Tag Archives: 2016 election

national news

Collusion not a crime … but how about conspiracy?

Donald Trump’s defense is morphing into something rather strange.

The president who keeps insisting he didn’t “collude” with Russian hackers who attacked our electoral system now says “collusion” isn’t a crime.

Weird, yes? I think so.

The president and his lawyer, Rudolph Giuliani, say there are no statutes on the books that cover collusion. Special counsel Robert Mueller is examining whether there was collusion associated with the attack on our system by Russians who reportedly presented some “dirt” on Hillary Clinton to the Trump campaign in 2016.

Rather than notify the FBI and rat out the hostile power with this information, the Trump team allegedly went forward with receiving the “dirt.” Did they then conspire with the Russians in their effort to interfere in our electoral system?

This investigation is slogging through difficult territory. There might be land mines aplenty through which Mueller’s team must navigate. Indeed, the Trump team appears to be planting them in some form of tactical retreat as Mueller proceeds methodically with his probe of the president and his campaign.

We now are left to ponder how, if collusion is not a crime, the president appears to be in so much trouble. We also now must consider why the president is working so hard to discredit the special counsel and his team of lawyers who have been given the task of finding the truth.

national news

‘Not a crime,’ but yes, it does matter, Mr. POTUS

Donald J. Trump’s got a million of ’em, idiotic tweets and assorted proclamations, that is.

He said this via Twitter early today, for example: Collusion is not a crime, but that doesn’t matter because there was No Collusion (except by Crooked Hillary and the Democrats)!

Whoa! Mr. President, it damn sure does matter.

Robert Mueller’s team of legal eagles is examining whether the president’s campaign “colluded” with the Russians who hacked into our electoral system and launched an attack on our democratic process. I get that there isn’t a statute that covers such activity; absent a statute, there can be no crime.

Is it right? Is it normal? Does this kind of activity keep faith with the notion that our system should be immune from this kind of interference?

Collusion not a crime

And what about the very idea that a hostile foreign power would seek to influence a presidential outcome?

The notion that a major-party political campaign could have accepted, if not solicited, this kind of foreign intervention in a presidential election should send chills up the spines of those of us who want our electoral system protected from such activity.

Does it matter, then, that the Russians attacked us? Absolutely.

Does it also matter that there might be evidence that the Trump campaign cooperated with the attackers? Without question … yes!

national news

Trump unleashes new fusillade against Mueller

Put yourself in the shoes of the man investigating whether the president of the United States and his team “colluded” with Russians who attacked our electoral system in 2016.

The object of that probe, Donald J. Trump, continues to fire off Twitter messages accusing Robert Mueller of conducting a “rigged witch hunt.” He says the probe needs to look at Democrats. He questions whether Mueller has a “conflict of interest” because of his friendship with a fired FBI director.

The president accuses Mueller, himself a former FBI director, of being corrupt and biased.

CNN reports: The attacks are not simply a window into his own rage, they also represent a coherent hardball strategy to unite his ever loyal political base and other Republicans behind him. With 100 days to go until midterm elections, that could be tough for the GOP.

How might you react to all of this?

Me? I would be incensed. I would be outraged. I would be damn angry at the president. Here’s the good news: It’s not about me. It’s all about a man who was praised universally when he got the special counsel job.

Mueller is on task. He and his legal team have kept their mouths shut. They have said nothing publicly about the shaming the president keeps heaping on them. They are acting professionally and with decorum and dignity.

Trump is acting, um, like an ass.

The president’s continuing harangue reveals a serious in this individual’s state of mind. No, I am not suggesting some mental disorder. I am suggesting that Trump possesses a personality trait that suggests a certain emotional instability.

Does that disturb you? If not, it should. It damn sure bothers me.

I have declared repeatedly on this blog that Donald Trump is unfit for the office he holds. His constant barrage in the face of a serious — and so far productive — investigation simply reaffirms what many of us have been saying since Day One of this individual’s presence on the political stage.

national news

Still wondering: Why the constant griping about Mueller?

You’ve heard it said of folks who likely are complicit in wrong doing that they “protest too much.”

Donald Trump continues to protest the existence of a special counsel, Robert Mueller. He keeps calling Mueller’s investigation into possible collusion with Russians during the 2016 election a “witch hunt,” which he’s elevated to a “rigged witch hunt.”

Is the president protesting too much? Is he seeking to discredit the investigator as a diversion from the evidence that well might be piling against him?

A politician who is as clean as Trump says he is might just want to keep his trap shut and let the investigation reach a favorable conclusion under its own power.

But that is not happening with this president. He keeps firing off Twitter message, he keeps ad-libbing at press events with statements that — at least to my ear — sound more like a guilty man than an innocent one.

national news

No, Sarah, probe is no ‘hoax’ or a ‘waste of time’

Sarah Huckabee Sanders needs a serious reality check.

The White House press secretary this week called special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into alleged collusion between 2016 Trump presidential campaign and Russian election attack squad members a “hoax” and a “waste of time.”

Hmm. Let me think about that.

OK, it’s not a waste of time. Nor do I believe that multiple criminal indictments and a smattering of guilty pleas constitute a hoax.

The Hill reports that the number of aides caught up in this mess now stands at 32. More are likely to be in the mill.

A federal grand jury has indicted 12 Russian intelligence officers on conspiracy charges. Key campaign aides have been indicted as well, along with a former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, who’s been cooling his jets in jail waiting for the start of his trial on charges of money laundering and assorted other felonies.

Hoax? Waste of time? Not even close.

Proceed, Mr. Special Counsel.

national news

Can’t put a single thing past POTUS

Once upon a time, long before he died of cancer complications, I once said of the late Amarillo millionaire weirdo Stanley Marsh 3 that I wouldn’t put a single thing past him, that he was capable of attempting any stunt under the sun.

With apologies to the late Texas Panhandle eccentric “artisan” and goofball, I am beginning to think the same thing of the president of the United States.

His former lawyer/confidant/”fixer” Michael Cohen has told authorities that he believes Donald Trump knew of the infamous 2016 meeting with Russians who had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton before the meeting took place.

That means Trump — surprise, surprise! — allegedly lied when he said he knew nothing of the meeting, that no one told him. Cohen reportedly told Don Trump Jr. in advance of the meeting, and that Don Jr. told Dad.

There also are reports that Trump’s legal might have leaked the news of Cohen’s recordings of the two men discussing paying hush money to a Playboy model who alleges she and the future president had a nearly year long love affair.

What might Trump the Elder have done here? There’s some speculation that the president might be behind the leak of this information so that he can get a head start on discrediting Cohen. He wants to peel away at Cohen’s credibility as he has sought to do with special counsel Robert Mueller and former FBI director James Comey.

And this all might be the work of someone who says point blank that he has “done nothing wrong.”

Sure.

national news

Or … what if Mueller comes up empty?

1 Comment

My previous blog post wondered what Donald J. Trump’s reaction would be if Robert Mueller delivers the goods on collusion, obstruction of justice and anything else he might find wrong with the president and his 2016 campaign.

My conclusion: Trump will go bonkers, nuts, ’round the bend.

In fairness, what might the president do and/or say if the special counsel comes up empty?

My thoughts? I believe Trump is fully capable of climbing onto the White House roof, bullhorn in hand and bellowing “I told you so!” until his voice no longer functions.

OK, I’m kidding.

Sort of …

Trump is incapable, in my humble view, of accepting victory like a gentleman. He doesn’t have the gene that allows him to congratulate Mueller for a job well done, and thank him sincerely for the service he has performed for the country.

No sir. He won’t do that.

If Mueller ends up with nothing, Trump will find a way to make something out of it. Why, he might never shut his mouth for as long as serves in the highest office in the land.

As we’ve learned already, 18 or so months into his presidency, Donald Trump cannot stop boasting about the Electoral College victory he scored over Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Imagine, now, how the president well might react if Mueller and his team come up empty on The Russia Thing.

national news

What if Mueller delivers the goods on POTUS?

I cannot stop pondering what might happen if the special counsel looking to The Russia Thing comes up with the goods on the president of the United States of America.

If you’re honest with yourself, you cannot stop thinking about it, either.

I believe I’ll share my thoughts here, in the public, for you to see. Maybe you’ll agree. Maybe you won’t.

Robert Mueller has been hard at work for a little more than a year trying to fulfill the task given to him by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. That would be: whether the Donald Trump presidential campaign colluded with Russians who attacked our democratic process in 2016; they interfered in our election. There also might be an obstruction of justice matter to decide. Oh, and how about that Emoluments Clause in the U.S. Constitution, that says presidents cannot use their office to obtain income from foreign governments?

There’s a lot to uncover. To peel away. To examine closely.

What if Mueller delivers the goods on the president? Trump already has expended a tremendous amount of emotional capital calling the Mueller probe a “rigged witch hunt,” a “hoax” and a phony circumstances concocted by Democrats who are angry at losing the 2016 presidential election to a first-time candidate for any public office.

I fear that the president might come completely, totally, categorically unhinged from reality. I cannot prove it, of course. Given his hysterical responses to matters relating to an investigation of matters that the president says he didn’t do, I wonder how he’ll react if the final Mueller report says Trump’s campaign colluded after all, that he obstructed justice by bullying law enforcement officials into backing off and fattened his wallet with income derived by, oh let’s see, Russian oligarchs.

There’s no way to know what Mueller has collected so far. He’s been quiet. He has been conducting himself like the mature professional he is known to be. Meanwhile, the president is acting quite differently.

To think: We don’t know anything … yet.

national news

The ‘Fixer’ now seeks to damage Trump?

You might not expect me to say this, but here it comes anyway: Michael Cohen, Donald Trump’s former good friend and lawyer, has allegedly revealed another big lie from the president of the United States … but it might not matter.

Hey, I think it’s a big deal. Others think it’s a big deal. But the president’s penchant for prevarication has become almost standard fare now.

Cohen reports that candidate Donald Trump knew of a meeting with Russian operatives before it happened during the 2016 presidential campaign. Trump has said he didn’t know about it. Don Trump Jr. has said he never told Dad about it. Cohen, though, says Junior told Senior about it before the fact.

Thus, the president and his First Son lied in public about what they knew — or didn’t know.

The Russians reportedly had dirt on Hillary Rodham Clinton, Trump’s Democratic foe in the election. They allegedly wanted to meet with Trump to tell him what they had. Did the candidate call the FBI to rat them out? Did Don Jr. do it? Did anyone squeal about principals from a hostile country to the feds? No.

Now it might be that Trump has been caught in another whopper.

Will anyone care? I do. So should you.

national news

Welcome aboard the ‘anti-meddling’ bandwagon

“Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd is a man after my own heart.

He, too, says “meddling” is too mild a term to describe what the Russians did in 2016. That is, he says the Russians didn’t merely “meddle” in our presidential election.

Todd pointed out that “meddle” defines when someone takes an interest in something that is not their concern. Yep, that’s meddling. My American Heritage Dictionary says meddling is “to intrude into others’ affairs.”

Todd wants to know what term to use to describe what the Russians did. Interfere? Attack?

I prefer “attack.” It was a direct assault on our democratic process. They intended, according to U.S. intelligence analysts, to swing the election in Donald John Trump’s favor. Whether they had a tangible impact on the election result, of course, remains a wide-open question.

But I agree with Todd. “Meddling” doesn’t cut it as a term to define what the Russians did.