This TrumpWorld Grab-Bag is Getting Personal

 

You can see the new regime paintjob in the picture above? I see them taking out "Diversity" and "Cooperativeness" and "Compassion"--but do you also see they are taking out "Leadership", "Integrity" and the "Constitution"?  This picture is well and truly worth a thousand words. This Trump Mis-Administration is a case of the baby and the bathwater getting chucked alike into a woodchipper. They are taking out things they don't like, and they don't give a fuck for what is structural or necessary. 

And it really shows. 

I predicted purges in the first Trump Administration--but they hadn't understood the infrastructure preventing them from fuxxoring everything up at the time. That was great--then. They figured it out, now. And now Elon the Crashing Boer the fuck Musk is sending this be-forked email, implying that government workers are "low productivity". And he's all up in the GSA base, nuking all our dudes. 

I'm a civil service person. We go through periods of feast or famine work-wise depending upon demand because of changes in legislation or natural deadlines in assorted procedures that might either produce down-time or overtime, but we do necessary shit. We serve the public. A lot of what we do is customer service--and if you are frustrated by not having prompt service from your government entities--one of the problems is probably not enough of us, not too many of us. 

Could be Nothing, But...

 

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas reportedly hid free yacht trip to Putin's hometown https://t.co/8yf1w7OMJe

— Raw Story (@RawStory) July 10, 2024

I mean, it was 20 years ago. However, it was part of 20 years of corruption and undisclosed gifts on Thomas' part, so even if it doesn't mean something more sinister--how bad does it need to look?

I'm not sure how far AOC filing articles of impeachment against Thomas and Alito will go, or how far a request for the DOJ to appoint a Special Counsel to investigate Thomas's possible tax violations will go, but something has to give.

(This post is a nice place to remind everyone that when 13 years of Justice Thomas's financial disclosure forms were amended about a dozen years ago, it was because he failed to include his wife's income from Hillsdale College and the Heritage Foundation. We've obviously been hearing a lot about the Heritage Foundation lately)

TWGB: TrumpWorld is Definitely Not OK

 

You know, all I wanted to do last night was post a little bit about Rudy Giuliani fixing to sue President Biden, but I fell asleep at the computer because it got so deep in the weeds, and as of today, there was more to the story:

Look, I think it's great that Rudy Giuliani found lawyers to take this case even though he is being sued by some of his other lawyers for not getting paid and can't seem to keep a Georgia-based counselor to save his behind. He's getting sued by Hunter Biden, of course, and by a former employee alleging sexual assault and harassment which is a case involving details that are profoundly stomach-churning. But these guys believe enough in Rudy Giuliani to pursue a case where his allegations are that Joe Biden's crack about Giuliani being a Russian pawn spreading disinfo cost him his reputation and millions of dollars of business--

In a way actually being a source of Russian disinfo, making wild pronouncements about a stolen election with shoe polish running down his face, putting on a presser at a landscaping service, farting COVID into the face of his stolen election co-counsel, losing his license to practice because of his shoddy ethics and being so frequently intoxicated that it's part of the investigation into the attempt of the Trump Team to steal the 2020 election are not the ACTUAL THINGS that screwed Giuliani's reputation? 

Whistleblowers Sometimes Fail

 

Whoops. Gal Luft, the GOP's new fake Hunter Biden "whistleblower," was just indicted by the Justice Department for arms trafficking, violating U.S. sanctions against Iran, making false statements to federal agents, and being an unregistered foreign agent for China.

James Comer… pic.twitter.com/cgwcfPbDnE

— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) July 10, 2023

You ever lose track of your very important witness to something and it turns out they were actually an agent of a foreign government just cutting deals left and right with what you might call hostile government entities? Because that's what seems to have happened with one of the GOP House Oversight Commitee's really big guns. You wouldn't have thought, right? 

Anyway, this guy was influencing TrumpWorld from 2016. 

 Among other things, in the weeks before the 2016 U.S. presidential election, LUFT and a co-conspirator (“CC-1”), who is a Chinese national and worked for a Chinese nongovernmental organization affiliated with a Chinese energy company, created a written “dialogue” between CC-1 and Individual-1, in which LUFT wrote Individual-1’s responses and included information that was favorable to China.  The dialogue was then published in a Chinese newspaper online and sent to, among others, individuals in the United States, including a journalist and professors at multiple U.S. universities.  When LUFT was writing the dialogue, CC-1 told LUFT that “[i]n these articles, we do not want to spill all the beans yet, just enough to let ‘people’ know he [i.e., Individual-1] is in the corridor of power to be.  Just broad stroke policy consideration that leaves plenty of room for interpretation and imagination to be filled in later.”  After the purported “conversations” were published, LUFT told CC-1 that certain information, favorable to China, had been “tucked between the lines.”  Shortly after the 2016 election, LUFT and CC-1 also discussed possible roles Individual-1 might have in the incoming U.S. administration and discussed Individual-1 taking a “silent trip” to China.  LUFT responded that “[w]e are debating about his role in the new admin.  There are all kinds of considerations . . .We should talk ftf [i.e., face-to-face] as there can be a supremely unique opportunity for china.”

The Individual-1 looks to be Jim Woolsey.  He was in the loop for a little bit of fuckery. But I'm not saying I understand how all of those parts fit. I just know when the House GOP's witness is kind of a spy for China this is very not good for them.

And I had thought it was pretty bad when one of their whistleblowers was just dead. 

Anyway in other news, the Trump-appointed US Atty investigating Hunter Biden's tax things says he was as independent as independent could be, which would have been my linchpin story if not for the China agent thing. Which lets you all know how well the GOP Oversight stuff is going right now. 

We've Found Some Weaponization

 

Trump discussed having the IRS and other federal agencies investigate two FBI officials involved in the investigation into his campaign’s ties to Russia, John Kelly says in a sworn statement. ⁦@nytmike⁩ https://t.co/IIhuPpY19B

— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) July 8, 2023

I remember when, during the Obama years, there was an IRS scandal that turned out not to be one at all--someone at the agency noticed there was a whole ton of new 501 (c) 3 and 4 orgs cropping up and wondered if they were all legitimate non-profits and not actually political and gave that paperwork more scrutiny. It turned out, they weren't even targeting specifically conservative organizations but certain keywords, that included "occupy" as well. The IRS apologized and settled with the organizations and processed all their applications. 

Anyway, conservatives acted like this was the worst, top-down oppression against conservative institutions by the Obama Administration in cahoots with the Deep State that anyone ever saw. It wasn't. But I'm pretty sure the legend remains in the minds of the people who always think the Deep State is in cahoots with Democratic presidential administrations.

Anyway, Trump personally wanted to sic the IRS on people he didn't like. I'm ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN the anti-government weaponization folks in the Freedumb Caucus will get right on that, of course? 

Heh. The House weaponization fixation is about using Congressional oversight (and your tax money) to investigate Biden. No amount of money (they seem to believe) should ever investigate the guy who lied about the 2020 election, cause an insurrection attempt, and stole classified documents.  But they will absolutely get on the lil' baggie of blow and Hunter Biden, because absolutely no one in the White House staff, or with the WH press correspondents, or a tourist from anywhere outside of the White House, even has some coke and smile anymore.

I'm just saying sometimes the hypocrisy really hits one in the face. Or it should hit somebody...

Nunes Left Congress for This

 

Anyway, you know the TMTG media thing that Trump launched after he left office and that looked like a pump and dump thing because the project seemed to have little material investment and lots of puffery?  The thing that started being investigated right away because wow, if it looks bad, maybe it is bad?  Anyway, subpoenas were issued to TMTG by the SEC and a grand jury for the SDNY--but Trump and Don, Jr. and a handful of other folks were already off the board. Apparently. It's amazing how that happens. 

So, according to the records, Devin Nunes, who left Congress for this, is still the CEO. It's very likely that the merger stuff between TMTG and Digital World was already in the can when he came aboard, and per Truth social posts, TrumpWorld is denying that Trump is really off the board. It's all a misunderstanding and a witch hunt. Except...

Is it? There's something really weird about a "successful" billionaire always being investigated to the extent Trump is (you know, like Trump University, and the Trump Foundation, and the tax fraud..) and always seeming to be dodging accountability (like, being himself or having associates in contempt of court for not turning over documents, which is still going on--would you believe?) that makes it seem like, maybe, just maybe, this Trump character isn't a great businessman, but a kind of possible...crook?

I'm not saying I know for sure. Maybe he's just extraordinarily unlucky. I mean, imagine the odds that Trump "foes" (also known as public servants who were just doing their jobs) like Jim Comey and Andrew Mccabe were selected for intrusive IRS audits by an agency run by a partisan Trump pick? Then throw in the odds that Michael Cohen fell under their gimlet eye as well (although that one doesn't necessarily feel as remote). 

The astronomical bad luck, am I right? You'd have to have some especial low opinion of how the world works (or at least, how certain people work in it) to see a not-so-hidden hand there, given how obviously bullies actually work in the open, yeah? 

Anyway, Devin Nunes, who left an influential seat in Congress for this, once sued an internet cow among other people who said very bad things about him on the internet, all of which were true. I think his current position is udderly ridiculous, and he should be cheesed off about it. 

Trump Makes Front Page News!

As only the third president to be impeached, today's vote was a significant vote--very historical! That has put him in something of a very special minority. But it should also be noted, if Trump was a little bit put out that he did not make the cover of Time Magazine as the Person of the Year (I think I did detect a whiff of sour grapes) at least he can take some consolation that he will definitely be on all of the front pages now.

You might suppose that, in response to this historic event, Trump might have tried to cover himself with at least a little sangfroid to demonstrate he wasn't even in the least bothered. If you did suppose that, however, I don't know whose act you've been watching all these years, because what he actually did was take the time to, during his campaign rally, suggest that a revered elder statesman was looking up from hell while patting himself on the back for assisting in the late congressman's getting the funeral honors he had earned during a lifetime of service while also taking his digs at the gentleman's widow, a current sitting congresswoman.

In other words, he was true to form. Sad!

If there was any hope he could take heart in the certainty that there is simply no likelihood that the GOP-majority Senate would vote to remove him from office, there is a great possibility that Senate Majority Leader McConnell's mouth has already snatched defeat from the jaws of an easy win. Democratic House Speaker Pelosi has suggested that the articles of impeachment might be delayed in being sent to the Senate to see exactly how the trial would be handled first.

This seems to me to be the right thing to do. The House Judiciary Committee extended an invitation to Trump to participate in the hearing on the constitutional basis for impeachment. (Trump via his lawyer declined.)  He and his supporters have claimed a lack of "due process" which rises to the level of histrionic and ahistorical (Witch trials? Pontius Pilate? when Trump is facing neither hanging nor crucifixion, but only a Senate trial) which have nothing to do with actual process and everything to do with having no actual fact-based defense of what Trump has done. (Trump, by the way, is the last person who should sit comfortably making a due process argument about the death penalty.)  His supporters ignored the facts and whined about process.

Well then, great. Here's a chance to have a stellar, non-sham process in the Senate. Instead of a rubber-stamp acquittal like the approval of his barely-qualified judicial nominations. You know, the kind of swift rush to exonerate a man that would sort of always look a little too rushed? The kind that doesn't even merit the term "trial"? The kind that always leaves a guilty little asterisk next to Trump's name--impeached by the House, but you know.  Mitch McConnell's wife works for Trump. And Lindsey Graham. You know the kind of man he is....

There is also another benefit to delay beyond any pressure it places on the Senate. This presidency is scandal-plagued. The turnover in White House staff, cabinet members, etc. for various reasons is all a part of the failure of leadership that goes to the very top--Trump himself. He said he would pick the very best people--has he? He said he'd drain the swamp--is that so? There will be other whistleblowers.  The story of Trump's financial records is not over. There are still lawsuits and SCOTUS decisions pending. An entire shoe store remains to fall, and I personally think this favor the long game. It is likely--I think, per the odds--Republicans will come to rue siding with this man.

Maybe that's just my opinion. But I say Trump's dealings look bad because they are bad, and it's because he's bad.  And I don't think a hidden good guy sits in that stage-makeup'd and grifting body.

TWGB: It's Getting Real, Now

A top House Democrat issues subpoenas for six years of President Trump's tax returns, giving Treasury secretary, IRS commissioner a May 17 deadline to deliver them. https://t.co/3yPYyBqlw9

— The Associated Press (@AP) May 10, 2019

So, adding to the subpoena issued to Don Jr. (which he could very well try to bail on, thanks to the weird blow-off advice of Uncle Lindsey and his own really dumb failure to still know what trouble looks like), we've now got subpoenas for Trump, Sr.'s tax returns.

And maybe these subpoenas will go nowhere at first--after all, former White House Counsel Don McGahn was subpoenaed to provide documents and testimony, and seems to be hanging in with White House instruction to just say "No" to that (even though, as a former White House employee and a grown man, he doesn't have to let them tell him to do anything.) Maybe that will change though, as it comes out that just after the Mueller report dropped, the White House tried to induce McGahn to go on record saying he effectively wasn't told to obstruct justice, in a way that looks sort of further obstruction of justice-y. And while McGahn isn't going to say it totally did happen out loud where the people can hear, he also doesn't want to say it didn't.

I feel like there are good reasons for that. But the truth might actually be more compelling in the long run because it looks like McGahn actually was told by Trump to do a crime, and didn't, which I guess really counts for something? (This nudge to say Trump is cleared on at least one count of obstruction reminds me ever so much of his pressure on Comey to say that he wasn't under investigation--it is hard to separate whether he has consciousness of guilt or just consciousness of looking bad. Heh--narcissism!)

But maybe there's reason to think the IRS/Treasury tax requests are going to also resolve themselves sooner than later--and one thing to note from my happy little New York appreciation post--once the information from the NY returns are out and about, the justification for holding back the federal returns weakens. The toothpaste doesn't get back in the tube.

Also. House Democrats are exploring a legal basis to add juice to their subpoena power by investigating the seldom utilized power of inherent contempt to make their legal requests more compelling. (And honestly, Jr. should just honor the Senate subpoena after contacting a good lawyer or so because eventually....I think he's just going to have to say something, and doing it as CYA as possible is his best bet.)

In my last post, I noted that public opinion is a factor in impeachment, and one of the things I think should be considered is that so many former US prosecutors have found themselves willing to sign their name to support the evidence for obstruction of justice in Trump's case. These are professionals who are legitimately saying they think, knowing what they know that they could try that one. That is really saying a lot.

Now, the White House and Barr's DOJ are still stalling on releasing the full Mueller report, and we hear that Mueller won't be reporting in person on May 15 after all. This seems to have something to do with the White House preferring he doesn't , which is really amazing for folks who want to pretend the Mueller report exonerated Trump when, oh, for goodness sakes, no. Also, Mueller too, is a grown person whose investigation was ended and doesn't need to keep hanging around DOJ, and if he wasn't at Trump's or Barr's say so, would be able to agree on his own volition without strings I am pretty sure?

I don't know. I'm not at that level. But from where I'm looking, Senator McConnell's claim that what we know of the Mueller report thus far means "Case closed" is like pretending the Super Bowl is over at the half based on who's up in the scoring.

That isn't how this works, at all. That isn't going to be how this works, regardless of what he wants to say.

A NY State of Mind

In a power move or so today, the state of New York did two key things that I am really excited by--the state senate approved a bill to vacate double jeopardy where a person was convicted of federal crimes only to be pardoned by the president, and also resolved to release NY state tax information to the US congress upon request. This comes a couple of days after AG Letitia James filed a lawsuit against the IRS and the Department of Treasury for not complying with legally mandated records requests. 

This all serves as a great reminder that even if GOP Senators, House Members, and Cabinet members want to toady up to the White House, states can still signify, and of the many investigations currently ongoing into President Trump and all his dealings, there are currently NY state cases regarding his taxes and how he used his "charitable" foundation as a slush fund. He doesn't have any leverage regarding the state, whatever he may have over the US DOJ.

I love New York for other reasons--it's a beautiful state! But today reminded me of the importance of state governments and why federalism remains an important part of our republic. 

The Transparent President

One of the (several) conceits of the Trump Administration is that he is the most transparent president ever. I mean, he won't show his taxes, and he tries to keep White House visitor logs secret. He would very much like to crow that he is a very transparent president while not complying with subpoenas and asking his cabinet to do the same. 

So, I guess what you might say is Trump is very transparent....about the things he would prefer you don't see. You can always tell where you stand with Trump by the specific things he would actually directly tell you he prefers to remain hidden. 

And he actually does come right out and say things he would rather you believe at times, like just a bit ago, when he mentioned a thing in the Mueller report about former White House Counsel Don McGahn.

So, Trump is trying to make it very clear that Mueller was NOT fired despite being surrounded by Angry Democrats (of whatever ever-changing number they may happen to be) and he explicitly denies first of all telling McGahn to fire Mueller, because he could have (could he?) done it himself.

Because the actual problem is if he did so 1) McGahn didn't do it, which means it is not true that Trump is always obeyed and 2) If McGahn didn't do it, but was told to, and then was told to pretend he hadn't, we've got a bit of subornation of perjury to talk about.

In other words, Trump is trying to use Twitter to make a kind of legal case for himself and to prop up his glum ego--it is sad to be president and know people steal letters off your desk or pretend they will do things you ask them to, but actually won't because they can wait until your mood is better and hope you forgot.

It's probably not exactly true that Trump is a transparent president, but it is pretty much the truth to say you can see through him. He exposes himself like a series of selfies, or a parted trench coat.

But why particularly focus on Twitter on McGahn, when the thrust of the Barr-created narrative should have been that he did not obstruct, but here he is, Tweeting about one of the more egregious examples of potentially suborning perjury and interfering with the investigation? Eh--transparency! You can't help knowing what he's thinking about! Could he have just not mentioned it in any format? Yes, if he wasn't this boy, right here, asking you to love him.

The downside is we can also get up close and personal with Trump's really dark side, because he doesn't hide it all that well. He really did plan to "lock her up" with respects to Hillary Clinton. In his recent interview with Sean Hannity, he went on about Page and Strzok, Clinton's emails, and continued harping on the never-verified wiretap claim. You can see his state of mind--he wants to either pretend he is being railroaded out of office whether he is subject to impeachment or even if he legitimately loses an election. He wants to be a victim like the pitiable little snowflake he is.

Is it not so unfair that as a public servant, he needs to be held up to any public scrutiny? Is he not the biggest martyr? Pity him and the rigged system that has thwarted him by....making him president, even if he is a know-nothing racist goober.

Anyway, he says he's transparent, but I can see him. I see him alright.  And so can journalists, which is why I guess he really hates the news media. So transparent--in how he prefers not to be seen.

What the Hell Are You Doing? 2: Scholastic Edition

"Grab that record": How Trump’s high school transcript was hidden https://t.co/SeXZBTL2jN

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) March 5, 2019

The important takeaway from this is that Donald Trump sent folks out to make sure his grades and SAT scores and all that did not get out and about just after he made the silly demand to know about President Obama's grades. I would have to believe this is because, in retrospect, it occurred to him that just maybe, his own academic achievements would not stand up to a comparison with Obama's own. Which makes one wonder about the potential projection that made him crack on about Obama's school records anyway.

There's something very specific about a detail that seems very intentionally buried, though--it makes people curious.

I'd have to say Trump's proprietary guarding of his tax returns and the possible lie about whether he's under audit with the IRS are perhaps the same kind of potentially unnecessary guarded behavior that stems from a fear of comparisons more than a cover-up of any truly embarrassing thing. We know from photos that high school Trump was a capable athlete. But there are some open questions about his academic history.


To which I, not a snob, would say, "So what?" I went to a school that my parents could afford and that was one public bus away from my house. I'm not living in fear that people will think I'm a dope because I could have gone to a better school, or because people will know I changed my major a few times (I started in Biology, ended up in English Lit. These are not similar disciplines, which says a lot about my understanding of my interests and capabilities when I started college versus when I graduated.) Of course a person who is 18-20-something years old is going to be a little flexible about what they want to experience from life versus what they want to achieve academically, and their interest and efforts can shift depending upon their circumstances. And not everyone is really cut out to be an intellectual and deal with the theoretical or lab sides of their chosen work--if their passion is business, why not just go and do the work? I'm super-prepared to not deride 20-something Donald Trump from either half-assing his undergrad years or even give him a lot of shit for his several draft deferments. He had those opportunities to do academic things or business things instead of war things, which others of his generation did not have. He lived a life that he seems to prefer to cover up about rather than defend.


And that's the problem. See, if someone like, say, John McCain, knew that he wasn't exactly scholastically gifted, but knew he had other qualities, he'd just rest on his life record and admit that experience and a sense of duty made him who he was. Trump's life record, his business associations, practices, and those of the children he introduced into his business is potentially dodgier than his scholastic one. All are under investigation. And he is willing to delay or impede all of these inquiries. Which only would, in practice, make everyone wonder the more whether the secrecy means there is something worth hiding.


This is very much a "what the hell?" if you suspect Trump hasn't anything dodgy to hide. Why then, any elaborate cover-up attempts? Are bad grades or a poor SAT score even relevant to his current functions as C-in-C? It becomes a little more clear when you consider that malignant narcissism might motivate him, and simply make a requirement for his basic functioning that he only or mostly hears only good things about himself.

It becomes downright troubling when it extends to his sense of accountability regarding his conduct as the US world leader and how he conducts himself under our flag and in our name. What the hell is he doing? Do we even feel sure we know?

TWGB: Accountability in the Age of Shenanigans

This long list represents the first round of letters requesting documents in an attempt to nail down information that has been previously requested, that pertains to already-existing lines of inquiry, and that shouldn't really surprise a damn soul who has been paying attention. This, despite the grumblings of certain members of the GOP, does not represent a "fishing expedition" because the requested information indicates that Nadler and others in the House know very well what they would like to know more about, and this is because all signs point to specific kinds of fuckery having been afoot. Take requesting docs from Sheri Dillon--who stood in front of stacks of file folders and told us that Trump ad a plan to turn his business interests over to his sons (and I don't know about you, but I think he's still deeply interested) and who claimed Trump was under IRS audit, a notion recently contradicted by Michael Cohen's testimony--it makes sense that these lines of inquiry exist.

It's called "accountability", and USA Today has a very nice and comprehensive opinion piece from Jill Lawrence that details why and how we're finally seeing some accountability from Congress in tracking major discrepancies between what Trump himself and the people who surround him have said, and facts pertaining to actual wrongdoing. The broadness of the requests should not be taken to mean that a "spray and pray" approach is being taken, but rather, there is a wide-ranging pattern of obfuscation, withholding, denial, delay, and, well, shenanigans, that require Congressional oversight so that we can get accountability.

One of the things I've noted about the rise of Trump is that those who support him and whom he has relied upon are actually the world's worst people, and attract even more really bad people. Jerome Corsi, birther conspiracist (as was Trump) is on the list. He recently made an apology of sorts for spreading the unfounded theory that Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who was murdered, may have been responsible for the DNC leak, not Russian hackers. This claim has now been pulled from InfoWars.

But you know who hit that Seth Rich claim pretty heavily--Sean Hannity (who either was a client of Michael Cohen or wasn't, depending upon how Hannity feels about attorney/client privilege on any given day). Julian Assange/WikiLeaks promoted that theory, too--and Assange is obviously on the list. Hannity, of course, is a big star at Fox News, whose relationship with Trump is well documented in Jane Mayer's latest at The New Yorker. Assange, of course, has been contradicted regarding the Seth Rich lie by the indictments procured by the Mueller investigation against a dozen Russian intel officials for that crime.

Roger Stone is also on the list, of course. He's in a bit of trouble because he seems to have violated his little old gag order by posting nonsense on Instagram and by having a book excerpt out where people can see which is not at all the sort of things he was supposed to do.  

And we could go on and on. Trump is subject to, as far as we know, 17 investigations, in many of which evidence of wrongdoing by others is already determined, and implications for Trump and his family are already strongly implied. There are people on this list who have already spoken before either the House or Senate intelligence committees and quite probably lied. Documents are being requested here for good reasons, and this is, truly, just the first round.

This is No Way to Run a Country

"I want to serve": Federal workers gathered by the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia to protest the government shutdown and express their fears about how it will hurt them. Furloughed employees will miss their paycheck if the shutdown isn't over by Friday https://t.co/VM3GdseHeh pic.twitter.com/S9l7CjNDyW

— CBS News (@CBSNews) January 9, 2019

The many furloughed federal workers would love to be back at their jobs and earning their pay, but they are left to scramble, sorting out what bills can be paid now, what can be negotiated, what side gigs they can get cash from, and what kind of financing they can swing to tide them over--except for who knows how long? Or how much they will ultimately need to get them over this stupid government shutdown? And as for the employees declared "essential" who are working through this nonsense without pay, some, like the IRS personnel who have been called back to work to process tax season refunds, don't even have the wherewithal to fill their tanks, arrange for daycare for their kids, and get themselves to their jobs. (The header says "defy", which seems pretty much a misstatement. They can't. They have an actual hardship.) They aren't making big bucks. The same goes for food inspection-personnel--they are still providing the essential work, but it's barebones. The TSA is experiencing high sick calls, but again, this isn't deliberate planned work action, this is people having actual physical hardships provided by their lack of finance.

These are just middle class, working class people, being called upon to serve for nothing more than their vested interest in their jobs (pension and benefits) and the pride they take in their careers. And they are hurting. And the jobs they do, often so well you would hardly know how vital they can be to our national security because of all the tragic potentialities they intercept, are strained.

It is a sin that Coast Guard employees are relying on food pantries while serving this country. It is a crisis when our air traffic safety may be at risk because we can't pay these people who keep us safe in the air. It is a crime when our justice system is threatened because our law enforcement resources at the FBI are being squandered through lack of use and money-starving. And it is beyond conscience that a government shutdown, supposedly over a crying need for border security (which is a bullshit crisis by any metric except the elastic inches of the white nationalists' hateful yardstick) now imperils actual national security in the estimation of the men and women who have headed departments related to national security and understand the principal issues involves most intimately.

This is no way--no way at all--for a country to be run, and that is because no person, no person at all, but Donald Trump, has been stupidly burdened with the responsibility of the executive office and all its powers, and the ability to fuck all of them up because he has no concept of their purpose and importance. And yet he could, quite easily, get all these wheels of state back in motion with the merest wave of his hand, freeing Senate Majority Reptile Leader Mitch McConnell to put a clean CR forward without the wall funding or any DACA or asylum shenanigans, just as had been passed before by both houses before Ann Coulter made him feel all funny about doing the right thing, as opposed to trying the alt-right thing.

He could actually show leadership by doing this thing, because it isn't actually a concession to resume the government without getting the "extra" funding for his wall--it's just the right thing to do. He could even frame it as being awfully big of him, giving up the wall funding to end a national crisis like this, and use the lack of wall funding as being on Democrats from that very day forward. The political framing to not see ending the shutdown as an L for him, or even making it about his resolve and heroism and shit, and calling it a "win", completely exist.

And all he has to do is ask himself--did you come here to run a country, or did you come here to run your mouth? Because I don't see what's going on right here, right now as running a country, and he wants to run his mouth about who did what.

How about having responsibility? Is this Trump anything at all? Because this shutdown is basically an abdication--it shows he isn't even trying to be shit, and his nonsense about security is bullshit while his inaction leaves us with so much potential for danger.

His poll numbers are taking a hit during this stand, and I really don't want to help his ass. But his doing the right thing, even if it makes him a little more popular, helps all of us.

Do the right thing, Trump. Just do the right thing. I might even find it in my greasy little heart to celebrate it.

(Or Mitch McConnell could....Nah, fuck him. he doesn't ever do the right thing, ever.)

(And not for nothing, although I know Secret Service are consummate professionals, I really would especially want them paid if they were personally protecting my personal ass. Just saying.)

TWGB: But What Does it Mean?!

George Papadopoulos deleted this tweet (using: Twitter for iPhone). #GeorgePapadopoulos #GeorgePapa19 #deletedtweet #screenshotbot #sshotbot pic.twitter.com/2eIKQixQy8

— Screenshot Bot (@sshotbot) December 29, 2018

There's something mysterious in the air lately, and, welp, I have no idea what's up with any of it. Nope. No freakin' clues. The above linked Tweet from George Papadopoulos regarding Maria Butina seems to pertain to the impression Russian tv is creating the Butina appears to have been "groomed" (in more ways than one) to perform some kind of campaign in the US. It appears to be a denial that this is even the case (and really, is it out of the way to suppose that Russian tv is not--GASP!--totally honest?) but frankly, what does he know?

I'm guessing he assumed the less said the better, in any case, which is a lesson better learned late than never, no?

In other fascinating news from McClatchy, it looks like a story they reported in spring may have firmed up a little, to the extent that Michael Cohen's phone (at least) appears to have been in the vicinity of Prague at the time when the Steele Dossier indicated that he was meeting with Russian officials to arrange a payment to hackers. This story from the dossier was originally met with by Cohen with a hard disavowal and a picture of the outside of his passport for some reason, and he still pretty firmly denies it--but a bit intriguingly:

He's never been, he says (although maybe he had, but it's been a while!) And yet, "#Mueller knows everything!"

Mueller knowing everything sounds good--but what does it mean?! (Stay tuned, I guess.) Sometimes these breadcrumbs we're following in this case seem like they are simply "for the birds". (I mean, honestly, one of the companies engaging in trolling during the 2016 campaign still appears to be trolling, filing a motion that tantalizingly refers to a "nude selfie".  Children, please do not let such sugar plums dance in your heads! It is probably nothing. Much.)

One of the things that does feel like "something" is that Russians appear to have actively promoted Jill Stein during 2016 to leech left-leaning votes away from Hillary Clinton as part of a protest contingent. This was enough to impact the totals for certain key swing states. (Although useless knob Gary Johnson impacted vote totals in my damn state by more apparently without Russian fuckery.) And remember her fascinating fundraising to try and get recounts? Well, it's paying for her legal defense, now. (And her ties to Russia aren't her only problem.) But all in all, the "something" I hope most people take away from this is that in America's two-party dominated system, right now, you have to vote your goals, not your feelings, and that might mean casting a vote for someone you don't love. It strikes me that I don't know if the problem is more about lack of civics or just innumeracy, but it gnaws at me that either deficiency could be so exploitable.

In another interesting "something" --look, I'm just going to post the lede of this Leopold and Cormier story and admit this is messed up and I also don't know what it means, either:

US Treasury Department officials used a Gmail back channel with the Russian government as the Kremlin sought sensitive financial information on its enemies in America and across the globe, according to documents reviewed by BuzzFeed News.

The extraordinary unofficial line of communication arose in the final year of the Obama administration — in the midst of what multiple US intelligence agencies have said was a secret campaign by the Kremlin to interfere in the US election. Russian agents ostensibly trying to track ISIS instead pressed their American counterparts for private financial documents on at least two dozen dissidents, academics, private investigators, and American citizens.

Most startlingly, Russia requested sensitive documents on Dirk, Edward, and Daniel Ziff, billionaire investors who had run afoul of the Kremlin. That request was made weeks before a Russian lawyer showed up at Trump Tower offering top campaign aides “dirt” on Hillary Clinton — including her supposed connection to the Ziff brothers.

And why in the hell would there be any cooperation when the information asked for was this? If there's any transparency, it looks like transparent fuckery!

But nope, I can't fit it all into the big, messy, clearly fucked-rotten story about what happened during the 2016 presidential election. It just looks like one more way among several that a foreign entity wanted to skew the election against Clinton--and in favor of Trump.

Speaking of Witch-Hunts, You Know that IRS Deal?

I followed the IRS scandlet like I don't know what. I was never certain that there was a "there" there. It always seemed to me that certain IRS employees picked up on a trend in non-profit applications, and wanted to goal-tend a little to make sure that dodgy groups set up in ways that solicited donations, weren't actually for-profit ops using their political nature as a disguise. It strikes me as a little bit of a synchronicity that recent calls for the head of John Koskinen, IRS Commissioner, for what honestly looks like a "high crime or misdemeanor to be determined later" coincides with the DOJ clearing of Lois Lerner, who was at the center of questioning largely because she rejected getting questioned by pleading the fifth.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. It is constitutional.

And it might be a little bit true that these politically-leaning organizations aren't simon-pure, and do themselves a piece of politicking.

It may even come about some organizations are grifty enough that GOP congresscritters are bound to take notice--not that there's anything wrong with that. It is constitutional. I think Congress should take a look at whether these PACs are really kosher.

Why wouldn't I think that? (Krugman ties it all together with the simplest connection--the modern conservative movement is a grift.)





Why is the Email Thing a Thing Regarding the "IRS Scandal"?

So, it turns out that the hard drive of Lois Lerner's work computer is reserving its own right to remain silent by having totally failed some time back on 2011, just before Lerner apparently learned of the plan to show greater scrutiny of certain buzzwords used in the names of 503 (b) and (c) orgs.

Now, leaving aside that she doesn't seem to have been the one who authorized the enhanced scrutiny of these groups, and that she reported having a computer failure and requested her emails be recovered right away, that the IRS had recovered her response email threads, and that for the most part, the IRS scrutiny of the various political-ish groups was in practice bipartisan, it sort of looks like the committee is fishing for stuff that might not even be helpful to them. But since all this computer failure occured before any investigation, it doesn't seem like anything was done to block an investigation that wasn't even happening yet.

This cache of emails we're talking about is in the thousands. I've heard about a tactic some big law firms use to stymie a civil case by just flinging all the docs they've got at the plaitiffs to bog them down in research. It seems to me like the GOP folks are asking to get more info than they should reasonably need to use or want. Why would they want to do that to themselves, unless this is more about fault-finding than fact-finding? If they knew what they were looking for, they certainly wouldn't be barking up this particular tree?

Just a thing I wonder about.

Aaaannd: Apparently Issa already knew about this, so?

But what if they believe in witches?

Rep Pete Sessions says D's call #Benghazi cmte "a political witch-hunt. Well, Mr. Speaker, that must mean there is a witch somewhere."
— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) May 8, 2014

Does it?  Witches? Not Wiccans or pagans, or generally troublesome women, but, erm.

There must be witches. 

Which would explain the magical thinking?

I dunno, does Pete Sessions look like a man who believes brooms can fly? I'm sure he thinks all kinds of things can fly. Actually, I think he believes his belief is contagious. Funny old thing, witch hunts. They work whether witches exist or not. They get someone, after all.

I still think there is something weird about Lois Lerner's silence...

Look, I am a deeply cynical person in some ways. That's why my hobby is politics and not, you know, charity and good works. So even though I have a tendency to understand the institutional reasons that the EO unit of IRS overreached with respects to 501(c)4 groups (and yes, I will insist in pointing out that, contra the original IG report, the overreach included progressive groups), I still think there is something weird and scandal-baity about how Lois Lerner has behaved during this whole thing. You know, like someone trying to act normal by tapping "E-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g-i-s-o-k-n-o-t-h-i-n-g-t-o-h-i-d-e-h-e-r-e" in Morse code on a desk with their shoe over and over.

You know, from the planted question at the ABA panel to her taking the Fifth even though I don't even know what she thinks about all this is even "self-incriminating" unless not being a really good department manager has become a crime. Which almost makes me wonder if she's sticking to silence because, uh, it's just better to retire from this one job and shut up (because the Fifth really is a good deal for beating a contempt rap) than admitting her bailiwick was a cluster.

I don't know. I'm not trying to throw her under the bus, I'm just implying she saw the bus coming and lay down. And I am still pretty much side-eying Rep. Issa for not granting her immunity since she's obviously squirrelly, because if he did happen to think she had imput from someone above her, that would probably have been the ticket to getting her to roll. So I either think Issa is incompetent himself and intentionally decided to do something that did not serve the investigation, or he doesn't really think there was any political reason for the targeting, anyway, and just wanted to serve up somebody because he's a rotten example of a human being.

For partisan reasons, I am utterly cool with accepting the latter interpretation.

Is Darrell Issa Out of His Depth?

The reason I ask this is because Rep. Issa's investigation into the overreach by the IRS into the business of various educational and social groups has hit a certain self-created snag:

Issa seems to think investigating any groups at all is a definite problem on one hand. 

But it seems like he doesn't care that progressive groups were targeted more frequently than conservative groups.  He might be able to enlist sympathetic Dems to look into the matter if he acted as though the investigation of liberal groups was a problem just as the investigation of conservative groups was a problem, but this just doesn't seem to be the case in his mind. He is okay with liberal groups being investigated. Memory of ACORN and all that.

But heaven help you if you touch the chinny-chin-chin of a billionaires' boys' club like Crossroads.

Is there some reason he isn't supposed to be treated with skepticism by Democrats who naturally think he might be being a bit partisan, here? I'm finding the logic hard.

Darrell Issa's Having Quite the Week, Huh?

You know, I think there's a persuasive case to be made that whether Rep. Issa is trying to legitimately get to the bottom of a handful of scandals, or is actually just keeping ginned-up controversies alive by fake-investigating them--he kinda sucks at it. I know, he is keeping them alive in the minds of the conservative faithful, but even the patient and forgiving Fox News had to lose patience with the transparent hyping of Benghazi claims that didn't pan out in the real world.

A similar thing should take place regarding over the disappointing display that happened recently  where House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair Darrell Issa was moved to cut the mike of Rep. Elijah Cummings, accusing him of "slander" when, in Cummings' view, he was offering advice. And, much as it matches my obvious vices, I nonetheless think that was probably what he was doing--trying to offer advice. 

Lois Lerner's having taken the fifth is constitutionally valid but inconvenient. It might save all kinds of time to cut to the chase--the likely reason for pleading the fifth is self-protection, so give her all the protection she needs and see what comes out. That's the proffer that was about to be suggested. Now, is it "slander" try and move a hearing along instead of wasting taxpayer dollars and congressmembers' time? It isn't slander to point out that Issa's handling of this particular case has excluded Democrats.  It isn't even slander to suppose that Issa is not following the most direct procedure for getting at the truth. Yes, he's dragging it out for the benefit of the type of people who think there's a "there" there. 

But it's just too damn obvious to the Democratic side. I mean, cutting the mic and hollering "slander"? Especially over the IRS official who alerted the public's attention to the targeting by the tax-exempt division of IRS of political groups, and has now decided to stop talking? Is Issa the one who really doesn't want this over with?  That shouldn't sit well with the GOP side either: if someone allows that there might have been something "off" about the IRS procedure--why not do whatever was necessary without being punitive (like charging Lerner with contempt) to get at the truth?  It just all looks like ham-fisted theater. He's not doing the GOP any favors by coming up empty again and again, either.