It’s almost impossible for me to understand how a 6-year and counting seamless pattern of lying, obstructing investigations, quid pro quo pardons for people who lied to obstruct, real time witness tampering, ongoing obstruction of investigations, orders to defy subpoenas, false privilege claims, ongoing destruction of evidence, has not given an apolitical Department of Justice enough evidence to bring obstruction of justice charges against the most corrupt administration in American history. I mean, seriously, what the fuck?

The official phase began when new president Trumpie fired FBI director James Comey for insufficient personal loyalty to the boss when he refused to “drop the Flynn thing.” Flynn pleaded guilty to lying about his illegal contacts with the Russians, eventually a Special Counsel was appointed and negotiations were undertaken with Trumpie to testify under oath. Despite his Bannon-like bluster about not being afraid of Mueller (who he tried several times to fire, enlisting various lackeys including White House Council Don McGahn, to do his dirty work), the ex-president agreed only to have his lawyers respond to written questions, his answers claiming no recall of anything, except for the final answer about Flynn, Kislyac, Jared, Don Jr., Bannon, Erik Prince and others. That was, arguably, one of Trumpie’s most “inadequate responses”. The response was, and I quote, “no response given.” Inadequate, indeed. But apparently no indication of intent of any kind, and absolutely no legal repercussions.

The piously corrupt William Pelham Barr, took the extraordinary step of trying to rescind the charges against Flynn, charges Flynn had already pleaded guilty to. Barr argued in a motion to dismiss that Flynn’s admitted lies to the FBI were “immaterial” and therefore noncriminal. In coordination with Flynn’s new lawyer, Sidney Powell, the DOJ moved to dismiss Flynn’s guilty plea. Trumpie later pardoned Flynn. Nothing to see here! Flynn, who went on to advocate invocation of the Insurrection Act and the imposition of martial law so his buddy could remain in power, recently pleaded the fifth over and over again in response to virtually every question the January 6 committee asked him. As you do, you know, when you have nothing to hide.

No presidential phone records during the riot that Trumpie unleashed on the Capitol, all gone, along with the burner phones Trumpie used to speak to his allies in Congress, and in the Willard hotel war room. Call logs all gone missing, whoops. No outtakes from Trumpie’s January 6, go home, beloved patriots video. Secret Service texts from the lead up and the hours of the riot, all permanently deleted after preservation orders were sent by numerous government entities. Though DHS has known about this by all appearnces illegal mass deletion of evidence since at least February, just last week they announced a criminal investigation into what appears to be a criminal cover-up that the Trump appointed director of DHS may well have been personally involved in. Nothing to see here, but the attorneys for people stonewalling the January 6th Committee, paid for by Trumpie, get copies of all transcripts, which the vindictive boss carefully reads, don’t forget!

Apparently, in a post-truth USA, proving obstruction of justice is virtually impossible. If the person angrily denies he obstructed Justice, intimidates all witnesses to his obstruction and rewards everybody who lies about, and obstructs investigation into his obstruction, in a pinch pardoning them, well isn’t that kind of a draw?

“The … suggestion that President Trump did not act swiftly enough to quell the violence is absolutely not true. Upon hearing of the reports of violence, he tweeted, pleading with the crowd to be ‘peaceful,’ followed by a tweeted video urging people to ‘go home’ and to do so in ‘peace.’ He and the White House further took immediate steps to coordinate with authorities to provide whatever was necessary to counteract the rioters. … He, like the rest of the Country, was horrified at the violence.“

— Trump lawyers’ trial memorandum, second Trump impeachment, Feb. 8, 2021.

https://wapo.st/3b0P3wF

With the revelation that the Secret Service (literally the [US]SS, damn), destroyed all evidence of real-time communications on January 5th and 6th, presumably out of loyalty to their former leader, since they were his praetorian guard and had taken a personal oath of loyalty to him, as in the old days of the Führer oath, my mind goes back to another famous, little remarked on bit of obstruction of justice by our greatest criminal president,

If you want to set the date for when the Department of Justice left an unaccountable criminal president in office because of an OLC memo, look no further than Trump’s final interrogatory answer to Mueller’s last written question. The questions were put to Trump in writing after a long negotiation because Trump’s lawyers understood his inability to tell the truth, even under oath, would inevitably land him in the famous “perjury trap”. The question is long and convoluted and Trump, who has a famously short attention span, had his lawyers provide what Mueller tactfully, and ridiculously, called an “inadequate response.”

Mueller’s question is insanely long and convoluted, but also greatly detailed. Good luck getting through it, I suggest a quick skim noting the names of an infamous cast of characters, and then a moment to review the full depth of Mr Trump’s inadequate response. If you want the date that democracy probably died, just look up when this inadequate answer, that was never answered more adequately, was made.

SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE:

b. 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).

c. On December 29 and December 31, 2016, LTG Flynn had conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about the Russia sanctions and Russia’s response to the Russia sanctions.

i. Did you direct or suggest that LTG Flynn have discussions with anyone from the Russian government about the Russia sanctions?

ii. Were you told in advance of LTG Flynn’s December 29, 2016 conversation that he was going to be speaking with Ambassador Kislyak? If yes, describe who told you this information, when, and what you were told. If no, when and from whom did you learn of LTG Flynn’s December 29, 2016 conversation with Ambassador Kislyak?

iii. When did you learn of LTG Flynn and Ambassador Kislyak’s call on December 31, 2016? Who told you and what were you told?

iv. When did you learn that sanctions were discussed in the December 29 and December 31, 2016 calls between LTG Flynn and Ambassador Kislyak? Who told you and what were you told?

d. 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.

e. On January 12, 2017, the Washington Post published a column that stated that LTG Flynn phoned Ambassador Kislyak several times on December 29, 2016. After learning of the column, did you direct or suggest to anyone that LTG Flynn should deny that he discussed sanctions with Ambassador Kislyak? If yes, who did you make this suggestion or direction to, when, what did you say, and why did you take this step?

i. After learning of the column, did you have any conversations with LTG Flynn about his conversations with Ambassador Kislyak in December 2016? If yes, describe when those discussions occurred and the content of the discussions.

f. Were you told about a meeting between Jared Kushner and Sergei Gorkov that took place in December 2016?

i. If yes, describe who you spoke with, when, the substance of the discussion(s), and what you understood was the purpose of the meeting.

g. Were you told about a meeting or meetings between Erik Prince and Kirill Dmitriev or any other representative from the Russian government that took place in January 2017?

i. If yes, describe who you spoke with, when, the substance of the discussion(s), and what you understood was the purpose of the meeting(s).

h. Prior to January 20, 2017, did you talk to Steve Bannon, Jared Kushner, or any other individual associated with the transition regarding establishing an unofficial line of communication with Russia? If yes, describe who you spoke with, when, the substance of the discussion(s), and what you understood was the purpose of such an unofficial line of communication.

TRUMP:

(No answer provided.)