Tag Archives: FBI probe

national news

President continues his insult tirade

One of the many promises Donald J. Trump made when he became president was that he would “act like a president.” He would talk like one, too.

He was elected to the highest office in America after burying his Republican primary foes in a mudslide of insults. Then he turned his insult machine loose on Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Lyin’ Ted Cruz, Low Energy Jeb Bush, Little Marco Rubio all ran against Trump in the GOP primary. Trump also told an interviewer that Sen. John McCain was a Vietnam War hero “only because he was captured; I like people who aren’t captured, OK?”

Then he turned his guns loose on Crooked Hillary Clinton. He urged on campaign rally crowds to yell “Lock her up!”

His core of supporters didn’t mind. Trump merely was “telling it like it is,” they said. He’s not a politician, they insisted. He talks like the rest of us, they added.

Has he stopped hurling insults now that he’s president?

Nope. Not a chance. Now we hear — from the “fake news” mainstream media outlets such as the New York Times — that he fired FBI Director James Comey because he’s a “nut job,” that he’s “crazy.”

Ah, yes. That’s how the president refers to the nation’s top federal cop, America’s top law enforcement officer. A nut job. He’s crazy.

Who heard the president offer this bit of presidential dignity? The Russian foreign minister and Russia’s ambassador to the United States. They were invited into the Oval Office on a suggestion from Russian President/dictator/killer Vladimir  Putin, who asked Trump to have these fellows stop by for a visit.

Oh, and then there’s this: Trump banned American journalists from the meeting. The Russian news agency, Tass, was present. Tass photographers took pictures of the meeting.

If you’ll forgive me for borrowing a term that Trump himself used in one of his endless string of tweets: This man’s behavior is so “unpresidented.”

national news, political news

What has happened to Trump’s ‘fine-tuned machine’?

We’re at about Day 120 of the Donald J. Trump administration.

The nation passed the 100-day benchmark period with the president proclaiming that he had accomplished more than anyone in the history of his office during that time.

In less than one month since that boastful time, it’s fair to suggest that the wheels have flown off the Trump wagon. His “fine-tuned machine” is on fire. Words like “impeachment” and “criminal investigation,” which once were whispered between friends are now being blurted out in the open.

Dear readers, we are on the verge of a full-blown crisis in our government.

We aren’t yet in full crisis mode. I am beginning to believe that the moment well could be at hand.

The U.S. Justice Department has appointed a special counsel to examine the president’s relationship with Russian government officials who — according to 17 U.S. intelligence agencies — tried to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

Trump has fired the FBI director, James Comey, because he was spending too much time on “the Russia thing.” He reportedly has labeled Comey a “nut case” and “crazy” while meeting in the Oval Office with the Russian foreign minister and that country’s ambassador to the United States.

What’s likely far worse is that the president said that firing Comey relieved him of “pressure” from the FBI probe into that very “Russia thing.”

Does this sound like an obstruction of justice? Does it sound like an impeachable offense? Does it sound like an administration running like a “fine-tuned machine”?

I also believe we are witnessing what many of us said would be a nightmarish political experience with the election of Donald Trump as president.

Many Americans said he is unfit, ill-prepared, unqualified and temperamentally unsuited to become our head of state and government and our commander in chief. To be honest, the speed and the drama associated with what looks like a presidential death spiral is shocking even to the most ardent critics of Donald J. Trump.

You may count me as one of those critics who is astounded at what we appear to be witnessing.

We’re just past the 100-day mark of a brand new presidency and it’s coming apart right before our eyes.

International news, national news

The ‘bombs’ keep exploding inside the White House

James Comey is a “nut job,” he is “crazy” and firing him relieved Donald J. Trump from the “pressure” of an investigation involving the president’s relationship with the Russian government.

That, dear reader, is a summary of what the New York Times is reporting about the president of the United States. It gets even more, um, interesting. The White House is not disputing what the Times has reported.

What does this mean as the president takes wing en route to Saudi Arabia on his first overseas trip as our head of state?

I think it means that the president is digging himself into a deeper hole as Robert Mueller, the newly appointed special counsel, begins his work to uncover the truth about the burgeoning problems that are looking more and more like a full-blown constitutional crisis.

Trump fired the former FBI director, who was in the midst of a probe into whether the president’s campaign colluded with Russian government hackers seeking to influence the 2016 election. Comey wrote a memo that reportedly states that Trump asked him to drop the FBI investigation; Trump denies making that request.

Trump has fired a former acting attorney general, Sally Yates, who warned the White House about former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s exposure to potential blackmail from the Russians; the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, recused himself from anything to do with the Russia probe; then the AG recommends to Trump — in a memo — to fire Comey, which may have violated the terms of his recusal.

Now, what about the vice president, Mike Pence? He said Comey’s dismissal had nothing to do with the Russia probe. The president then contradicts the vice president. Who’s the bigger liar?

I believe this story is getting hotter by the hour.

Special counsel Mueller’s plate is overflowing. The piling on is coming — if you can believe it — from the principal subject of his growing investigation: the president of the United States.

legal news

Liar’s contest is developing

Donald John Trump has denied asking James Comey to pull the plug on an FBI investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

That’s one side of it.

The other side comes from the Washington Post and the New York Times, which have reported that the president did ask the former FBI director to do precisely that very thing.

We haven’t heard from Comey — yet!

Who are you going to believe? Two major newspapers’ reporters who stake their reputations on getting the story right? Or do you believe Donald Trump, a man known to prevaricate, fabricate and dish out lies whenever it suits his purpose?

Let me think. OK. I’ve thought about it.

I’m going to go with the reporters as well as those who know Comey well enough to confirm that he likely did keep a meticulous written record of his meetings with the president of the United States.

We have a liar’s contest developing. Who, then, will “win” this match? If the winner happens to be Comey — and it turns out that Trump did do what’s been reported — I would say it’s lights out for the Trump administration.

legal news

Turn the special counsel loose

1 Comment

If history is any guide, a special counsel investigation aimed at rooting out issues relating to the president of the United States and his alleged ties to Russia well could develop a life of its own.

Robert Mueller has been given the task of finding out whether Donald John Trump’s presidential campaign was complicit in Russian government efforts to swing the 2016 presidential election. He’s also going to examine possible links between a former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, to the Russians. Moreover, he has latitude to look into whether the president obstructed justice by “asking” former FBI Director James Comey to shut down a probe of Flynn’s ties to Russia.

Could there be even more to learn, beyond the official tasks given to Mueller — himself a former FBI director?

Mueller’s the man

We have some historical precedent to ponder.

Kenneth Starr once held the title of “independent prosecutor.” His duty in the 1990s was to look at a real estate venture involving President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Republican critics in Congress thought there were some shady circumstances that needed to be examined. Starr began poking around and discovered some evidence of a relationship between President Clinton and a young 20-something White House intern.

A federal grand jury summoned the president to testify. The president took an oath to tell the whole truth to the grand jury — and then he lied about his relationship.

Ah-hah! GOP House members then cobbled together an impeachment proceeding that charged the president with perjury and obstruction of justice. The House impeached the president. The Senate held its trial and he was acquitted.

Will history repeat itself? I have no clue. My guess is that special counsel Mueller doesn’t yet know where his probe will lead.

These matters do have a way of growing legs. The statute gives Mueller considerable leeway in his pursuit of the truth. The president cannot fire him; he can, though, order the Justice Department to do so. Let’s hope that Donald Trump resists that impulse. I know that’s a tall order, given the self-proclaimed joy he gets when he fires people.

But the Justice Department’s deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, has picked a serious legal heavyweight to do some seriously heavy lifting.

It’s time now for Robert Mueller to get busy. Rapidly.

media news

Thank you, mainstream media, for doing your job

The media keep getting a pounding from those who hang nasty labels on them.

Enemy of the people. Biased. Unfair. Mean.

I want to give them a serious shout out for the job they have been doing in reporting some of the most explosive news stories in, oh, a couple of generations.

The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal … the big guns of the so-called “mainstream media” have served their craft well. They make those of us who toiled in that craft — and are doing so to this day — so very proud.

Donald J. Trump’s tenure as president might be in serious jeopardy. Why? Because big-city newspaper reporters and editors are telling the public what they need to hear about the president of the United States. They are reporting on incidents that could result in charges of obstruction of justice; they are chronicling events and reporting the news to the public that must always be informed about how the government is being run on its behalf.

A former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich, said recently — and quite stupidly — that he is “personally offended” by the media. He just cannot stand reading negative news about the president and so, as is customary among some thin-skinned politicians, he blames the messenger. Gingrich ignores the undeniable fact that all of Trump’s wounds — every one of them — have been self-inflicted.

The president himself has labeled the media “the enemy of the American people.” Why? Again, because they are doing their job. They are reporting to the public the mistakes that the president is making. Trump’s senior political adviser, Stephen Bannon, has referred to the media as the “opposition party.” What absolute crap!

Conservative media outlets have waged war against the so-called “mainstream media” for years, using that very term as an epithet against media outlets that dare to tell the truth.

It’s far too early to know where all of this reporting will lead. As the current House speaker, Paul Ryan, has implored, “We need the facts” before making judgments.

I am going to rely on the media to keep presenting the facts. They make me proud. I plan to keep reading … and learning.

national news, political news

Mueller pick enables Congress, POTUS to get back to work

One of my first takeaways from today’s blockbuster news about the appointment of a special counsel to probe the “Russia thing” suggests that Congress and the president can get back to actual work.

You know … governing!

Robert Mueller is going to lead the investigation into whether Russia colluded with the Trump campaign to influence the 2016 election; he’ll look at whether Donald Trump asked former FBI director James Comey to shut down a probe into former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s Russia connection; he might even find some other things we haven’t even thought of … yet.

You’ll recall that a former special counsel, Kenneth Starr, was tasked initially with examining a real estate deal involving Bill and Hillary Clinton and discovered that the president was having an “inappropriate” relationship with a young White House intern. The rest became history.

Mueller, himself a former FBI director, is an excellent choice to lead this probe. I give Deputy U.S. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein high praise for making this choice.

Senators, House members and the president now can get back to arguing over some other things: health care, tax reform, infrastructure, immigration matters, North Korea, Syria, NATO.

We can argue ourselves hoarse over the merits of what Donald Trump wants to do. I don’t mind that debate continuing at full throttle.

This Russia matter and all its tendrils have strangled the government. For his part, Trump has made a mess of just about everything he has touched. Congressional leadership hasn’t acquitted itself much better, either.

Yes, House and Senate committees will continue to examine the “Russia thing” along with whatever Mueller uncovers. Let them pursue their charter as prescribed by congressional rules.

The rest of the House and the Senate — along with the guy who is president of the United States — ought to concentrate more fully on what they were sent to Washington, D.C., to do.

That is to govern.

legal news

Take it away, Robert Mueller

I have just caught my breath.

Deputy U.S. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has given the cause of truth and justice — and perhaps even the American way — a major boost. He has named former FBI director Robert Mueller as the special counsel to examine the “Russia thing” and “related matters.”

What do we make of this?

I’ll take a stab at a couple of points.

One is that Mueller served as FBI director under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. James Comey replaced him as FBI boss. Mueller and Comey reportedly are professionally close and have worked together well over many years.

Comey is out of his job at FBI, having been fired by Donald J. Trump because he was spending too much time on the “Russia thing.”

And, yes, we have reports of a memo that Comey wrote after the president reportedly asked him to shut down the FBI probe of former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s Russia ties.

OK. So now Mueller will probe deeply into what, if any, relationship the Trump presidential campaign had with Russian government officials and the Russians’ effort to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Mueller will be free of any direct link with the Trump administration and with Congress. He will be “independent” and will be charged with seeking the truth behind the myriad allegations that have bedeviled the president and his team.

Rosenstein faced great pressure to appoint the special counsel. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has recused himself from all matters relating to Russia; the Trump administration opposed the appointment of a special counsel. It fell to Rosenstein to make the call.

Mueller is known as a tough-minded lawyer.

Hey, this story is accelerating way past the posted speed limit. I’ve got to take my foot off the gas pedal for a moment or two.

I’ll just applaud the deputy AG for making this call. I also plan to breathe deeply and get ready for the next round of blockbuster news.

national news, political news

Is Rep. Chaffetz the GOP answer man on impeachment?

Given that I am a red-blooded American male, which means that I am wrong a good bit more than I am right, I will advance this notion with some trepidation.

U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz could emerge as the stand-up congressional Republican who gets his GOP caucus members to see the unvarnished truth behind the president of their party.

Donald J. Trump might be in some serious political trouble with what we’re hearing now about what he allegedly “asked” FBI Director James Comey to do; he reportedly suggested that Comey shut down an investigation into national security adviser Michael Flynn’s ties to Russian government officials.

Obstruction of justice, anyone?

So, where does Chaffetz fit into all of this?

He chairs the House Government and Oversight Committee. He has announced he will not seek re-election to his Utah congressional district seat in 2018. He is a lame duck. He has no more pandering to do to get elected. He need not worry about his “base” of supporters.

Chaffetz said this week he is preparing to ask to see a memo that Comey wrote after meeting with the president shortly after Trump fired Flynn from his national security adviser job. The memo reportedly is part of a meticulous paper trail that Comey has left that details conversations he had with the president.

There could be much more to this than we know about already. Chaffetz might want to see all that Comey wrote down and which now is in the FBI files, presumably locked away somewhere inside the J. Edgar Hoover Building. If the FBI has its former director’s memoranda, then it belongs to the public. Chaffetz, therefore, would seem to be entitled to see them as a representative of a committee charged with examining “government operations.”

Chaffetz is set to chart a new life for himself away from Congress. The timing of these revelations — and of the chairman’s decision to step away from the House — suggest to me that Chaffetz has far less to lose politically than other congressional leaders who have been unable or unwilling to take decisive action against the president.

Mr. Chairman, are you up to the task of rooting out the truth, no matter where it leads?

media news

Oh, and let’s toss reporters into prison, too, shall we?

Amid all the political shrapnel that’s flying around after the latest explosion from inside the White House, we have this little item that went virtually unnoticed.

The president of the United States sat down earlier this year with the FBI director and opened a conversation with a statement about whether the FBI should “imprison reporters” who report on leaked classified information.

Yep, that would be Donald J. Trump telling that to James Comey. I reckon Comey didn’t precisely buy into that line of crap from the president, but I’m just guessing at this point.

What in the world is Donald J. Trump trying to do here?

To my way of thinking, his complete ignorance of the America’s foundational basis is being put on full display.

Mr. President, the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment does not allow the government to do the very thing you suggested should be done. You do not understand that. I am now absolutely certain that at 70 years of age, you never will.

We’ve been caught up in the Big Story of the Week, which is that the president possibly committed a criminal act by asking Comey to shut down an ongoing FBI investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s contacts with Russian government operatives. This is getting serious, folks.

However, we narrowed our focus a bit too hastily. The bigger picture suggests a president infected with paranoia over how the media do their job. It is to report the news. If the news is about those who leak information to the public, then the media have an obligation to perform their duty.

Threats of imprisoning reporters cannot be tolerated.

Just as a refresher, here is what the First Amendment says in its entirety; I will italicize and bold-face a specific point for emphasis:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Are we clear?