Tag Archives: Russia probe

national news, political news

Another clumsy diversion from POTUS

I believe they call it “projection,” where someone seeks to project blame on to someone else.

Check out this tweet from Donald J. Trump regarding the Department of Justice indictment against 12 Russians on charges they conspired to meddle in the 2016 presidential election.

The stories you heard about the 12 Russians yesterday took place during the Obama Administration, not the Trump Administration. Why didn’t they do something about it, especially when it was reported that President Obama was informed by the FBI in September, before the Election?

What is the president trying to do here? I think I’ve got it.

He is trying to say that the Obama administration should have stopped the attack on our electoral system and that because the president didn’t act immediately, that it’s not the Trump campaign’s fault that the Russians interfered in our election.

Sorry, Mr. President. That doesn’t cut it.

The Trump campaign should have blown the whistle on the Russians in real time, the moment they came to whomever in the campaign with some dirty goods on Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The Trumpsters didn’t act, either. Therefore, it’s on them.

The Trump campaign’s failure to act has led us to the appointment of a special counsel — Robert Mueller — who is seeking to slog his way through the thicket of evidence to determine whether there was collusion with the Russians.

Meanwhile, the president needs to stop trying to lay blame at the feet of others.

national news

Nothing ‘clear’ about collusion

Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel is getting wa-a-a-a-y ahead of herself.

The RNC statement on the Justice Department indictments of 12 Russian military intelligence officers does make clear that the Russians meddled in our 2016 presidential election.

The RNC has joined a growing chorus of other intelligence and political officials who have acknowledged the obvious. Donald Trump, though, remains an increasingly lonely holdout.

However, McDaniel’s statement asserts that “it remains clear there was no collusion” between the Russians and the Trump campaign.

Hold on, Mme. Chairwoman. We do not know that … yet.

Special counsel Robert Mueller is continuing his work toward determining whether there was collusion. The president keeps asserting there was “no collusion.” That’s fine. Let him squawk all he wants.

It’s Mueller and his team, though, that will make the official determination about possible collusion. Or about possible obstruction of justice. Or about possible campaign finance violations. Or about possibly anything else that they might deem relevant to the conduct of the president and his campaign.

As for the RNC climbing aboard the Trump bandwagon/clown-car train, let’s settle down and await the outcome of this investigation.

national news, political news

It’s the timing, man!

What are we to make of the timing of two key events in the 2016 presidential campaign?

Donald J. Trump in July of that year invited the Russian government to find the missing 30,000 e-mails that Hillary Rodham Clinton deleted from her file at the U.S. State Department.

Here is the GOP nominee making that invitation:

Then … according to an indictment handed down against 12 Russian military intelligence officers, on that very day they began hacking into the Democratic nominee’s files.

Coincidence? I think not. Neither does the legal team headed by special counsel Robert Mueller or the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller to the special counsel post.

I have believed since the beginning of this probe that Mueller’s so-called “witch hunt” is nothing of the sort.

national news

East Texan gives lunacy a bad name

1 Comment

U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert outdid himself today.

The East Texas member of Congress decided to do something few members of Congress have done. He accused a witness before a committee who had taken an oath to tell the truth of being a liar. The witness was Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who the House Operations Committee grilled for hours over his role in the Robert Mueller investigation into the Donald Trump presidential campaign.

Gohmert, a Republican, violated a rule of the House. Members are not allowed to question the veracity of witnesses who swear an oath to tell the truth. He did so anyway. To his great shame.

Oh, but he wasn’t done.

Gohmert then decided to wonder whether Strzok was truthful when he looked his wife in the eye while denying an affair he was having with another FBI agent. That line of questioning brought out howls of protest from Democrats on the committee.

Gohmert’s behavior today stood out in a hearing that was full of disgraceful utterances.

That is really saying something. And none of it is good.

Louie Gohmert is a disgrace to his office.

national news

To what end will this investigation lead?

I’ve spent a good part of my day sitting in my study. My TV has been tuned to a cable news channel, which has been broadcasting a congressional hearing with a single witness: FBI agent Peter Strzok.

My question is this: For what purpose are they conducting this all-day marathon?

Strzok used to serve on Robert Mueller’s team that is looking at Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. Then he and another agent, Lisa Page, were fired. Mueller canned them when it became known that they had exchanged anti-Trump messages via e-mail. Congressional Republicans allege a deep bias against the president. They are contending that the alleged bias taints the Mueller probe. They are seeking to undermine Mueller’s probe.

So, where is this investigation going? The U.S. House Oversight Committee is going to issue some kind of report. Then what? Suppose the report determines Mueller’s team has been biased and has conducted a corrupt investigation into whether the Trump campaign “colluded” with Russians who meddled in our 2016 election. Are they going to recommend an end to the probe?

Strzok has defended himself fiercely. He said he and the FBI did everything “by the book.”

I keep circling back to the man at the top of the investigation, Robert Mueller.

I remain quite convinced that Mueller’s integrity is intact. He is a former FBI director. He is known to be a meticulous lawyer. Mueller has assembled a top-tier legal team to probe deeply into the myriad issues surrounding the Trump campaign.

As for the president’s assertion — backed up by his GOP allies in Congress — that the Russia probe is being dominated by “13 Democrats,” this flies in the face of the fact that Mueller is a life-long Republican; so is the man who appointed him, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein; and … so is the man Trump fired as FBI director, James Comey.

Trump accuses Mueller of launching a “witch hunt” against him. I strongly suspect another type of “witch hunt” is under way. It ‘s occurring in Congress and the target is Mueller, who the GOP is targeting because he is inching closer to the White House in his probe into what happened during the 2016 presidential campaign.

House Oversight Committee Republicans have one of Mueller’s former team members — Peter Strzok — in their sights.

Where in the world is this congressional probe heading? I think it will end up in the ditch, right along with the Benghazi probe.

national news

Not a good day for our government system

I guess you can look at what many of us saw today through two prisms.

The congressional hearing that subjected FBI agent Peter Strzok to intense questioning was either:

  • A demonstration of the free-wheeling aspect of a representative democracy, or …
  • An exhibition of extreme partisanship, lowlighted by Republicans’ continual attempts to disrupt and throw the witness off his game.

Strzok was grilled for most of the day over emails he wrote that GOP House members say revealed an anti-Trump bias while he worked on special counsel Robert Mueller’s team that’s investigating the president’s 2016 election campaign.

He stood his ground. He denied any bias. He said his conscience is clear. The back and forth was remarkable in the anger it generated from Republicans who contended Strzok wasn’t answering their questions and from Democrats who objected to the constant hectoring of the witness.

I have two favorite spectacles from the hearing.

One was Freedom Caucus founder Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio — who’s been accused by athletes at Ohio State University of looking the other way when sexual abuse was occurring. Jordan kept interrupting Strzok, preventing him from answering the questions he was posing. Then Jordan would argue with a shrill voice that the agent was not answering his questions.

My other favorite moment involved the East Texas GOP loony bird, Rep. Louis Gohmert, who wondered whether Strzok was able to look into his wife’s eyes as he “lied” about his sexual relationship with another FBI page that Mueller fired from his legal team.

Gohmert the Goober could not have possibly sunk any lower with that kind of tawdry question. It drew howls of outrage from Democratic committee members.

All in all, this was not a good day for the cause of good government in America. We witnessed a clown show that should have ended hours ago.

legal news

‘Rigged witch hunt’? C’mon, Mr. President!

Donald John Trump took a moment today from berating our allies in Europe to send a message out via Twitter.

He wrote: How can the Rigged Witch Hunt proceed when it was started, influenced and worked on, for an extended period of time, by former FBI Agent/Lover Peter Strzok? Read his hate filled and totally biased Emails and the answer is clear!

I believe I need to declare once again that Strzok works for a man, Robert Mueller, who was hailed universally when the Justice Department asked him in 2017 to serve as special counsel in the hunt for the truth behind the Russia meddling/collusion matter.

The president has been calling the “Russia thing” probe a “witch hunt.” Now it’s “rigged.”

Mueller is a man of impeccable integrity. He was identified that way when DOJ named him special counsel. His integrity is intact now, even as the investigation inches closer to its conclusion.

I hasten to add that Mueller’s team has been tight. Sound proof. Hermetically sealed. There hasn’t been a single leak from Mueller’s cadre of legal eagles.

The man is doing the job he has been asked to do.

Settle down, Mr. President.

national news

Bannon offers spot-on comment on Sessions’s recusal

As a general rule I am not inclined to offer praise for a former Donald Trump policy adviser who has been portrayed as the Grim Reaper on “Saturday Night Live.”

However, Stephen Bannon has offered a spot-on analysis of U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s decision to recuse himself from anything relating to the Russia meddling matter in the 2016 presidential election.

Bannon said Sessions made precisely the correct call in backing out. He added that former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also would have made the same decision had they been put in that position.

Why? They all had direct involvement in the president’s campaign and, thus, could not possibly be trusted to conduct a thorough, fair and unbiased investigation into Russian meddling in the campaign. The question of the moment is whether the president obstructed justice by firing FBI Director James Comey and whether his campaign “colluded” with Russian operatives who had dug up dirt on Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Yet, Trump has been trashing Sessions for making that decision. He has said repeatedly he regrets selecting him as attorney general. Trump has disparaged the leadership at the Justice Department and the FBI.

The president doesn’t understand the complexities of conflict of interest. Sessions got it when he backed out of the Russia matter. Accordingly, Bannon — someone who hasn’t generally served the nation well — happens to be totally correct in his assessment that Trump is wrong to condemn the AG for acting properly.

I do have to chuckle when Bannon keeps insisting that he still admires and respects the president, saying he cherishes his relationship with him. He offers that caveat while reminding him publicly that he doesn’t understand why he is so damn wrong when he ridicules the attorney general.

legal news, national news, political news

AG might seek a new job

If I were U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions — and I am so glad I am not — I would be looking for a new job.

As in right now. Immediately if not sooner. But I am not altogether certain a new attorney general would serve the public interest as it regards an ongoing investigation into the president’s 2016 campaign.

The president of the United States, Donald John Trump, has tweeted once again that he regrets picking the former Republican senator from Alabama to be the nation’s top law enforcement officer.

Why is that? Oh, it’s just Sessions decided to do the right thing by recusing himself from any Justice Department investigation into the Russia matter and the Russians’ meddling in our 2016 presidential election.

I am no fan of the AG, but on this matter he made precisely the correct decision. He had served on Trump’s political team; he was central to the president-elect’s transition to the presidency. Had he remained involved in the Russia matter, he would have been in charge of investigating himself. How does the attorney general do such a thing without compromising  a sensitive and complex investigation? He cannot. That’s why he bailed on the Russia probe and turned it over to his deputy AG, Rod Rosenstein.

Donald Trump, though, keeps yapping that he should have picked someone else to lead the DOJ, had he known Sessions was going to recuse himself.

Sessions might be inclined to want out. But there’s this thing involving the integrity of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. Would a new AG be as faithful to the appearance of conflict of interest that Sessions was when he recused himself?

Hey, maybe Jeff Sessions ought to wait for Trump to fire him.

Then he can watch along with the rest of us as the crap hits the fan.

national news

Another Trump allegation proving false?

I am not a betting man, but if I were I might be willing to wager some real American money that Donald John Trump’s allegation of spying within his 2016 presidential campaign is going to go the way of earlier allegations that flew out of his guy’s mouth.

You know … that Barack Obama wiretapped his office; that millions of undocumented immigrants voted for Hillary Clinton; that thousands of Muslims cheered the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11; that Sen. Ted Cruz’s father might have been complicit in President Kennedy’s murder; that Obama was born in Africa and not in Hawaii and, thus, was ineligible to run for president in 2008.

It’s all crap. Now the latest.

He accuses the FBI of planting a “spy” in his campaign. He says the deed was done for “political purposes.” He has produced as much actual evidence of this latest assertion as he did for all the others.

None. Zilch.

Even some congressional Republicans are backing the FBI in the face of these allegations from Trump.

The president is reaching deep into his bag of tricks to discredit the investigation of special counsel Robert Mueller, who the Justice Department appointed in 2017 to look into the “Russia thing,” meaning whether Trump might have worked with Russians who meddled in our election.

The FBI has become one of Trump’s preferred bogeymen. He fired the former FBI director, James Comey, because of the Russia investigation. He is calling Comey a liar; he is disparaging the reputation of former CIA boss John Brennan, former director of national intelligence James Clapper and, yes, also Robert Mueller.

Where, though, is the evidence to back up the allegation of “spying” within his campaign? No one has seen it.

If I were inclined to place a bet on this one, my hunch is that there is no evidence to be found. Why? Because it didn’t happen.

Which brings me to the question: How in the name of political sanity does this guy, the president, get away with lying at this level?