Tag Archives: Lindsey Graham

‘Probably’ shouldn’t say Spygate? C’mon, Sen. Graham

Lindsey Graham can do better than this.

The South Carolina Republican U.S. senator says that Donald Trump “probably shouldn’t” use the term “Spygate” to level an accusation that the FBI planted someone inside his presidential campaign for political purposes.

Actually, Trump is defaming the FBI yet again by making an assertion without the hint of evidence that what he is saying is true.

Trump most clearly shouldn’t use such language to describe what the FBI might have done, which is to probe questions that arose during the 2016 campaign that Russians were meddling in our election and trying to turn the tables in Trump’s favor.

Rather than welcome an FBI investigation into that allegation, Trump has decided to declare political war against the law enforcement agency and leaders at the top of the Department of Justice.

He is seeking to discredit the special counsel’s probe. He has launched a scorched-Earth campaign against the FBI. He has introduced the term “spy” to describe the FBI’s effort to get to the bottom of the Russia meddling caper.

Graham offered radio host Hugh Hewitt a milquetoast response to the question about the Trump’s reckless language: “I don’t know. Probably not, but I don’t know,” he said. “I didn’t go to the meeting. I don’t think it’s — I don’t think he’s a spy. And I don’t know who this person was.”

Trump’s continuing campaign against the FBI is a disgrace.

Who can we believe regarding POTUS’s gutter mouth?

It’s come down to this: No longer can I take a single thing that Donald John Trump Sr. says at face value.

I do not believe unequivocally a single statement he can make.

Take his recent use of the term “sh**hole” to describe Africa, Haiti and El Salvador. He denies saying it. This morning, Sen. David Perdue, R-Ga., who was in the room when the president said it actually stood with Trump in his denial.

Others in the room — Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Dick Durbin, D-Ill. — said Trump used the term. Durbin said he uttered the term “repeatedly” while talking about immigration.

Trump’s lying is so pervasive, so inclusive, so very disturbing that I’ve crossed a key threshold that now casts into doubt every single utterance that flies out of his mouth.

My state of disbelief rivals how I used to feel about a one-time Amarillo, Texas, figure. I refer to the late Stanley Marsh 3, the eccentric millionaire artisan/lawyer/goofball who in his day did some mighty strange things.

The Weather Channel came here in the early 2000s to cover a weather-related event and while the TV weatherman was on the air, Marsh — while wearing a feathered head dress — started prancing around in the background doing some sort of Native American dance.

Marsh was the strangest of strange dudes. It got so weird that there came a time when there wasn’t a single thing one could say about Marsh that I could dismiss out of hand.

“Hey, did you hear that Stanley flew to Mars and brought a Martian back to Earth with him.” I always felt in the deepest part of my gut, “You know … I wouldn’t put it past him.”

And so it is with Donald Trump. The man has been heard in public using filthy language. He referred to pro football players protesting police conduct against African-Americans as “sons of bi*****. ” He has used what my father used to call “the functional four-letter word” on more than one occasion since becoming a politician. He has done the same with the scatological term as well.

So, when he denies calling certain nations of the world “sh**hole” countries, well … I don’t believe his denial.

The man is a liar.

Not the dumbest idea, but it’s close

Lindsey Graham said this in response today to a question about a joint U.S.-Russia initiative to combat cyber hacking: “It’s not the dumbest idea I’ve ever heard, but it’s pretty close.”

That was among some of the critiques that the South Carolina Republican U.S. senator offered on Donald J. Trump’s meeting with Vladimir Putin in Hamburg, Germany.

Graham went on during his interview with “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd: “He gave a really good speech in Poland, President Trump did, and he had what I think is a disastrous meeting with President Putin. Two hours and 15 minutes of meetings. (Secretary of State Rex) Tillerson and Trump are ready to forgive and forget when it comes to cyber-attacks on the American election of 2016.”

Donald Trump, to no one’s surprise, is calling his second overseas trip as president a success. The Putin meeting, by many accounts, was anything but a victory for the president. He “pressed” Putin on allegations that Russian government officials meddled in our 2016 election; Putin denied it. Then the two men announce this joint effort to combat cyber attacks? Are you kidding? Sadly, no. They aren’t.

Trump once again revealed that he appears to be the only world leader on the planet who refuses to accept that Russia launched an attack on our electoral process. He keeps giving the Russians cover. He keeps saying things like “We don’t really know” who is responsible for the hacking of our system. Actually, a lot of intelligence experts in this country do know who did it. They say it’s the Russians.

Meanwhile, U.S. politicians from both political parties are demanding that Russia be held accountable for what they did. Instead, the president wants to form a partnership with them to put an end to the Russians’ effort to subvert our electoral system?

I agree with Sen. Graham. It’s a pretty damn dumb idea.

Sen. Graham tells it bluntly about Trump, Russia

Donald J. Trump needs to hear a lot more blunt talk from members of his own political party.

He got it today from U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican, who pulled zero punches when talking about the president’s “blind spot” as it regards Russia, Vladimir Putin and the Russian effort to undermine our electoral process.

Sen. Graham said this, among other things, on “Meet the Press” this morning: “When it comes to Russia, I am dumbfounded,” Graham said of Trump’s actions. “I am disappointed and, at the end of the day, he’s hurting his presidency by not embracing the fact that Putin’s a bad guy who tried to undercut our democracy and he’s doing it all over the world. He is literally the only person that I know of that has any doubt about what Russia did in 2016.”

Read more of what Graham said here.

The reality is that the president and Putin met in Hamburg, Germany, in advance of the G20 summit and Trump has decided it’s now time to “move forward” after hearing Putin deny Russian effort to meddle in our 2016 presidential election.

That’s it. Vlad says he didn’t do anything and that’s good enough for me … or so Trump seems to be saying.

Graham is having none of it. Nor should he. Nor should the intelligence professionals who have concluded that the Russians sought to influence the election outcome.

I agree with Graham, moreover, that whatever the Russians did likely didn’t affect the outcome. Trump was elected fair and square. However, the point of Graham’s tirade is that Trump shouldn’t accept Putin’s denial while denigrating — on foreign soil, no less — the U.S. intelligence apparatus’s capability, which Trump did in Hamburg.

Will any of this straight talk matter to the president? No one believes it will change this man’s point of view. His blind spot toward Russia and Putin, though, is “hurting his presidency.”

That means, to me, that he’s hurting the nation.

Bipartisan calls for Trump to produce ‘tapes’?

What do you know about that?

Democrats and Republicans in Congress are starting to sing in unison on something. It regards a threat that Donald John Trump made toward the former director of the FBI, James Comey.

The president fired Comey a few days ago for reasons that still seem a bit muddled. But as the hubbub began to build, Trump fired off a tweet that said Comey had better hope no tapes exist that recorded the conversations the two men had prior to Comey’s dismissal.

“If there are any tapes of this conversation, they need to be turned over,” Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-S.C., told NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Now we have Democrats and Republicans saying that if Trump has tapes, he needs to produce them. He needs to validate the threat he leveled against the FBI director.

If the president has no such tape recordings — and few observers really doubt that he does — then we well might be talking about something else altogether. There might be a case built that suggests the president was using a blind threat to intimidate the former FBI director who — as it happens — was in the midst of an investigation of allegations that the Trump presidential campaign colluded with Russian hackers seeking to influence the 2016 election outcome.

Do you follow me?

My line of thinking suggests that the absence of any recordings exposes Trump to potential obstruction of justice accusations. Was the tweet he sent out warning Comey meant to coerce the lawman? Might a coercion attempt ripple its way to others within the FBI who are up to their armpits in this investigation.

The president’s obsession with Twitter as a form of “communication” well might swallow him whole. I say it might because no one has any proof — at least not yet — of his intentions while he continues to fire off these petulant messages.

Polls show Trump support falling in the wake of the Comey dismissal. Indeed, given the president’s obsession with polls — especially when they’re favorable — is going to continue to hound him perhaps for his entire presidency. Americans don’t like the way he handled the Comey firing.

They would like it even less if Trump were to destroy any recorded evidence rather than surrendering it to Congress.

What, though, happens if he didn’t record those conversations? What happens if it turns out he is just making empty — but still dangerous — threats against a law enforcement official and the agency he once led?

Now are you frightened?

Trump promised to “unify” the country. It just occurs to me that he well might have brought warring political parties together in Congress, thus unifying the country’s representatives in our government.

Listen to your fellow GOPers, Mr. President

Lindsey Graham isn’t exactly a huge fan of Donald J. Trump.

He ran against him for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016. Trump hurled a few insults at him. Graham said some unkind things in return.

But the U.S. senator from South Carolina is trying to implore the president to do the right thing — and avoid naming a politician to become the next director of the FBI.

Sen. Graham is talking specifically about Texas Republican U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, who has emerged as one of the favorites to succeed James Comey at the FBI, whom Trump fired this past week.

Cornyn could face stiff resistance in the Senate if Trump selects him, even though Cornyn has been part of the “world’s greatest deliberative body” for some time now. He’s known to have friends on both sides of the aisle.

But the FBI needs a decidedly non-political director in this difficult time, Graham said. “I think it’s now time to pick somebody that comes from within the ranks or is such a reputation that has no political background at all,” he said. “John Cornyn is a wonderful man. Under normal circumstances, he would be a superb choice to be FBI director. But these are not normal circumstances. We’ve got a chance to reset here as a nation.”

“Reset” is a mild term. I prefer to think the FBI leadership needs a major overhaul.

It’s not that Comey was a bad director, despite what the president said about him. Word filtering out of Washington by those who know Comey well say the president’s description of him as a “showboat” just doesn’t square with the man’s reputation.

Sen. Graham’s assessment of a successor, though, is on target. The FBI needs to be led by someone who knows how to pursue an investigation to a comprehensive conclusion. I would have thought Comey is capable of doing that, which likely got him in trouble with Trump.

Cornyn may have great political skill. The agency needs someone who would cooperate fully with a special prosecutor — whom the Justice Department should name to handle this probe.

Sen. Cornyn’s political background is precisely the wrong fit for this job — at this time.

‘The bottom’ of Trump’s wiretap will be bare

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham promises to “get to the bottom” of the president’s allegation that his predecessor wiretapped Trump Tower.

OK, then. The South Carolina Republican has expressed his deep worry about what Donald J. Trump has alleged.

Did President Obama order an illegal wiretap? Is there a “there” there? Or, did Trump make it up? Did the president decide to fire off a storm of tweets alleging something that is patently ridiculous on its face?

Trump said Obama wiretapped the Trump Tower offices to prove that the president-elect had conversations with Russian officials. This controversy is boiling to a scandal status.

Here is what I think Sen. Graham is going to find.

Nothing! I believe the “bottom” of this specious claim is going to reveal yet another bald-faced lie from the president of the United States.

Political leanings turned upside-down

I am listening to U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters rail, rant and ramble about a dastardly human being, Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The California Democrat — so help me — is sounding like a 1950s Republican! She is not alone among congressional Democrats who are calling Putin a war criminal, a monster and no friend of the United States of America.

Meanwhile, we have the nation’s leading Republican — the president-elect — continuing to bite his tongue as it regards Putin. Donald J. Trump just won’t — or cannot — bring himself to say what Democrats are saying. Which is that Putin is a seriously bad guy.

What’s going on here?

Republicans traditionally have hated the Russians, especially when they were governed by the communists who created the Soviet Union. Indeed, Putin is a creature of the monstrous Soviet era, the KGB, the notorious and ruthless spy agency he once ran.

These days, though, we’re mired in debate over what role the Russians played in influencing our 2016 presidential election. Democrats are enraged. Republicans, well, are not … generally.

Sure, some GOP senators have spoken out against the Russians. Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio are three harsh critics of Putin and they all have openly challenged Trump’s relationship with him and the rest of the Russian government.

The president-elect? He’s keeping quiet.

Donald Trump is the leader of the Republican Party, the traditional enemy of Russia. Democrats used to be accused of being squishy-soft on the Russians.

Talk about a reversal of roles.

Graham is correct, Trump is wrong on Russia

I am not inclined generally to speak well of U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, but I want to say a good word or two now about the South Carolina Republican.

He says the president-elect is wrong about Russia and wants him to wake up and smell the coffee before too long about the nation formerly known as the Evil Empire.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/313194-graham-republicans-gleeful-about-russia-election-interference-are

Graham appeared this past Sunday on “Meet the Press” with his good buddy U.S. Sen. John McCain. He said this about his fellow GOP senators, according to The Hill: “Most Republicans are condemning what Russia did. And to those who are gleeful about it — you’re a political hack. You’re not a Republican. You’re not a patriot.”

Trump happens to be one of those Republicans who are “gleeful” about the Russians’ behavior during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Trump continues to question the CIA assessment that Russia sought to influence the election in Donald J. Trump’s favor. The CIA and other intelligence agencies have concluded that Russian spooks were acting on the director orders of Vladimir Putin; they cheered in the Kremlin when Trump was declared the winner of the election.

Graham is rightfully dismayed at the findings of the intelligence community, as is McCain. These two loyal Republicans have joined others within their party — not to mention Democrats — who want a thorough, bipartisan investigation in Congress to get at the root of what the Russians did and to seek solutions to prevent any foreign government from such overt interference in our electoral process.

If only the president-elect would listen to them.

Ted Cruz for Supreme Court?

UNITED STATES - SEPTEMBER 20: Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., participate in the press conference on military aid to Israel with on Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2016. (Photo By Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call)

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham has posited an interesting notion about who should be nominated to fill the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court.

He says his Republican Senate colleague, Ted Cruz of Texas, should get the call.

Cruz would be hailed by everyone in the Senate as the perfect choice by the new president, according to Graham — but not for reasons that have anything to do with Cruz’s credentials.

Most of Cruz’s Senate colleagues detest him. They would vote virtually unanimously to send him to the Supreme Court, said Graham, who once joked that “if you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.”

Graham and Cruz, you must recall, once were GOP rivals for the party’s presidential nomination in 2016. Donald J. Trump ended up winning the presidency and now can nominate someone to fill the court vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.

Do I think Cruz would be a good choice? No. I don’t want the court to mess with a woman’s right to choose to end a pregnancy or to undo its ruling that legalized gay marriage.

Still, Sen. Cruz — or “Lyin’ Ted,” as Trump once labeled him — would be a most provocative selection for the court. He is a sharp lawyer, a former Texas solicitor general who has argued before the Supreme Court.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/lindsey-graham-ted-cruz-supreme-court_us_582ba677e4b01d8a014b4490

The new president might want to look to make a key appointment that would steer him away from difficult a Senate confirmation fight. In that context, Ted Cruz for the U.S. Supreme Court sounds like the right choice.