"They said the application drew on other intelligence material that the Republican memo selectively omits. That other information remains highly sensitive, and releasing it would risk burning other sources and methods of intelligence-gathering about Russia."
Notably, the Republicans refused to release the Democratic rebuttal to their memo. In the rare previous instances of releasing a classified Congressional memo, both versions were released simultaneously.
Why Mueller Won’t Indict Donald Trump January 30, 2018 By Taegan Goddard
The Atlantic: “Mueller will not indict Trump for obstruction of justice or for any other crime. Period. Full stop. End of story. Speculations to the contrary are just fantasy.”
“He won’t do it for the good and sufficient reason that the Department of Justice has a long-standing legal opinion that sitting presidents may not be indicted. First issued in 1973 during the Nixon era, the policy was reaffirmed in 2000, during the Clinton era. These rules bind all Department of Justice employees, and Mueller, in the end, is a Department of Justice employee. More to the point, if we know anything about Mueller, we think we know that he follows the rules—all of them. Even the ones that restrict him in ways he would prefer they not. And if he were to choose not to follow the rules, that, in turn, would be a reasonable justification for firing him. So … the special counsel will not indict the president.”
There is no policy forbidding indictment of presidential associates, I trust. And carried out with sufficient vigor, that could well be disastrous for the president.
Quite so. Here’s the whole column.[Click] It’s worth reading to the end; at this point no one’s crystal ball could possibly be clear, but this is reasonable prognostication.
So a President can collude with a foreign nation wanting to do us harm and we can't oust him for that? Gosh, that is the most depressing thought. Congress has no spine at all. Nearly three more years of THIS?!! The midterms had better shake the ground and put a brace on the backs of Congress members. The DNC had better sort itself out fast.
That falls under the rubric of "high crimes and misdemeanors." As I understand it, a sitting president is not subject to criminal prosecution; but after he leaves office he can be prosecuted. Remember that Nixon was pardoned to prevent exactly that. I can understand President Ford's reasoning that it would be best for the country, and do not disagree with it; but I voted against him precisely because of it.
Hmmmm....it occurs to me that the Trump Organization might be at risk under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. It probably is, in fact.
Answer to question on previous thread: No, I don't have a laptop. I have a tablet with a detachable keyboard that I use on trips, but it's not entirely satisfactory for general use. Not to mention that I have never really mastered the art of sitting up in bed.
Treason really ought to make it possible to remove the Traitor in Chief from office. If Congress doesn't do the deed, I think a revolution will erupt in a big way.
Quoted from talkingpointsmemo.com --Alan ================= Reaction to the State of the Union Address January 30, 2018 at 10:35 pm EST By Taegan Goddard
The White House promised that President Trump’s State of the Union address would include bipartisan themes and stress unity. That wasn’t close to the truth.
Trump’s political strategy since the moment he was sworn in has been simple: Keep the base energized with red meat on immigration and trade and keep 80% to 90% of Republicans unified around more traditional policy goals such as tax cuts and conservative judges.
It’s important to recognize that many more Republicans were watching than Democrats. He was not talking to the entire nation. Democrats who watched were most likely deeply offended by much of the speech.
Trump is betting on a crowded and divisive Democratic primary for the 2020 presidential nomination. He would also benefit from multiple third party candidates to split the vote. His path to a second term may not require more than 40% to 45% of the vote.
It wouldn’t be surprising if Trump got a short term bump in approval ratings from this “presidential” speech on the most presidential of stages. As his advisers know, the more he reads from a TelePrompter instead of tweeting from his bed, the better he looks.
But more than anything else of substance, it’s most interesting that the speech followed the same political strategy Trump has used from the beginning. He may never win the majority of support from voters. But it may never matter either.
Or would that be a uniom?
ReplyDelete--Alan (who should have hit the sack ere now)
listener--replies on previous thread
Bill--thanks for the update. Progress is good.
It would. Thanks, Alan! I changed the title to reflect ... reality. 😎
DeleteTHE MEMO
ReplyDeleteHouse panel votes to release secret memo critical of FBI
It hints at a new GOP target: deputy attorney general
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/01/29/schiff-gop-house-panel-vote-release-classified-memo-alleging-improper-use-surveillance-russia-probe/7SevbFZxrTE2YXbQ2QHZhM/story.html?et_rid=632732895&s_campaign=todaysheadlines:newsletter
"People familiar with the underlying application have portrayed the Republican memo as misleading in part because Steele’s information was insufficient to meet the standard for a FISA warrant.
"They said the application drew on other intelligence material that the Republican memo selectively omits. That other information remains highly sensitive, and releasing it would risk burning other sources and methods of intelligence-gathering about Russia."
Notably, the Republicans refused to release the Democratic rebuttal to their memo. In the rare previous instances of releasing a classified Congressional memo, both versions were released simultaneously.
DeleteWhat. a. shock., eh?
Delete“Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!”
This time feels so surreal. I wish we could wake up like Alice in Wonderland and realise it was a bad dream and "They're all a pack of cards!" Heh.
Why Mueller Won’t Indict Donald Trump
ReplyDeleteJanuary 30, 2018 By Taegan Goddard
The Atlantic: “Mueller will not indict Trump for obstruction of justice or for any other crime. Period. Full stop. End of story. Speculations to the contrary are just fantasy.”
“He won’t do it for the good and sufficient reason that the Department of Justice has a long-standing legal opinion that sitting presidents may not be indicted. First issued in 1973 during the Nixon era, the policy was reaffirmed in 2000, during the Clinton era. These rules bind all Department of Justice employees, and Mueller, in the end, is a Department of Justice employee. More to the point, if we know anything about Mueller, we think we know that he follows the rules—all of them. Even the ones that restrict him in ways he would prefer they not. And if he were to choose not to follow the rules, that, in turn, would be a reasonable justification for firing him. So … the special counsel will not indict the president.”
There is no policy forbidding indictment of presidential associates, I trust. And carried out with sufficient vigor, that could well be disastrous for the president.
--Alan
And solid evidence of obstruction of Justice, should it exist, would be grounds for impeachment.
DeleteQuite so. Here’s the whole column.[Click] It’s worth reading to the end; at this point no one’s crystal ball could possibly be clear, but this is reasonable prognostication.
Delete—Alan
Noooooooooooooooooo!!
DeleteSo a President can collude with a foreign nation wanting to do us harm and we can't oust him for that?
Gosh, that is the most depressing thought. Congress has no spine at all. Nearly three more years of THIS?!! The midterms had better shake the ground and put a brace on the backs of Congress members. The DNC had better sort itself out fast.
At least I get to vote for Bernie in November.
But OHHHH MANNNNNN!!!
That falls under the rubric of "high crimes and misdemeanors." As I understand it, a sitting president is not subject to criminal prosecution; but after he leaves office he can be prosecuted. Remember that Nixon was pardoned to prevent exactly that. I can understand President Ford's reasoning that it would be best for the country, and do not disagree with it; but I voted against him precisely because of it.
DeleteAlan
Hmmmm....it occurs to me that the Trump Organization might be at risk under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. It probably is, in fact.
DeleteAlan
Answer to question on previous thread: No, I don't have a laptop. I have a tablet with a detachable keyboard that I use on trips, but it's not entirely satisfactory for general use. Not to mention that I have never really mastered the art of sitting up in bed.
ReplyDeleteIt was worth a shot. 🙂
DeleteTrump sues over property tax bill for Florida golf club[Click]
ReplyDeleteTrump says Florida course worth $50m; appraiser says $19m (and it gets weirder...)
Pro golfing partner says Trump ‘cheats like hell’
—Alan
So the SOTU speech is about to begin, I'm typing and my left thumb develops a twitch. Why am I thinking of Shakespeare?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.rawstory.com/2018/01/trump-russian-tv-host-celebrates-white-house-refuses-enforce-new-sanctions/
ReplyDeleteOh for the love of Mike.
DeleteTreason really ought to make it possible to remove the Traitor in Chief from office.
If Congress doesn't do the deed, I think a revolution will erupt in a big way.
DT Despicable Toad.
ReplyDeleteI am sitting here looking forward to hearing Joe Kennedy's response.
Bernie's response was better.
DeleteI don't recall ever watching or listening to a State of the Union address, and I am not about to start now (especially now).
ReplyDeleteThat sign from the Eureka march was one of my favorites too, listener.
--Alan
Quoted from talkingpointsmemo.com --Alan
ReplyDelete=================
Reaction to the State of the Union Address
January 30, 2018 at 10:35 pm EST By Taegan Goddard
The White House promised that President Trump’s State of the Union address would include bipartisan themes and stress unity. That wasn’t close to the truth.
Trump’s political strategy since the moment he was sworn in has been simple: Keep the base energized with red meat on immigration and trade and keep 80% to 90% of Republicans unified around more traditional policy goals such as tax cuts and conservative judges.
It’s important to recognize that many more Republicans were watching than Democrats. He was not talking to the entire nation. Democrats who watched were most likely deeply offended by much of the speech.
Trump is betting on a crowded and divisive Democratic primary for the 2020 presidential nomination. He would also benefit from multiple third party candidates to split the vote. His path to a second term may not require more than 40% to 45% of the vote.
It wouldn’t be surprising if Trump got a short term bump in approval ratings from this “presidential” speech on the most presidential of stages. As his advisers know, the more he reads from a TelePrompter instead of tweeting from his bed, the better he looks.
But more than anything else of substance, it’s most interesting that the speech followed the same political strategy Trump has used from the beginning. He may never win the majority of support from voters. But it may never matter either.