1. Trump Said He Would "Drain The Swamp" And Now He Has Become The Swampiest Of Them All! And The GOP Support This.
2. Trump's Terrorist Attack On the Press (With Fox News Support)
3. Trump Is Clearly In Bed With Putin. GOP Are Clearly In Bed With Trump... Are Trump And The GOP Pandering To Putin As An Election Strategy? i.e. "It Worked Before So Why Not Again?"
4. Height Of Hypocrisy 7: The Executive Order & Dictator/Tyrant Hypocrisy
5. Trump's Obstruction Of Justice Saga: Trump Has Made Obstruction Of Justice One Of His Favorite Pastimes
This post simply contains a walkthrough a collection of videos showing that Obstruction of Justice IS taking place and that ALL of the GOP are involved (if not actively then passively by not impeaching the President).
Republicans betray their oath of office and blatantly support party over country;
Lawrence: Republicans betray oath, put Trump over country In the MSNBC exclusive secret audio recording, Rep. Devin Nunes says Republicans need to keep the House in November to protect the President from investigations into any unlawful activity. Lawrence says members of Congress have not always been willing to betray their oath of office.
Republicans are planning another con to obstruct justice;
Nunes on secret tape: Kavanaugh vote, then Rosenstein impeachment In a secret audio recording obtained exclusively by The Rachel Maddow Show, Rep. Devin Nunes is heard at a private fundraiser for Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers remarking on Donald Trump's cringe-worthy tweets, and explaining to donors that the impeachment of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has to wait so it doesn't interfere with Senate confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.
GOP say one thing out loud and plan another (obstruction-of-justice/undermining-rule-of-law) in the background away from public eyes;
Secret Nunes tape contradicts Paul Ryan on Rosenstein impeachment Rachel Maddow shows that Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan's statements that he is not in favor of impeaching Rod Rosenstein is undercut by assurances by Devin Nunes that "it's a matter of timing," raising the stakes on the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.
Openly obstructing justice by telling Mueller to wrap up an investigation that is still in its infancy (compared to past investigations listed below);
Despite recent progress, Republicans press Mueller to ‘wrap it up’
On NBC News’ “Meet the Press” yesterday, host Chuck Todd noted the dispute between Donald Trump and Michael Cohen, and asked Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) whether this is a potential area of scrutiny for the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Ohio Republican’s answer included a rather dramatic change of subject.
“Well, I think it’s going to be, you know, a he said and he said issue. So I think it’s probably better that, you know, this goes through the regular process, which is ongoing, Chuck. And I think the Mueller investigation ought to be brought to an end also. I mean, we need to have the facts lead to the right conclusion, and so I support the investigation, I have from the start. But we do need to wrap it up.”
The wording echoed a sentiment from Vice President Mike Pence in May, when he said, . “In the interests of the country, I think it’s time to wrap it up.” A month later, House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) was a little more colorful on this point, sending a message to Mueller during a committee debate: “Whatever you got, finish it the hell up.”
None of these Republicans went into any detail explaining why, exactly, Special Counsel Robert Mueller ought to “wrap it up,” which is a shame because their appeals don’t appear to make a lot of sense.
Indeed, Mueller and his team appear to be making quite a bit of progress, with new indictments against Russian military intelligence officials issued just this month. Meanwhile, the criminal trial against Paul Manafort, who chaired Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016, begins tomorrow.
We are not, in other words, watching a federal probe that’s just spinning its wheels, going nowhere.
But the argument from Portman, Pence, Gowdy, and other Trump allies basically seems to come down to calendar considerations: the special counsel has been on the job for 15 months, and 15 months seems like a long time for a federal investigation to continue.
But is it? The Washington Post’s Paul Waldman recently put together a list of notable prior investigations conducted by independent and special counsels:
* Iran-contra: 6 years, 8 months (1986-1993)* Samuel Pierce, HUD corruption: 9 years (1990-1999)* George H.W. Bush administration, improper search of passport records: 3 years (1992-1995)* Henry Cisneros, mistress payments: 11 years (1995-2006)* Mike Espy, gifts from agriculture company: 6 years (1994-2001)* Bill and Hillary Clinton, Whitewater: 6 years 8 months (1994-2000)* Lewis “Scooter” Libby, CIA leak: 3-and-a-half years (2003-2007)
And that doesn’t include other recent federal investigations from Congress. The GOP’s investigation into Benghazi conspiracy theories, for example, lasted several years.
Openly lying about the FBI;
Rep. Adam Schiff: Nunes, Gowdy lied about the F.B.I. The top Democrat on the House Intelligence committee says House Republicans, including Devin Nunes and Trey Gowdy, lied about an FBI warrant application in order to protect Donald Trump.
Promoting a Judge that thinks Nixon was innocent (as per Roger Ailes plan to provide obstruction of justice support to Presidents of thier party)!
Kavanaugh voicing of uncommon view on Nixon tapes sparks furor Joyce Vance, former U.S. attorney, talks with Rachel Maddow about a view expressed by Donald Trump Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh that the decision to force Richard Nixon to produce his Oval Office tapes was incorrect - an uncommon perspective and one sure to be probed in the confirmation process.
Theory: Republicans have a tendency to follow their leaders without question and thus are all following their leaders towards obstruction of justice;
Lawrence: Republicans ‘brainwashed,’ won't object to Trump obstruction Donald Trump may have publicly committed obstruction of justice with his tweet called for Jeff Sessions to end the Mueller probe, according to Lawrence. But not one Republican strongly denounced President Trump for that.
No Republican has to courage or morality to hold Trump to the Rule of Law and the ancient belief in America that no one is above the law in America (certainly not the President cause Monarchy's is what this country was against begin with). At the most you get token condemnations when action is within their grasp;
Maddow: Trump’s GOP detractors placated by hollow, symbolic gesture
Donald Trump’s controversial trade policies have plenty of Republican critics on Capitol Hill, and a few weeks ago, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) decided he’d do something about it. In a seemingly bold move, the retiring Arizona senator said he’d use his leverage to block the president’s judicial nominees until he was satisfied that Congress was addressing his concerns.
The trouble is, Flake is too easily satisfied. The Wall Street Journal reported overnight:
With the Trump administration announcing a new round of tariffs on China, the Senate took a symbolic step Wednesday toward asserting its power over levies that President Donald Trump has already imposed. […]Senators voted Wednesday, 88-11, to instruct the lawmakers appointed to iron out differences with the House over a spending bill to also insert a provision giving a role to Congress when the executive branch decides to impose tariffs on the basis of national-security concerns. The measure doesn’t offer any specifics about that role.
In other words, the Senate passed a non-binding resolution, with no force of law, that effectively says it’d be nice if Congress limited some of Trump’s abuses on tariffs in an upcoming spending bill.
And with that complete, Flake said the Senate can once again start confirming the White House’s far-right judicial nominees.
It’s at least mildly refreshing when some of Trump’s GOP detractors show a willingness to stand up to their party’s president, but I don’t think these folks fully appreciate how leverage works.
Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), another retiring senator who helped champion yesterday’s symbolic resolution, warned Americans yesterday that Trump is “diminishing” the United States’ international influence, adding that he’s “troubled” by the president’s antics on the global stage.
Those are certainly worthwhile sentiments, but the Tennessee Republican is the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. If he wanted to, Corker could use his position to great effect, checking Trump’s power.
Facing test on legislative arithmetic, Paul Ryan flunks
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) is generally very careful about publicly disagreeing with Donald Trump, and this morning was no exception. While not specifically condemning the president trade tariffs by name, the outgoing Republican Speaker was willing to say, “New tariffs are not the solution.”
So why not pass a bill rejecting the White House’s policy? Ryan also said today there’s simply no point.
“You would have to pass a law saying ‘don’t raise those tariffs’ and the president would have to sign that law. That’s not going to happen.”
This comes the day after most Senate Republicans supported a measure expressing vague opposition to Trump’s tariffs – in a non-binding resolution that had no force of law.
Trump's - unprecedented - attack on free speech is also GOP supported as there is no impeachment on the table after all of this!
Poll: Nearly half of Republicans agree with Trump claim that press is the enemy of the people https://t.co/lOspLxW4Us pic.twitter.com/f61TVl2EHJ— The Hill (@thehill) August 7, 2018
Trump's terrorist attack on the press is being fought locally by some;
Newspapers to speak out for free press, against Trump attacks Rachel Maddow alerts viewers that newspapers across the United States will be publishing Op-Eds about press freedoms and free speech and what is means to stand up for those principles in the age of Donald Trump.
Trump's most recent attack on critics (which goes too far given the context);
Fmr. Acting CIA Dir.: Trump is attempting to 'muzzle free speech' The CIA's former Acting CIA Director, John McLaughlin, says he looked at President Trump's 26-page executive directive to revoke a security clearance and none of its 13 listed reasons match up to what the White House said on John Brennan.
Critic speaks;
Fmr. CIA Director John Brennan: This is an abuse of power Former director of the CIA John Brennan responds to Trump revoking his security clearance
Once again, GOP are facing down the nation on majority opinion (in a big way);
How Americans view foreign influence on U.S. politics Poll: 79% of Americans think campaigns need to steer clear of foreign powers offering information on political opponents in the wake of Donald Trump Jr.’s meeting with Russians during the 2016 Presidential race.
GOP's attitude is along the lines of "Bow to Our Dear Leader";
.@SenRonJohnson: "A security clearance is a privilege and I think John Brennan was abusing that privilege." pic.twitter.com/OPCcONtqoZ— Fox News (@FoxNews) August 16, 2018
Conclusion: GOP shows, once again, it has no morals or values or intent to support the Constitution and all in represents in any way whatsoever.
Matthews on Trump: How low we’ve gone To show how low Trump’s taken it, Chris refers to a snippet of an earlier president, FDR, responding to a charge by his 1944 Republican opponent New York governor Thomas Dewey.
On another note: Once again, lack of transparency in confirming a Supreme Court Judge says Rule Of Law is not that important to the GOP, just party politics;
Sen. Blumenthal: Senate GOP hiding and concealing Kavanaugh docs Senator Richard Blumenthal talks with Rachel Maddow about the lengths Democrats are having to go to in order to obtain documents from Brett Kavanaugh's time in the George W. Bush administration while Republicans filter them through a political insider.
Also, the Emoluments clause of the Constitution, that all public office holders have taken an oath to uphold, seems to be violated daily;
Foreigners reportedly ‘curry favor’ with spending at Trump properties
Donald Trump’s first legal problem as president began literally on his first day. As regular readers may recall, the “Emoluments Clause” of the Constitution prevents U.S. officials from receiving payments from foreign governments, but Trump, who refused to divest from his private-sector enterprises, never stopped profiting from his businesses, some of which receive payments from foreign governments.
Before the president’s inauguration, Trump World vowed that his business would monitor receipts and make sure the president didn’t profit from foreign governments, though last summer, NBC News reported that the Trump Organization decided not to keep that promise, determining that it’d be too difficult.
NBC News had a related report this morning:
Four foreign governments, 16 special interest groups and 35 Republican congressional campaign committees spent money at Trump properties in 2017, according to data compiled by the government watchdog group Public Citizen. […][I]n a report called “Presidency for Sale,” Public Citizen found that Trump properties in Washington, Florida and elsewhere seem to have benefited from Trump’s election as groups with something to gain from U.S. policy have paid to stay or dine there more than 60 times.
Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, added in reference to the findings, “There is no way to escape the conclusion that these events are being held at the Trump properties as a way to curry favor with the president.”
I imagine some of you are wondering right now about whether a federal court would consider all of this kosher. As it happens, we recently received an answer to that question.
A few days before Christmas, a federal judge dismissed a case testing Trump’s practices. The Washington Post reported:
A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit Thursday alleging that President Trump violated the Constitution’s emoluments clause because his hotels and restaurants do business with foreign governments while he is in office.The plaintiffs argued that because Trump properties rent out hotel rooms and meeting spaces to other governments, the president was violating a constitutional provision that bans the acceptance of foreign emoluments, or gifts from foreign powers.But Judge George B. Daniels of the Southern District of New York ruled that the plaintiffs, led by the government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), lacked standing to bring such a case, saying it was up to Congress to prevent the president from accepting emoluments.
It’s that last part that stood out for me. The judge in the case didn’t say Trump’s practices are constitutionally permissible; he said it’s up to Congress to intervene.
Congress, of course, is not intervening to protect the Constitution thus betraying their oath of office, as usual;Laurence Tribe: A series of high crimes and misdemeanors President Donald Trump says he asked former FBI Director James Comey if he was under investigation. Constitutional expert Laurence Tribe takes issue with that and other Trump actions he says are likely impeachable offenses. Duration: 7:25
Constitutional clauses probably being violated with Russia;
High Crimes &Misdemeanors...
Comparing Trump & Nixon;
Note: Trump and Company have gone from "no collusion" to "collusion is not a crime" indicating collusion has taken place;
Trump Joins The 'Collusion Is Not A Crime' Chorus
Watch Shepard Smith take down Rudy Giuliani's "straw man argument" that collusion isn't a crimeSmith: "While the U.S. criminal code does not criminalize collusion, per se, it is a crime to conspire with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine our election"
Related:
Previously:
Rudy Giuliani Doesn't Know If Colluding Is Crime - Trump's legal team has come a long way from 'no collusion!' to 'collusion is not a crime!'
Moment Of Zen:
Key Point:
No comments:
Post a Comment