), accompanied by a bunch of lawyers, provided for him by the president of the United States.   

His former boss, Mr. Trump, has repeatedly vowed to fight all subpoenas and had counsel send  Lewandowski a letter setting forth the exact, limited scope of his testimony, something Mr. Trump calls ‘absolute immunity’ — bullet proof legal protection from the disclosure of any communication of any kind with anybody, beyond what is sworn to in the four corners of Mueller’s report.   The legality of the president’s invocation of this blanket protective privilege over all forms of communication — “absolute immunity” — in essence a blanket , preemptive NonDisclosure Agreement, for any disclosure of anything involving him, is currently being fought out in the courts.

Trump has repeatedly vowed to obstruct any investigation into whether he corruptly abused the massive powers of his office to do illegal things like instructing subordinates to defy subpoenas.     He has been fighting, as is his way, his only way, it’s truly all he knows how to do.   He orders his lawyers and all subordinates to fight to the death.  Lewandowski is doing that today as he resists direct questions to the greatest extent arguably allowed by applicable laws, and at the risk of being found in contempt of a subpoena that ordered him to appear and to testify truthfully.  

Whenever somebody related to the Trump administration appears to testify they are accompanied by a squad of White House lawyers, sometimes including heavy hitters from the DOJ itself (there was at least one of those at the Hope Hicks hearing), who intervene energetically whenever necessary to prevent answers to any uncomfortable question. 

Many people who testify in Congress appear with a lawyer, Trump associates enter the chamber flanked by a team of White House and other lawyers.  Lawyered up, as they say.  Making an aggressive claim of absolute privilege against giving any testimony involving the president, what he may have said, what he may have asked them to do, what documents might have been generated.

“Point of Order!” interrupts a Republican Congressman as Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrald Nadler is making a statement.  The stern, irate ranking Republic(an) member, an indignant man named Mr. Collins, lectures Nadler about the inviolable sanctity of the House’s five minute rule for asking questions of a witness.   

Collins spends most of his time disparaging the Democrat(ic) investigation into the president’s arguably impeachable behavior (no argument from me, mind you, the corrupt public servant needs to be bounced out of office, pauperized and set to wander the earth like Cain, but without the protective mark).   Mr. Collins goes on at some length about the importance of this five minute rule.  At the end of his indignant remarks we are informed that the gentleman’s time has expired.

A Republican, now giving a speech about truly important issues like the immigration crisis, the unpardonable behavior of the treacherous Jim Comey and other supremely important matters, rather than asking any questions of Lewandowski, just used the term “fake impeachment” — and, a moment later, a second time, the same message in an even fancier iteration “a fake, faux impeachment”.    You’ve got to love the in-your-fucking-face loyalty of these giant balled bastards.  

Now a merciless and totally unfair partisan Democrat from Georgia is showing this Lewandowski quote from the Mueller witch hunt that totally exonerated the president, and trying to force the steadfastly loyal Mr. Lewandowski to answer compromising questions about the note for Sessions that Trump asked him to write, the literally dictated remarks Trump wanted Sessions to make to clear up the totally illegal witch hunt against the completely innocent President of the United States:

TOTALLY UNFAIR!   Citing a report by a man with a massive conflict of interest (Mueller was once ripped off for unused membership fees by a Trump golf course), a report that completely exonerated the president of any and all wrongdoing of any kind, past, present and future.   COMPLETE AND TOTAL EXONERATION!  And yet, here are those hateful traitor Democrats, quoting from the so-called investigator’s so-called report which found nothing.  THE REPORT FOUND NOTHING!  COME ON!!! OLD FAKE NEWS!!!

Another Republic(an) now lambasts the Democrat(ic) party for refusing to cooperate with the president in his exhaustive effort to protect the integrity of our future elections.   He suggests these disloyal, obstructionist Democrats are “useful idiots,” like the ones Lenin saluted during the heyday of hard-line Communism.  You know how corrupt, partisan and obstructionist the Democrat party is!  They refuse to cooperate with the president’s well-known effort to protect future elections from Russian interference!   Dig it.   

“The Party of Impeachment” is a new talking point, that’s what the damn Democrat party is, we hear today for the first time.  They are the “Party of Impeachment” fueled by irrational and unprovoked  hatred of a man who only wants justice and prosperity for the very fine people of the United States of America, very fine people, on all sides.   

“The Party of Impeachment” is not talking about the terrible acts of the vicious and disloyal Jim Comey, we are reminded, and if Comey hadn’t leaked what he did about Trump’s suggestion to him about letting the Flynn thing go, which the IG found was a breach of Comey’s duty, there never would have been a Special Counsel appointed in the first place and no witch hunt (the traitorous origins of which Mr. Barr is currently investigating) and none of this “Party of Impeachment” blather with its tedious, fake, divisive, failed, loser talking points.   

In fact, as the staunch and defiant Mr. Lewandowski just said, the president has no incentive to do anything to make more money, because “he’s already very rich”.  Now we are treated to a humorously pitched rhetorical question about the so-called Sharpie alteration of the so-called National Weather Service weather map of the projected path of so-called Hurricane Dorian.   Now, staying directly on point, within the four corners of the Mueller investigation, as previously agreed, a question to Lewandowski about the recently called for impeachment of Justice Kavanaugh.  “He’s a good man” answers Lewandowski, steady as Oliver North back in his day.

The Republicans make a barrage of parliamentary objections and points of order to try to stop the thirty minute interrogation of Lewandowski by the designated attorney, an “independent subcontractor” (like an Uber driver) who is not a staff member as provided in the rules and therefore, according to ranking Republic Mr. Collins, proscribed from participating in even this sham ‘inquiry.’   

Chairman Nadler displays an admirable degree of unflappability during these determined efforts to interrupt and stop the questioning of the witness.   The subcontractor asks a series of questions — good ones, and Lewandowski has to pause a few times to make disparaging comments about the privileged honor student (and he knows the college this guy went to, I forget) who got a fancy law degree from Harvard, unlike the self-made, born poor Lewandowski, who got everything he has by sheer hard work and unshakable loyalty.   Lewandowski reminded everyone that he has written two NY Times best sellers recently.

Lewandowski acquitted himself with that high degree of intelligence and integrity we have come to expect from Trump surrogates.   The session of him battling the skillful subcontractor, Barry Berke makes a good 30 minute clip for tomorrow’s youTubes and I hope to link to it here.   (HERE YOU GO– well worth watching).

The Democrats “the Party of Faux Impeachment” need to get Nancy Pelosi to stop publicly wringing her fucking hands and get on with the goddamned actual impeachment of the most corrupt president this great nation has ever been blessed to have.   

Let the president’s people continue to follow his directives, resist all subpoenas to testify and refuse to produce documents in an actual impeachment proceeding, let his lawyers thunder (as they did today at several points during the Lewandowski questioning).   

Let the unimpeachable Boof Kavanaugh and the other four rule on the constitutional right of Congress to call and question witnesses in an impeachment hearing.   

Now get out of the way, Nancy (“I call her ‘Nancy'”).

perjury trap.

Here is Mueller’s intro to Appendix C, the complete written questions and Trump’s “insufficient, inadequate, incomplete, imprecise”  answers.  Mueller explains. quite logically, why he didn’t pursue in person testimony from our historically candid and truthful commander-in-chief:

Beginning in December 2017, this Office sought for more than a year to interview the President on topics relevant to both Russian-election interference and obstruction-of-justice.  We advised counsel that the President was a “subject” of the investigation under the definition of the Justice Manual—“a person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury’s investigation.” Justice Manual § 9-11.151 (2018).  We also advised counsel that “[a]n interview with the President is vital to our investigation” and that this Office had “carefully considered the constitutional and other arguments raised by … counsel, and they d[id] not provide us with reason to forgo seeking an interview.”   We additionally stated that “it is in the interest of the Presidency and the public for an interview to take place” and offered “numerous accommodations to aid the President’s preparation and avoid surprise.”  After extensive discussions with the Department of Justice about the Special Counsel’s objective of securing the President’s testimony, these accommodations included the submissions of written questions to the President on certain Russia-related topics.

We received the President’s written responses in late November 2018.   In December 2018, we informed counsel of the insufficiency of those responses in several respects.   We noted, among other things, that the President stated on more than 30 occasions that he “does not ‘recall’ or ‘remember’ or have an ‘independent recollection” of information called for by the questions.   Other answers were “incomplete or imprecise.”’  The written responses, we informed counsel, “demonstrate the inadequacy of the written format, as we have had no opportunity to ask followup questions that would ensure complete answers and potentially refresh your client’s recollection or clarify the extent or nature of his lack of recollection.”  We again requested an in-person interview, limited to certain topics, advising the President’s counsel that “[t]his is the President’s opportunity to voluntarily provide us with information for us to evaluate in the context of all of the evidence we have gathered.” The President declined. 

[entire short paragraph redacted:  “Grand Jury”]

Recognizing that the President would not be interviewed voluntarily, we considered whether to issue a subpoena for his testimony.  We viewed the written answers to be inadequate.  But at that point, our investigation had made significant progress and had produced substantial evidence for our report.  We thus weighed the costs of potentially lengthy constitutional litigation, with resulting delay in finishing our investigation, against the anticipated benefits for our investigation and report.   As explained in Volume Il, Section II.B., we determined that the substantial quantity of information we had obtained from other sources allowed us to draw relevant factual conclusions on intent and credibility, which are often inferred from circumstantial evidence and assessed without direct testimony from the subject of the investigation.

source

The best line from the deadpan Mueller:

Other answers were “incomplete or imprecise.”

Among these answers was the president’s response to the final, multi-part question about his knowledge of the actions of his associates during the transition period, two subsections of which read:

Following the Obama Administration’s imposition of sanctions on Russia in December 2016 (“Russia sanctions”), did you discuss with Lieutenant General (LTG) Michael Flynn, K.T. McFarland, Steve Bannon, Reince Priebus, Jared Kushner, Erik Prince, or anyone else associated with the transition what should be communicated to the Russian government regarding the sanctions? If yes, describe who you spoke with about this issue, when, and the substance of the discussion(s).

and

At any time between December 31, 2016, and January 20, 2017, did anyone tell you or suggest to you that Russia’s decision not to impose reciprocal sanctions was attributable in any way to LTG Flynn’s communications with Ambassador Kislyak?  If yes, identify who provided you with this information, when, and the substance of what you were told.

You have to love Trump’s answer to this one:

[No answer provided]

Incomplete, inadequate, insufficient, sure, but hardly imprecise.   As precise a “fuck you, asshole” as you can write using three other words.   Why have I never seen any reference to this colossal FUCK YOU in the media?

I’ve got to ask Preet Bharara about this one.   As a former federal prosecutor, Preet, did you ever encounter this kind of in-your-fucking-face fuck you, you fucking fuck, even from the most psychopathic mobster?    Is there no sanction for this kind of deliberate and brazen evasion?