Giuliani, True Believer

 

Rudy says Sean Hannity, John Solomon, Bill Barr and Mike Pompeo betrayed Trump by suppressing and helping to cover up the Hunter laptop story in 2019-2020 when he brought it to them. pic.twitter.com/VHEZSdPlCk

— Ron Filipkowski 🇺🇦 (@RonFilipkowski) December 13, 2022

You know, I am cynical. But take the "two watches" thing: I think there could be something badly wrong with Giuliani, and I'm not actually just riffing off of his claims that other people are actually old/sick/nuts/dying.  None of the above people named: Hannity, Solomon, Barr, or Pompeo, were actively hostile to pitching anti-Biden disinfo. From the first impeachment, we know very well that all the above-named were on board with the search for Biden dirt.

John Solomon, who was featured on Hannity with his fabulist takes, was found by The Hill to be pushing poorly sourced and misleading bullshit--that mostly came from Rudy Giuliani. For their part, Barr admitting he was accepting information from Giuliani, and Mike Pompeo disagreed with the narrative that Hunter Biden's laptop was a Russian disinfo op. 

They weren't disagreeable to what Giuliani was pushing out, necessarily. But take where Barr ended up on that score: he wasn't going to go out of his way to endorse a dodgy product. I think all of these Trump supporters realized there has to be a morning after and there's a little thread of credibility you need to keep for yourself. And maybe they didn't like what they were smelling from Giuliani. 

And also, maybe Hunter Biden just sues your whole ass off if you are wrong. 

Giuliani is all in. Other people might want to have lives after Trump. Giuliani is this guy. Some gimmick is getting Trump back in office, and maybe, maybe, Giuliani won't even be an unpaid lawyer for Trump anymore and won't have to go without a pardon in his pocket. 

A guy can dream, right? AG Giuliani in Trump's second term. Loyalty paid off. (And it will never happen.) 

And needless to say, if Kevin McCarthy wants to go all in on hearings for the intelligence community professionals who signed a letter saying they didn't think the laptop story sounded kosher--he might just be airing why people who know what they are talking about think TrumpWorld is horrific for national security by politicizing every fucking thing without weighing actual national interest and truth concerns. 

Blowback Isn't Always Immediate

 

Breaking News: The Justice Dept. charged a member of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard on Wednesday for plotting to kill John Bolton, a Trump-era national security adviser. Prosecutors said the man had offered $300,000 to hire someone to kill Bolton. https://t.co/oHbuJ5ocXG

— The New York Times (@nytimes) August 10, 2022

Amidst Trump's Mar-a-Lago search warrant drama and the recent serving of several PA legislators over the false electors' scheme, the story of an assassination plot against John Bolton as a late retaliation over the slaying of General Suleimani surfaces for me as an example of something that US foreign/military policy sometimes fails at: theory of mind. The idea that our allies and enemies alike have the agency and will to respond in proportion and according to their own schedule is something that the "deciders" sometimes miss--almost as if they believe they are playing a game where the "other side" consists of NPC's.

That there would be blowback of some kind should have been obvious. That former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is also a possible target of Iran's Revolutionary Guard would not shock me. And naturally, none of this helps the attempt to renew the JCPOA that the Trump Administration fecklessly scuttled. 

The decision to escalate tensions with Iran was a Trump Administration fuckup we will be dealing with for some time. It wasn't necessary--it was ideological, and yes, Bolton and Pompeo were obvious anti-Iran antagonists and I nonetheless do not endorse their mortal peril because of the decision that ultimately came down to a green and under-prepared CinC who may have thought the exercise was about dick-measuring and clout.

It is simply as natural as night following the day--actions do have consequences. It's not that the IRG's assassination plot is acceptable--no! But it isn't unexpected when you appreciate the other side has a side.  

Denial and Co-Dependency in Afghanistan

 

(Graphic via Financial Times.) 

I don't really want to get too deep into this idea, but I think one of the biggest problems with the coverage of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan is one of denial: I just don't think that the media was prepared to deal with the war ending, and can't seem to shift off the idea that somehow, President Biden must be responsible for the whole of what is going on right now, even if the facts are staring them in the face. The reporting on the war is that it has been rife with mistakes that have prolonged the war, enabled corruption, and created an Afghan military that was dependent on US air power and materiel support backstopping them before Biden was elected.  And yet?

It feels like there is an unwillingness to see the evacuation efforts as a success because it means the war wasn't. As if this final, visual, physical evidence of the failure is the worst damage to the illusions some people wanted to manifest. As long as we were there still, maybe, somehow--? The effort would pay off. But take a look at the graphic I posted above--by the time the US got going, it was time to go. 

Critics of the Biden administration can talk about whether dealing with the Taliban now strikes them as abhorrent (it's actually necessary because who else is there?), but where have they been? It's true we only have one president at a time, but it's bizarre to forget the previous ones ever existed. The previous administration cut out the Afghan government we were supporting in order to deal with the Taliban because they knew what was coming. They very likely enabled the lightning speed of the fall. And were heedless of internal criticism. 

But who was it we were cutting out? And weren't the deals that resulted in the Afghan military folding set in motion way back in 2020 when the Trump deal with the Taliban was made, before Biden started the pullout? Because, while Trump can now say he would have gone back on his word (and his withdrawal from the JCPOA confirms that he cares little for the value of the US's word) we know what he said about what Biden should do, until he had the opportunity to be a backbiter. (I think the "ruse" notion is not actually so unlikely, as that even as early as just post-impeachment, Trump, contra his claims that he won the election, knew he wouldn't win and and legitimately wanted to set up Biden for a shitty transition. But in the off chance Trump won or one of his ugly little challenges kept him in office, yeah, he'd feel empowered to renege on any damn thing.) 

So there's a lot of denial. People who don't want to acknowledge their dirty hands or the questions they left unasked, or officials who want to fix their poor records on this subject. And of course, people got rich on the contract opportunities in nation-building, whether it went well or not. (Erik Prince is still making bank on human tragedy because of course.) 

So when breath is given to even Hank Kissinger's vegetable opinion--I only have one question: How is he still alive? Why are we still giving voice to horrorshow people who can only give us cynical ways to be wronger and more morally tainted to accomplish dubious goals? 

Our foreign policy house is rife with abuse and dysfunction. Our media still herald our bad old father figures because they gave us monstrous examples to learn from. We can do better. We can learn from failure and the gift of bad optics. We can do better by nations without our freedoms and resources by being the example we mean to set. 

Biden is breaking a terrible cycle, and his administration is, in the evacuation, demonstrating the great logistical strength and discipline that can be accomplished when people understand their clear mission. The uncertainty evidenced by things like not knowing just how many US citizens there were to be evacuated, who needs to be evacuated, etc. also are a part of denial.  A delayed preparation for an inevitable outcome, one so seemingly far off in some minds that even high school students (even in the time of COVID-19) thought to visit the war-torn country regardless of the international news. 

I don't know the fix for any of this. I can only recommend people surface from their ideals and drink of the realities, whether they taste great or are less filling or whatever. And then re-evaluate accordingly. 

Failure Has Many Fathers

 

Taliban Commander Who Led Attack on Afghan City Was Released From Prison Last Year, Officials Say - WSJ https://t.co/4qDJdyTyYc

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) August 16, 2021

The co-founder of the Taliban was captured under Obama and was released under Trump, and is now going to be the new leader of Afghanistan. Somehow, this is Biden's fault, because he inherited a withdrawal plan from Trump that was supported by the former guy until it looked bad, because that's how Trump rolls. 

But the problem was not just settling Al-Qaeda business and departing in Bush's first term, which always seemed like it should have been possible, but I think strategically, they fucked up Afghanistan in Bushworld because they really wanted to take a poke at Iraq. And if Afghanistan was wrapped up, the Iraq WMD crisis wouldn't have seemed as immediate.

 Leaving Obama to try and wind down Iraq according to the Bush-signed SOFA. Which wasn't leaving him with a great bunch of choices. Obama, to his credit, never tried to leave a mess in Syria--except of course, ISIS happened. 

And you know what Trump did with regards to our attempts to unfuck that. I'm not trying to place a partisan frame on what had happened, of course, just trying to smash the stupid lies Republicans want to tell about what they've been doing the last two decades. 

 (Just like the economy, re: unemployment and the debt, GOP does the damage, Democrats clean up.)

Mike (Klepto) Pompeo doesn't walk away from it. (Even if he'd rather be obnoxious about CRT and other stuff right now.)  The Bush Administration certainly shouldn't. They initiated the lie that kept us there--that we could fix it. That women and children depended on us. 

We were guilted into forever war. Biden is doing the honest thing. The buck is stopping with him. So for many lazy pundits, that means he gets the onus of failure? Pshh. I am not a goldfish. and can remember years of effort. Media pundits can and should do the same. 

This TrumpWorld Grab-Bag Hates Disco

 

It's always amazing to me that when I try to do an omnibus post of TrumpWorld news, there's still some crumbs left behind. For example, when I posted my latest regarding the Barr memo and the McGahn testimony stuff (of which, I guess there will be more to come) I didn't include the funny old news that former Ambassador to the EU, Gordon Sondland, is suing former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and the US Government for his legal fees. I guess it's because I wanted to focus on the Russian 2016 matter (the impeachment that wasn't, since Barr snaffled the Mueller Report) and this was so very late 2019 and early 2020. But of course, it's meaningful--why is Sondland important?

It's because he threw Giuliani under the bus and copped to how Trump directed Ukraine policy to be run through Rudy Giuliani of course. That is very significant, what with the current legal cloud Trump's former (I guess?) pro bono lawyer is under (which has been growing!). 

So here's the deal--were Sondland's legal fees supposed to be covered by the State Department by law, or was there an agreement? And what kind of agreement was it, and did it get reneged because Sondland said the wrong thing? 

I think that's a hell of a multipart question, right? So, I think some answers might be suggested if this shit gets settled RIGHT AWAY. And that's because there are reasons some folks might not want this one to drag out, because Mr. Sondland said everything that would keep him from being caught perjuring himself during the impeachment hearing, but he didn't say everything he possibly knew. (That's my completely unprofessional opinion, so, FWIW). Also Mike Pompeo wants very badly to be running for president and used his office to help him set up, so he isn't about to to let that get fucked up. And you know, covering up how much fuckery was involved in Trump's 2020 campaign (where he still lost the election, by the way) is practically a "personal favor" to so many people. So really, what's $1.8 million? It's petty cash for this banana stand and how Trump would do it, TBH. 

I guess some questions might get answered if this drags out, too (and in the Giuliani matter, the discovery is really like, in the iClouds and whatnot), so. Happy findings!

Here's the funny old thing--back when Giuliani seemed to be a patsy for laundering Russian disinfo for the 2020 election which is still is ongoing wherever election fraud narratives are sold? There's reason to believe TrumpWorld knew exactly what they were doing and didn't give a shit, because there was money involved.  Sort of like how they don't give a shit about the Jan. 6 insurrection attempt--they would not like to offend the sources of their patronage. No wonder McConnell thinks putting the kibosh on investigations is a really personal favor. 

But this is TrumpWorld doings that basically still benefit...Trump. The guy whose business practices are under investigation because...like, duh? Who might not even be a viable candidate come 2024 but is still being treated like the leader of a party that simply has no vision. 

Because if they bothered to look, who knows what they would discover? 

Except When It Isn't a Joke

 

Sec. of State Pompeo outright denies the election results: ‘There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration’ pic.twitter.com/ZWlBTxWjkh

— NowThis (@nowthisnews) November 10, 2020

The thing of it is, the joke isn't that he said there would be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration as a joke. The thing is--the joke is on people who want to take it as a joke. Because all the shuffling around at the Pentagon, the planning for next year's budget, the lawsuits and denial coming from the Trump campaign/White House team (apparently, Kayleigh McEnany has been pulled from White House spox to campaign spox the way a hockey team pulls its goalie in the clutch?) continue in defiance of reality could certainly have one fooled.

If the US is supposed to be the champion of democracy, then our free and fair elections are not ever a punch line. While Sec. Pompeo may be unable to see the hypocrisy of lecturing to other nations regarding their process, while deriding our own (which was judged to be perfectly fine by international observers), he is sending a terrible message. When our leadership implies that they will do whatever they like and simply call it "democracy", they give a defense to the enemies of democracy around the world and give the finger to those who see the US as a positive example to follow. 

Had Pompeo simply made a joke at the expense of Trump's continued defiance in the face of his loss, the sarcasm would not be lost on me. But those surrounding Trump have fallen into such a fell lockstep that people need a clear message that this is certainly not normal, not American. We don't need funny people, we need brave ones who tell the damn truth.

But like I have said before--these are evil clowns. Their pranks are meant to hurt.

Mike Pompeo is Racist or Dumb or Both.

The @NYTimes’s 1619 Project wants you to believe our country was founded for human bondage. What a dark vision of America’s birth. What a disturbed reading of history. What a slander on our great people. pic.twitter.com/s24rA3C3m8

— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) July 16, 2020

I think that there is certainly substance in the idea that the US was founded on the concept of certain unalienable rights, but if we're going to maintain that it's the government's job to protect those rights, it's actually awfully hard to square the ideas of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" with the privations of bondage slavery, which is the actual point of the 1619 Project. The revolution that liberated the colonies didn't liberate enslaved people. The ideals the nation was based on weren't extended to everyone. And Pompeo considers some human rights more worthy of defense than others.

Like private property rights, which is kind of problematic. And religious freedom. It's not funny that those two are particularly favored, or that certain others he considers to be "diluting" those primary rights are not by him specifically enumerated. I think if the United States is capable of noting that human trafficking is a terrible crime in the present moment, and at odds with out highest ideals, then it should be no great hurdle to acknowledge that human beings were sold here and owned here and it was at odds with our highest ideals, and we as a nation didn't live up to them for a good long while, nor have we fully dealt with what proves to be an ongoing struggle for the law to do what it should: protect everyone's unalienable rights.

Where is the slander? Slavery was a fact of life in the early days of this country. It was such a part of our economic beginnings that every schoolchild has been shown, matter-of-factly, a chart showing the "triangular trade" to this hemisphere which included human bodies as a negotiable good. In housing, in income, in benefits, in criminal and social justice, there are still racial disparities that serve as a legacy of this factual history. Not wanting these things to be true isn't erased by denying that history, but by working to fix it in the here and now.

And when he says "our great people", what does he mean by "our"? Who does that include--or exclude?

Pompeo has spoken volumes, but he has, I'm afraid, spoken more to his own ignorance, than to any other purpose.

The Pompeo Effect

The State Department watchdog that Trump fired on Friday has since been told that he is physically barred from returning to the State Department even to collect his belongings.

If Pompeo and Trump have nothing to hide, why take this extreme measure?https://t.co/2IgJRaR3HJ

— Citizens for Ethics (@CREWcrew) May 19, 2020

What's funny is, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is supposed to have requested that the IG investigating him be fired for "undermining the State Department" and claimed he did not know that he was being investigated. But we have moved on from Pompeo and his wife were using his office and personnel for things like errands and dog-walking, to the more troubling news that Pompeo certainly knew the IG had questions for him about a Saudi arms deal, to finding out that Pompeo also was having many fancy parties on the taxpayers' dime for what looks like building a contact base for his future political parachute, not anything to do with diplomacy.

And aaaalllll of this came to light in just days. I think the "Streisand Effect" should have a new name, huh? Also, why do I get the sneaky suspicion based on the way the IG has been locked out of his office that there is more information to come?

Oh yeah. Because in TrumpWorld, if it looks bad, it is bad. That's why.

A Virulent "Hoax"

Trump calls coronavirus criticism Democrats' 'new hoax' and links it to immigration https://t.co/Q2JfVQtklA

— The Guardian (@guardian) February 29, 2020

"Hoax" seems to be Trump's magic word for dismissing any news he doesn't particularly care for. The story about Russian assistance to his 2016 campaign? He calls it a hoax--but it certainly isn't. The impeachment over his abuse of office in holding military aid over Ukraine's head to extort an investigation into Hunter Biden? He calls it a hoax, but the details of the extortion plot are quite clear when you eliminate his apologists' obfuscations. And now that the stock market, what Trump believes to be a key indicator of his strong economy (it isn't) is being affected by the spread of the COVID-19 outbreak, and cases here in the US are documented with some accounting of Trump Administration cock-ups, Trump and his pitiable lickspittles like Mulvaney and Pompeo are comfortable suggesting that this, too, verifiable as many details may be--is a hoax. The virus only exists to fuck with Trump's re-election plans. Pay it no mind.

Of course, if it was a "hoax", that wouldn't entirely explain why, consideration of the coronavirus enters into postponing a summit with Asian leaders. That much is real. But I guess, the hoax part is supposed to be the bit where a whistleblower was removed for pointing out that infectious disease protocols were not observed when dozens of Health and Human Services workers met with Wuhan evacuees, who were not tested, and these personnel afterwards just....went about their business. We aren't supposed to note that the Administration hobbled our pandemic readiness, or that crisis management after the fact is a poor substitute for preparedness when a crisis does hit.

Look, It's Mr. Christian Leadership 2

An NPR reporter was notified that she was being removed from the press pool covering an upcoming trip by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

The sudden change came just a few days after Pompeo responded angrily to an interviewer from the public radio outlet. https://t.co/rDoOZTkCqD

— CNN (@CNN) January 28, 2020

To follow up on the previous post about Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's dust-up with NPR reporter Mary Louise Kelly, Pompeo made a point of responding in a way that was, um, weird:

Quite the statement from the nation's top diplomat: Sec Pompeo responds to @NPR, saying @NPRKelly lied and... insinuating she misidentified Ukraine on that map. "This is another example of how unhinged the media has become in its quest to hurt Pres Trump and this administration." pic.twitter.com/9xdZWZs34o

— Conor Finnegan (@cjf39) January 25, 2020

Belarus, I'd consider. Bulgaria, I'd consider. Mary Louise Kelly is, no way, no how, mistaking Ukraine for Bangladesh. I can just about imagine the nerve of arguing about whether the statements he made were OTR or not, but it should be noted that NPR is standing by their reporter. This additional nonsense where a different NPR correspondent was removed from Pompeo's press pool seems...let's face it, like some pettiness. Although Susan Glasser certainly has a great take--he's trolling the media because it's the kind of brash arrogance his boss, Trump loves. I like her take; she wrote a really great profile on Mike Pompeo that has an absolutely immortal line in it:

The former official said that, in private, to, Pompeo is "among the most sycophantic and obsequious people around Trump." Even more bluntly, a former American ambassador told me, "He's like a heat-seeking missile for Trump's ass."

It's not a great look, but as Trump may be casting about for scapegoats amidst the ongoing impeachment trial, maybe performing a little public loyalty test is just the sort of price Pompeo feels he has to pay for whatever he considers his higher work. Although I do have my questions about what, exactly, that is. His faith-based media briefing last year was another occasion in which he barred certain media. I think he is under the mistaken impression that it is possible to play to only certain audiences in this day and age, without other people also seeing what he is about, and having an opinion about it.

It is a very curious blind-spot for a public servant to have. Something something, argue, something something, ink by the barrel.

Take Her Out

LISTEN: Recording appears to capture Pres. Trump at private dinner saying he wants Ukraine ambassador fired. https://t.co/9jqfYz99pR

— ABC News (@ABC) January 25, 2020

This seems even more disturbing after the news that the Ambassador was possibly surveilled by some party (possibly affiliated with Trump, the brand, the presidency, and the ongoing political campaign thereof) while doing her job in Ukraine, because "take her out" has more than one meaning.

Obviously, as with the firing of, say, FBI Director Jim Comey, Trump has the right to fire some personnel at his pleasure. Except that he seems to be announcing he wants her gone in a way that implies more than just firing. And he seems to not want to do this through ordinary procedures. You combine this with the language from the "perfect phone call" that she is "about to go through some things" and it starts seeming like a horror movie. The issue of Yovanovitch's service in Ukraine then isn't about whether the president has a right to remove someone from their position--he does! But why he seems to be responding to personnel requests from some rando donor at an event that he now claims he didn't even know is a really good question, especially when that person has been indicted for. among other things, working on behalf of one or more Ukrainian officials to get the Ambassador fired. And also slopping lots of money into Republican campaigns.

There are a lot of problematic takeaways here. Is Trump unduly influenced by the donor pool of folks around him during his weekend stayaways golfing and hobnobbing and whatnot, because he really is the worst case scenario of opsec fail and emoluments clause-flouting.

But for the people who just got super-offended that it was implied they were scared of what Trump might do if they voted against him--here's a word: Mobster. Trump talks like a mobster. Maybe he did, unbeknownst to you all, say something to a rando donor-type guy along the lines of "heads on a pike". Because the kind of guy who brags about whether a terrorist he put a hit on was crying even if Trump didn't have virtual eyes on, or who brags about pussy-grabbing, or who makes improbable stories up during his campaign rallies about big men who never cried before etc. and the military being out of ammunition before he came along, and other improbable and self-aggrandizing bullshit, always tries to make himself sound like he toughest of guys. During Celebrity Apprentice--he said "You're fired." During this video, he says "Take her out!" That sounds more suggestive than wanting a firing. Intentionally?

And his stated reasons have to do with thinking she didn't like him enough. Like, that she didn't hang his official portrait in her office soon enough. What kind of crap is that?

This video came out and cast a weird light (albeit not one no one realized was likely) on how this president operates that the senators deliberating Trump's removal should well consider. They should not be under the mistaken notion that this is a one-off. His level of access to people like Parnas and Furman and the likelihood of additional video or audio recordings of problematic dialogs are very high.

All the more reason to deliberate after a long dive into Trump's associations, with witnesses and docs. Because things exactly like this are out there. This is just a sample.

Also, this is the exact reason that Pompeo needs to answer for his lack of support for an Ambassador who went through this situation. He clearly did not show support for this Ambassador.

Look, It's Mr. Christian Leadership

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo abruptly cut off an interview with NPR today. He shouted his displeasure at being questioned about Ukraine, used repeated expletives, according to NPR's @NPRKelly, and asked, "Do you think Americans care about Ukraine?" https://t.co/dRZMxM5Foa

— NPR Politics (@nprpolitics) January 25, 2020

While reading about Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's recent blow-up, I couldn't help but think about the time not so long ago that he touted his "Christian leadership" on the official government webpage for his agency. Is bullying a reporter over a tough interview with profanities and questioning her intelligence how one shows Christian leadership? For that matter, wouldn't leadership of any kind whatsoever mean showing respect and support for one's personnel as well as having a broad understanding of the United States' mission in various countries and how that mission is impacted by our efforts, not one based on the political or geographical understanding of regular folks?

Regardless of whether most Americans or any Americans care about Ukraine, his intemperate outburst toward this reporter demonstrates a very poor face that he will be taking with him when he visits that country in the near-future.

I am not saying that I would be watching out for this trip to be rescheduled again, but these things do happen in this administration. But I would also imagine that such a visit, should it go on, might be very awkward. Maybe not terribly diplomatic.

It Was Against the Law

Breaking: GAO concludes that “OMB withheld the funds from obligation for an unauthorized reason in violation of the ICA.1 See 2 U.S.C. § 684. We also question actions regarding funds appropriated to the Department of State (State) for security assistance to Ukraine.” pic.twitter.com/CdUWpFK8kd

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) January 16, 2020

Oh, would you look at that. Apparently, there was a law broken.

In other news. there has been an announcement that an investigation has been opened--into the surveillance of Ambassador Yovanovitch. This is actually showing more concern for the safety of US State Department personnel than I believe Pompeo has shown regarding this matter.

And the day is still young.

UPDATE: Very interesting:

FBI investigators went to the home and the business of Robert Hyde on Thursday. The agents were seen by CNN and confirmed by a law enforcement official. They were at the home early Thursday morning in Weatogue, CT before going to Hyde’s business in Avon, CT.

— Shimon Prokupecz (@ShimonPro) January 16, 2020

UPDATE: Apparently, Hyde had quite a lot of fire power when a visit was paid to his home last year. His personal history--it is not great.

Some Kind of Imminent Threat, They Say

“There is no doubt that there were a series of imminent attacks that were being by plotted by Soleimani. We don’t know precisely when and we don’t know precisely where but this was real” pic.twitter.com/zu3lZ0IxYp

— Acyn Torabi (@Acyn) January 10, 2020

Sure you do! It apparently now means when you don't know exactly where or when an attack will take place but soon. Soon-ish. Really.

Now, it's possible that VP Mike Pence is having a little trouble with the concept of imminent:

Pence begins Trump's rally in Toledo by giving up the game about Soleimani strike: "When 1 American life was lost at the hands of Iranian-backed militias just a few short weeks ago, POTUS launched the first airstrikes against them in 10 years." (So long "imminent threat.") pic.twitter.com/a1E2IzVpyh

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 10, 2020

(Nope--retaliation would not be imminent because it's a thing that happened before. Someone needs to sit Mikey down and tell him to at least get the story half-right if he's going to start talking.)

But Trump knows very well what was going to imminently happen. Soleimani was going to blow up the embassy--but that was an "anti-Benghazi" because...just nope.

⁦@SenMarkey⁩ just said on @TheLastWord that during the briefing the Senate received about the reason for the Trump-ordered attack that killed Soleimani, there was NO MENTION of a plan to blow up our embassy. Trump’s lies are never ending. https://t.co/ynkWv0sGkX

— Glenn Kirschner (@glennkirschner2) January 10, 2020

Someone must have drawn a diagram for Trump in Sharpie, because he has been consistent with that--today, anyway. (His validation for the embassy story is the embassy protest of 12/31, though, which still sounds a bit like "retaliation" to me.)

The story just isn't straight. I guess Sen. Lee is going to try and walk this back a bit, but it sounds like the Trump Administration treated briefing Congress about the Iran situation a little contemptuously? (Is contempt of Congress a thing now? Shouldn't it be? Where have we heard that before? Is it a pattern we should be concerned about?)

In the NPR interview, Lee also disclosed that at one point in the briefing, an official “discouraged us from even having a debate on the Senate floor” about whether Congress should pass new measures constraining Trump’s authority to launch future military actions without authorization.

“That might somehow embolden the Iranian regime in future attacks against the United States,” Lee said, characterizing the argument the official made.

"Embolden the enemy"? I feel like we've been to this rodeo before, folks. Another thing that emboldens the enemy is thinking it's all inevitable anyway so what have they got to lose--just go for broke. You can argue any old shit; but we're either a democracy or not, even if pinheads like Sarah Huckabee Sanders are a little fuzzy on who is supposed to authorize war per the Constitution.

The more I hear "Shut up and trust us" the more I don't trust them and don't want to shut up.

Not What They Expected

Historic scene. After hearing concludes, the room erupts in applause for Ambassador Yovanovich’s courage as Republicans complain. pic.twitter.com/tYxTvb92RY

— Jesse Lee (@JesseCharlesLee) November 15, 2019

I am pretty sure that the GOP House members did not expect this applause for Marie Yovanovitch because they are too deep in their defense of Trump and demonization of the "Deep State" to realize that what they are calling the Deep State is just career people with a deep sense of mission to serve the United States. This came through in her testimony.

I think an important takeaway though, is this:

“We see the potential in Ukraine. Russia, by contrast, sees the risk,” she said. “Ukraine is a battleground for great power competition, with a hot war for the control of territory and a hybrid war to control Ukraine’s leadership.”

The potential benefit to Russia is two-fold, she explained. Withholding security assistance, she said, painted a picture to Moscow that the U.S. may not be the staunch ally of Russia’s vulnerable neighbor it has signaled it would be. And at the same time, she said, allowing corruption to fester in Ukraine — including empowering officials there to get the White House to remove an ambassador (as happened with her) — also makes the nation vulnerable to Russian influence.

“Corruption is also a security issue, because corrupt officials are vulnerable to Moscow. In short, it is in America’s national security interest to help Ukraine transform into a country where the rule of law governs and corruption is held in check,” she said, before directly fingering Vladimir Putin as a beneficiary of the administration’s actions in Ukraine.

Whether wittingly or unwittingly, the kind of adventurism Sondland, Giuliani, etc. have participated in are contrary to what should be US interests, and serve private interests, whether Trump's (in getting election assistance) or anyone else's (using the US State Department to finagle things for Ukrainian and Russian oligarchs over the expressed anti-corruption goals of our country and Ukraine's new government). The simple "text" or the scandal is bribery and extortion. The subtext is whether these people, acting corruptly, are even trying to pursue legitimate goals.

The former Ambassador was fired, it appears, because she was doing her job too well for the liking of some people. Trump and Pompeo are doing their jobs too poorly for mine.

TWGB: The More Things Change, The More Trump Is the Same

Wow, Donald Trump just got booed out of the building, into his limo, onto Air Force One, and back into the White House residence.

Even the majority bro crowd at #UFC244 hates this guy’s guts.pic.twitter.com/ohI7Cs7opS

— TrumpsTaxes (@TrumpsTaxes) November 3, 2019

Was Trump supposed to not get booed at when he went to MSG for a night of UFC action? Like, did he expect something different from what he experienced at game 5 of the World Series because he was nestled in the bosom of his hometown (of which he no longer considers himself a resident) instead of that ballpark frequented by employees of the Deep State?

Maybe the president doesn't need to take it so personally. Everyone gets booed sometimes. Maybe people just go to sporting events to not think about politics, and feel like Trump is a polarizing presence. Me, I boo Trump for real from the privacy of my home, because unlike normal people I'm writing a TrumpWorld Grab-bag as once again, the news continues to make it pretty damn clear his whole presidency is snake shoes and fish tits.

Like, let's just take the Attorney General and the Secretary of State I mentioned in my last post as a kind of messed-up example of what's up with TrumpWorld. You've got the guy running the US State Department, Mike Pompeo, a department ostensibly about foreign policy, international relations, that kind of thing, with a weird kvetch about a Ukrainian conspiracy theory and a propensity for spending time in Kansas. I mean, when he isn't confusing folks in Italy (as has Bill Barr) or wherever else with his trying to personally track down the mysteries of what happened in 2016. It's very weird that he thinks his job is alienating allies and proving Trump right about debunked things, whilst some part of him clearly wants to click his heels and murmur "There's no place like home." And we also have Barr, who ostensibly runs a Department of Justice, who seems to want to overturn the results of numerous investigations into the Russian hack of the DNC to get a result more favorable to one person--President Trump. As if he was not an officer of the law, but a defense lawyer for Trump.

"Time is out of joint, o cursed spite," but I was ne'er born to set this right, myself--only to serve as your humble reporter. Today's impeachment inquiry has a lot to do with Ukraine, in fact, it has a lot to do with what Trump tried to do and how White House lawyers tried to cover for Trump. It is important to know, however, that Trump has a very odd idea about Ukraine--and appears to loathe the country:

“They are horrible, corrupt people,” Trump told them.

So far, a dozen witnesses have testified before House lawmakers since the closed-door impeachment inquiry began a month ago. One theme that runs through almost all of their accounts is Trump’s unyielding loathing of Ukraine, which dates to his earliest days in the White House.

“We could never quite understand it,” a former senior White House official said of Trump’s view of the former Soviet republic, also saying that much of it stemmed from the president’s embrace of conspiracy theories. “There were accusations that they had somehow worked with the Clinton campaign. There were accusations they’d hurt him. He just hated Ukraine.”

But if you want to get at the genesis of this loathing--you have to go back to 2016. (We never, ever, leave 2016. It is like a Stephen King short story from a collection he demanded be taken off the store shelves that circulates amongst fans of a very particular kind of horror.) Information obtained recently from the Mueller memos by Buzzfeed and CNN enlighten us a little on that score: Trump's former campaign manager Paul Manafort and his former NSA Michael Flynn both pushed Ukraine even back when in 2016 as being the source of the hack and the reason for the rumors that would inevitably occur that the campaign was helped by Russia. And even if the involvement of the GRU has since been greatly clarified, Trump is sticking with what his very good and not at all corrupt friends that he would like to pardon one day told him. That he is not at all a loser who got help from a foreign country. (But, if I consider Trump out of the loop on Russia's actual involvement and believing of a sweet-sop cover-story regarding Ukraine corruption, how does one account for Trump's willingness to spout the Russian line on things? Ah, faith--the belief in things unseen! He doesn't look the gift horse in the mouth, but he trepidatiously rides it all the same.)

So Trump believes in a bleak weird thing where 30 thousand emails that were on Hillary Clinton's server (which never were hacked) are on a single server (the entire fuck? a ginormous outfit like DNC has a cloud set-up with like, over a hundred servers) that are somehow in Ukraine because he's fixated on Hillary Clinton's emails (no, really, he was and his mega-fans still are) and even though his campaign and apparently the RNC coordinated with WikiLeaks in dribbling out the DNC emails, he loved them, but didn't actually get that they were two different things. To put it gently, "Pops is confused."

Which is why his "perfect phone call" to Ukraine was so damn confusing, because what in the hell of any of the CrowdStrike shit would have made sense to Zelenskyy? For that matter, for all the folks who want to say random things about whether Ukraine's president felt pressured or not based on what he said sharing a stage with Trump: Really? Go along with you! And would a battered woman standing next to her husband not say she got her black eye from walking into a door? And does that door have four fingers and a class ring? Yes, it was a very complicated door, indeed. Which is why, even if Zelenskyy can't deliver the right investigation outcomes, there are signs some kind of accommodation is in the offing.

I don't know what is worse in all of this, the dishonesty, the cover-up, the sheer incompetence required to get all of this going. and yet, we are only experiencing some information from the closed-door impeachment hearings, about which the transcripts in full will come to light, and open hearings will occur (even though for now, the White House is trying to prevent many key players from talking--and what does that even mean, one might legitimately ask!) There will be more Mueller memos distributed via Buzzfeed and CNN, which seriously means that the Mueller report is not dead, but has powerful new significance because of what it could have, but didn't include (so much obstruction of justice, apparently, though). But why so much obstruction? For what? Why? What is Trump hiding with all the vehemence he reserves for his net worth and the real story of his vital statistics?

The polls and the boos and the news show that something is changing in how Trump is viewed. But for now, he stays the same: in denial, and thinking he is a beloved leader who can survive his multiple scandals by changing address or brazening them out. I don't expect a lot from Trump. I expect a lot from us all, in voting, finally saying the best, most brutal kiss-off "Goodbye" to him. The final, most raucous, boos.

He will never get better from this point on. The worst is yet to come, and will be astonishing. Flynn's ongoing trials and Roger Stone's trials still continue, and more will be revealed.

Secretary of Church and State

It is a little bit jarring, just after noting that AG William Barr blames "militant secularists" for all sorts of nation-decaying moral turpitude, from drug use to experimental jazz, that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has seen fit to grace the official government page for his agency with an advert for his speech on being a Christian Leader. There once was a Secretary of State who delineated a separation of Church and State, but Mike Pompeo does things a little differently.  I guess we could disagree about the results.

As a matter of preference, I think it would be wrong to say that Mike Pompeo's faith would be in anyway disqualifying for his office--obviously, the traditions of the United States should hold that there is no litmus test with regard to religion for higher office. I'd say it is dismaying that he elects to depict things through the lens of his religion without respect to externalities like whatever is actually happening. Being Trump's chump, excusing and covering for apparent abuses of office, and even finding an excuse for what Trump's incompetence is doing to Christians in Syria shows dubious leadership of any sort, whether Christian or otherwise.

As to the profession of his faith, if he does so in his personal time, this is no concern of mine--but broadcasting his Christian leadership on his official agency website seems to be both a timely advertisement of his faith (and refuge!) and a thing that does not belong there, as if privileging the special nature of leadership and Christian thought (and shading the leadership that might be posed by persons of other faiths, or no faith at all).

A person in his office should know better, but it is perhaps true that knowing better and doing better are separate things in Trump World.

TWGB: The Big Questions

I asked Giuliani again if he and Trump have a representation agreement. His response: “All I can tell you is that I still represent him as I have since April 2018. End of story.”

— Olivia Nuzzi (@Olivianuzzi) October 11, 2019

In a mean way, the $64,000 question to Rudy Giuliani was always what Olivia Nuzzi put to him, obliquely: Is your ass really covered by the president's favor on purpose in writing? Because this SOB will throw you over like boxers that "shrunk" in the wash. In a senseless goober way, Giuliani's response does not seem to indicate that he thought this shit through. Because the Magic 8Ball in Trump's head is reading "Situation Hazy" at the mo'. He might have lunch with him, sure. Like you have a pleasant meal with someone who has broken up with you but wants to maintain the peace.

Yeah. I'm saying Trump is definitely that guy. Giuliani is wearing treads right now from the front wheels of the bus and waiting on the last wheels to have their way with him.

He's that guy that casts about for people to do his dirty work when he doesn't want it to turn back on himself. (This is probably why he has "acting" this and that offices--he wants people who will just do a thing for him, not even being fully sure of the rules or the equities of their department.) Folks at the Pentagon worried if the delay in Ukraine aid was kosher, as well. It starts to look like Trump's definition of "deep state" is just "professionals in government who understand their jobs and reject his ideas". Needless to say, Pentagon and OMB docs are so subpoenaed right now. And really ought to be.

We've now heard from the "You're Fired!"'d Ambassador Masha Yovanovich, who is a badass.

“Although I understand that I served at the pleasure of the president, I was nevertheless incredulous that the U.S. government chose to remove an ambassador based, as best as I can tell, on unfounded and false claims by people with clearly questionable motives,” she said.

Ms. Yovanovitch’s testimony, which could help build momentum for the impeachment inquiry, captured the arc of her troubled tenure in Ukraine: how Mr. Giuliani and his allies mounted a campaign against her based on what she described as scurrilous lies, how the State Department capitulated to the president’s demands to recall her, and the upshot — losing an experienced ambassador in a pivotal country that is under threat from Russia and in the middle of a change in government.

Her situation--being removed from her post because of an influence campaign led by foreign actors, who rankled at her focus on corruption because they rather liked their brand of corruption, is definitely a big part of the story, here. But also important is her message about what government service means, and what Trump's lack of leadership has done to the State Department:

More broadly, she portrayed the State Department as a whole as “attacked and hollowed out from within.” Unless it backs up its diplomats, especially in the face of false attacks by foreign interests, she said, more of them will leave and the wrong message will be transmitted around the world.

“Bad actors” in Ukraine and elsewhere will “see how easy it is to use fiction and innuendo to manipulate our system,” she warned. “The only interests that will be served are those of our strategic adversaries, like Russia.”

As if on cue, we have the resignation of a top advisor to Sec. of State Mike Pompeo. An example of the drain of good people.

Maybe it's in part a reaction to Yovanovitch's testimony that Trump's folks decided Ambassador Sondland should speak, but this might not be great for Trump: Sondland is expected to say that Trump told him to say there was no "quid pro quo" but you know what? There really was one. There really in retrospect was.

Huh.

But let's just keep this in mind, what with the timely release recently of volume 2 of the Senate report on Russian interference. The Russians definitely did interfere in the 2016 election. The Ukraine stuff Giuliani and Fox News have been peddling is bogus. And, in case you missed it, Weird Rudy enlisted Ukrainian folks affiliated with Dmitry Firtash who is under the tutelage of Semion Mogilevich meaning they were putting Russian money into US elections--while supposedly on a mission to debunk Russian involvement in US elections.

This seems pretty circular and entirely dumb. I guess one of the big questions is "Did Giuliani know this was circular and dumb?" and that should be rapidly followed by "Did Trump know this is returning to the scene of the crime AG Barr just tried to absolve your stupid orange-peel ass of?"

The current issues regarding Trump's impeachment based on the Ukraine call aren't separate from the Mueller report or the longer Russian counterintelligence investigation--they are part of the very same issue with respects to Trump's corruption and biddability by foreign powers. It should be viewed as both the core question of his impeachment, how he abuses his office for any international dealings, whether for emoluments (personal financial gain) or his own personal power, and of his re-election campaign--can someone under such a cloud be considered fit to continue to serve?

I say he never was capable of adhering to his oath of office and has always been illegitimate. But I do not fault those who only now realize what a mistake placing trust in Trump has been (even if you ignored a shit-ton of bigotry and misogyny and other fucknuttery in the process).

Those who stick with him, though? What the entire fuck is wrong with you?

TWGB: The Second Whistleblower

A 2nd whistleblower comes forward in Trump-Ukraine scandal; "has first-hand knowledge" of the events in question, the person’s attorney says.https://t.co/BQ4b7cBNd7

— MSNBC (@MSNBC) October 7, 2019

Just to keep on top of TrumpWorld matters as a housekeeping thing, there's a second whistleblower (and perhaps others) with firsthand knowledge of the particulars of the Ukraine call. FWIW, the call summary from the White House already matched the original whistleblower's report to a remarkable degree because there was considerable corroboration, which had been checked by the IC IG. President Trump, and his defenders, when they maintain these two documents don't match up, are simply lying.

That's it. They are not telling the truth. Both docs are short and easy to read. The interpretation regarding a "quid pro quo" isn't at all far-fetched in context. As the popular prom song went in ye olden times, whoomp, there it is. Whoompst among us would disagree, except a partisan hack?

And yet, the swamp is rife with them no? After all, how else would Trump and all have found a counternarrative to send Giuliani and Pompeo and Barr off into the wilderness to do, I dunno, a quest about? It's swamp gas.

But it's swamp gas that Peepaws that don't understand the internet and stuff seem to treat as real: thus, Rudolph Giuliani's really weird cable news behavior.

Like, super-weird:

Rudy Giuliani holds up what he claims are three affidavits but is actually a printout of a right-wing blog site... Later in the interview, he reads portions from the blog site printout as if they are from the affidavits pic.twitter.com/iSBURi8UYJ

— Acyn Torabi (@Acyn) October 6, 2019

So help me, the printout is from a site actually called "Hopelessly Partisan." This is obviously bad internetting, but shit, it's pretty bad television, too. In the meanwhile, whatever the snipehunters attached to the State Department, or DOJ, or wherever, might be finding (great shades of Obama's real birth certificate and the tale of the California vote fraud, yes?) there isn't any actionable stuff coming out of it. Yet. Although Trump has been screaming about the conspiracy against him ever since he....won the election. Well, before, actually. Well before.

Also, it is interesting that Trump has fingered Rick Perry as having coaxed him to make the call that is pretty damning regardless of who told him to make a call. But Perry was trying to make Naftogas more amenable to American interests, and apparently many Trump folk wanted a cut in any potential largesse. Wow. People wetting their beak on the taxpayer dime. You hate to see it.

Anyways, this is just a snapshot of where the impeachment thing is--Trump friends are in denial, and anti-Trumpers like myself are only seeing confirmation about what we've suspected from Trump's circle all along. They happily even screw with the United States' broader policy goals, to take and take and take. Like some international crime syndicate. Do Zelenskyy a favor (military aid) if he delivers on a favor (dirt on Biden or possible Ukrainian DNC hackers, which is crazy bullshit)? Please! Trump's foreign policy is about all kinds of favors. This is definitely but a sample. What I think is great is that the whaaargarble from RW hacks has become nonsensical enough that the mainstream media is incensed and proud enough to push back on it. (Way to go, Chuck Todd!) You all need to fix yourself for your Murrow-moments, okay? Your Cronkrite consciousness. Because the time is now.

We are all taking notes on history. Let's do this right.

What a Week Today's Been!

What with all that's been going down on the home front, one might have been wondering where William Barr's been keeping himself, what with being front page news in the whistleblower report and having been mentioned by name by President Trump on the Zelenskyy phone call as being definitely someone who should be contacted with any information he might have about....something to do with Joe Biden or something to do with Ukraine. He's apparently been in Italy--hunting geese. Or chasing them. Something like that.

Everyone is now reminded that Trump did say back in May that Barr would be beating the bushes to get at the origin of the Russian investigation and find the real culprits, even in Australia or Ukraine. I'm just staggered the man is actually going off and doing that. I mean, when Trump said he had people finding out "very interesting things" in Hawaii in the search for Obama's birth certificate, or investigating the rampant voter fraud in California, those were kind of elaborate leg pulls. But this!

Forget about Trump having gotten his Roy Cohn. He's got his attorney general hitting the pavement for him like a private detective. Homuncule Pierrot best mind what he's doing though--it might wind him up in a little gray cell. But everyone is doing it, no? His Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is also off to Europe, with Sebastian Gorka, for some reason. Don't ask me why. Gorka is a man with a very specific set of skills. Just because no one knows what they are is no reason to think they aren't real.

Anyway, today we found out that Pompeo, who seemed a little befuddled about what was in the call summary on the news shows, turns out to have been in on the call.  Do you know who wasn't, though? Recently (it seems like forever ago, but it really wasn't!) fired (or resigned) NSA John Bolton. He did not approve. I once wrote a blogpost called "John Bolton is Still a Bloodthirsty Loon", but you know what? If Bolton wants to dish I will make martinis and listen and drink all the martinis. (He also demonstrates why he was out of the loop on North Korea, but there are no heroes with this one.)

In other news, the IC IG just wanted everyone to know that nobody changed the rules for whistleblowers at the last minute to make this particular report kosher, no matter what the president wants to Tweet. The individual indicated they had first hand knowledge of some things, and second hand knowledge of other things and the report was all good and legal--but you want to know what?

The call summary, though. It still has Trump hanging support over the Ukrainian president's head while he suggests two favors. Congress-approved taxpayer money to help a country under fire from Russia, dangled to help save Trump's orange peel ass. If anyone wants to pretend there is no quid pro quo there (and there doesn't have to be) I would still let them know context is important, because this wasn't the first time Zelenskyy was hearing any of this, apparently. Also, the participation of Pompeo now makes Giuliani's claims that the State Department knew what he was doing seem so much less daft (I mean, still a little, but less).

We still don't know what Giuliani's clearance is. Or if you could really say he was really working as Trump's attorney on this one. (How?) But those things could very well be answered, because Giuliani has now been subpoenaed by the House, and Pompeo is, too.

Apparently, the 2016 election and investigation thereof refuses to die. Would you be surprised to know that Trump may have lied! Lied! To one Robert Mueller? Wow! If only we ever had some prior historical reason to believe that Trump was damn-near congenitally untruthful!

I'm tired folks. I'm thinking I will finish this post, go back on Twitter, and see links to like, a half-dozen more things that got dug up a minute ago. But I will post about them tomorrow, for tomorrow is another day! Or like, a week, in TrumpWorld time.