• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Trump visits Walter Reed
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Trump visits Walter Reed
    William on Trump visits Walter Reed
    William on Trump visits Walter Reed
    Catscatscats on Trump visits Walter Reed
    William on Trump visits Walter Reed
    bellecat on Trump visits Walter Reed
    Propertius on Trump visits Walter Reed
    riverdaughter on Trump visits Walter Reed
    Ga6thDem on Trump visits Walter Reed
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Standing O
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Trump visits Walter Reed
    riverdaughter on Trump visits Walter Reed
    Ga6thDem on Trump visits Walter Reed
    Catscatscats on Standing O
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    May 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Apr   Jun »
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Hope Is Bullshit
      I am unintersted in “hope.” Or as we called it in the Obama bullshit years, Hopium. Hope is not a plan. Hope is bullshit. Luck is real, but you don’t count on luck other than in the sense that the harder you work, and the more things you do, the more likely you are to […]
  • Top Posts

The only answer to Trump: Trust but Verify

Donald is very insistent that Mueller not testify before Congress. He says that after $35M and NOKA LUJON, that it’s over. Nothing to see here. Move along.

By the way, does Mueller have a security detail? Just wondering.

Now, Donald May be perfectly innocent, like he says, and there’s nothing more to say on the matter of Russia, national security risks and obstruction of justice. He may have no stain on his spotless reputation at all.

Life would be so much easier for all of us if we could only trust him. We want to think that he’s not a ruthless, unprincipled, uneducated and selfish man sitting on the most powerful arsenal the world has ever seen.

We’d like to believe that he wasn’t implicated in a coup in 2016 using the help of a foreign government. That would make those of us in Pennsylvania feel better about the integrity of our voting apparatus.

So, let’s presume innocence on Donald’s part.

But check with Mueller anyway to keep things transparent between all parties. It couldn’t possibly hurt an innocent man to have it all laid bare and to see all the cards everyone is holding.

25 Responses

  1. I hope Mueller has guards. I would put NOTHING past Putin. 👿

  2. Trump tried to get Mueller fired. He would not appear in person for an interview. He got his new AG to shut down the investigation prematurely, and then issue a four-page report which did not contain one single complete sentence written or dictated by Mueller. The AG said there was no finding of collusion, but Mueller had said at the outset of his report, that collusion was bereft of legal meaning, and that what he found did not rise to the level of an indictable criminal conspiracy in his opinion, despite the obvious quid pro quos laid out in detail.He found many instances of obstruction of justice, but said that since (never legally tested) “rules” forbade the indictment of a sitting president, he would simply lay out the history, and emphasize that the president was not exonerated by the facts. The AG said that since Mueller did not indict, it was up to him, and he found no obstruction, although he admitted he did not read the report in full, and a priori believed that a president could not under any circumstances commit obstruction,; and that additionally the president actually always had the right to fire anyone investigating him, if he believed the allegations were false.

    The House, now run by Democrats because of the 2018 election, wants Mueller to testify. Trump says he does not want him to, and is clearly trying to get the AG to stop it. Trump said the report fully exonerates him, which it literally does not. Trump does not want the person who he said exonerated him, to testify about it. Trump says, move along, it’s all over. He does what every dictator since the beginning of society has done: make up his own facts and his own truth, and forbid everyone else from questioning it. If Trump had his way, Mueller would be imprisoned, tortured and executed, along with Hillary, Comey, Obama, McCabe, and anyone else he considers an enemy. Trump tried to get the FCC to take SNL off the aIr. The depressing and infuriating efforts of the media to normalize this attempted tyranny, to act like it is just two football coaches arguing about calls on the field, is contributing to all of it. Does Trump have to actually start having people beheaded, for the rest to understand that he wants to be Putin, Erdogan or Kim, or very likely Hitler, whose book “Mein Kampf” was kept by Trump’s bedside, and likely the only book he ever read, other than the one ghostwritten about him? There are things that can be done to fight against an attempted fascist takeover of this heretofore democracy,, but the longer we wait, the harder it will be. I have some ideas, none of them violent or illegal, including absolute boycotts of major companies owned by Trump supporters; generally spending money only on local businesses and not corporations; buying as little gas as possible. Ideas should be brought up and discussed. You cannot rationally argue with a tyrannnical madman or his followers. All you will get, is an unending series of lies, distortions of obvious reality, and the use of robots, stooges, insane people, and amoral grifters, to repeat them over and over.

  3. One of the biggest problems is that only 3% of the population, via polling, say that they have read all of the Mueller report. Another 10% said that they had read some of it. So 87% of the country has not read one word of it. All they know is what Trump said, and what Barr said, and what the mostly stupid and compliant media said at the outset. So they think that the report exonerated him, because they said it did, when it didn’t. It does not take any great logical facility to know that if this is the reality in our country, that so few know the actual facts, or care to learn them; and would rather listen to the tyrants feed them their own “alternative facts,” then we don’t have too much hope, why would we? If Trump can just tell them that the economy is booming (it is not for most people, middle class wages barely outpace inflation), and that the jobs numbers are great (every jobs report which came out under Obama was dismissed by Trump as lies and fake numbers), the only thing that will stop them from believing all of it, as the proles believed all the lies from the dictatorship in “1984,” is if they actually see negative economic effects for themselves, such as higher taxes, higher gas prices, no health insurance, losing the safety net. Or someone somehow getting through to them that this is what surely is going to happen if Trump is re-elected. But there are plenty of con men and tyrants throughout history, who counted on the ignorance and gullibility of people. Trump has made a life’s work of it. It just popped into my mind: can you imagine if Hillary had started a phony university which bilked people out of their money, and then had to settle the lawsuit for $25 million, what do you think the media would have said about it? It never even gets mentioned any more.

    • Actually the majority of the people don’t think the report exonerated him according to polling. This is because nobody believes Trump. When you lie about things like losing the popular vote from the get go people just quit believing anything you have to say. The issue right now is people who haven’t read the report don’t know how really bad it is for Trump and having Mueller testify and his testimony being all over the news is going to get the message through to a lot of people. That is why Trump does not want Mueller to testify. However Trump cannot demand that anybody not testify.

    • only 3% of the population, via polling, say that they have read all of the Mueller report.

      In the given percentage, AG Barr, Rep. L. Graham and the Commander in Ignorance -Dump himself are not included.
      They have not read the report, they’ve acknowledged so.

  4. If the Dump is a principled and moral innocent being…I am Sophia Loren!
    Ha! Ha!

    DOJ Alumni Statement
    May 6

    View at Medium.com

  6. The Democratic Party of course has its general and individual flaws, as any political party throughout history has had. But in general, they try to do good things for the average American. Virtually every social program in this country which we value, was created by a Democratic President and Democratic Congresses. Social Security. Medicare, National Labor Relations Act and related union-protecting Acts. Voting Rights Act. Ban on assault weapons. Income tax. Civil Rights Act. SEC. FDA.

    The modern Republican Party has had three goals: Make the very wealthy even wealthier , no matter what the cost to the rest of the population, or to the environment. Ban abortion, except for allowing very wealthy Republicans access to it. Win by any means possible, irrespective of any lasting damage to the institutions which made this country a democracy.

    They have looked for and exploited every loophole, as it is were a board game with flaws in the rules which could be gamed by someone who did not want to play fairly. And with each episode of this, it becomes clearer–except that the propaganda machine they own with their trillions of dollars, fogs and obscures it. In our latest example, the Secretary of the Treasury simply refuses to hand over Trump’s tax records, even though the law clearly says “He shall turn over.” He should be thrown in jail for this, but the Department of Justice is run by a corrupt henchman of the corrupt President, and he will refuse to serve any contempt citation. Republicans do not care if the entire foundation of democracy and law is destroyed, because they never believed any of it, except that part that protects their wealth from the hordes.They believe. This was all obvious to most of us decades ago. But Democrats in office clung to the belief in fair play and protecting institutions. One cannot really blame them for that. Except that you cannot deal with ghouls and zombies and perverse religious fanatics by negotiating with them or appealing to some better angels which they do not have.

    There is no reasonable expectation of “bringing the country together.” When are we going to get the stolen Supreme Court seat back? Only if we steal one, which the Democrats will never do. Republicans will do anything to win on their terms. Not holding hearings on Garland should have led to a massive peaceful revolution, but it barely caused a ripple, because the Democratic President did not want to make waves. So I suppose that we now must just play whatever cards we have left in our hand, and take it to the limit, just one time. Or use our last efforts to try to win the next election. Preferably, both.

  7. I would rather have had Jon Tester run, than Joe Biden. I’m not saying that a moderate-to-conservative Democrat is the way to go, but Tester would have been tough to beat in a general election , he is always impressive when I see him interviewed.

  8. William,

    I like and appreciate Tester’s willingness to speak truth to power but I do believe that Elizabeth Warren has pretty much proven throughout her career that she is fearless in speaking truth to power under more difficult conditions against much greater odds than Tester.

    She proved that she is willing to stand up to Wall Street on behalf of consumers, which no man has been able to do in the same effective way as she has. Perhaps one of Warren’s biggest advantages as a candidate is her financial expertise. A longstanding critic of the current banking financial system, she is one of the few people in elective politics who understands that system and has a workable plan to reform it. She remains undaunted by trumps continuous attacks against her and just today stood on the Senate floor and fired back at McConnell’s continued efforts to protect trump and mislead the country while ignoring his duty to defend the Constitution, while he stood there stating that the Mueller Report did not find any evidence of obstruction by trump! In this speech, that toughness that you admire in Tester is front and center with Elizabeth: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/05/07/mitch-mcconnell-mueller-report-case-closed-elizabeth-warren-response-bts-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/this-week-in-politics/

    She doesn’t pull any punches and fights for the average Amerian to have the same opportunities as those at the top have and who continue to benefit from a rigged system that favors only them. From my vantage point, if you think Tester would be tough to beat in the general, then so should Elizabeth for the very same reason you stated about Tester. After all, she is running for president and Tester is not.

    Of course, since she is a woman, these same qualities which are admired in a man are summarily overlooked in a woman. Despite her gravitas, experience and passion fighting for us, we are still told daily ever since biden entered the race that ONLY a white man has the best chance of beating trump. I just don’t agree that we need another white guy in the WH, when it was white guys who got us into the mess we are in right now.

    I believe women will show their disgust with the same old crap we saw Hillary having to put up with in 2016 being spewed again in this election cycle by showing up in droves in 2020 and supporting the best woman for the job in both the primary and the general.

    • Kathleen, I support Warren on a number of issues, and she would be the most liberal President we have had since FDR, which is a good thing. But I really do think that she could not win a general election, because it is too easy to tar her with the “socialist” label. AOC started this with her foolish comment about “Democratic Socialists,” but I don’t think AOC cares much about anyone but herself and the few people who are on her side.

      I have nothing against a reasonable European-style socialism, but it is anathema in this country, perhaps mostly because in the last century, corporate plutocrats like Hearst conflated it with Communism. Most people seem to think it is the same thing, which of course it is not. But every poll shows that people do not want to vote for “socialism,” even though I think it is much better than unfettered capitalism. Capitalism always does better in such polling. There is no way to educate the American voter about the nuances of capitalism and socialism. And while I have not studied all of Warren’s plans, I don’t think that she is a socialist, she does not want the government to take over the means of production. She wants much higher taxes on corporations and the wealthy, which is necessary. But again, I think that rust belt voters, many White voters, the same people that voted for Trump, would buy the propaganda which would show the flag waving, and a voice intoning, “Did Americans fight for democracy and liberty, just to have the country turn to Socialism?” She could argue about it all day, and it would do no good. Republicans are all ready to make the election about Socialism, just like they made the 1988 election about flag burning and the ACLU. Do I think that Democrats need to only run “moderates” in every election? No, they must not. But they absolutely need to win this one, and I don’t think that Warren would do it. She is identified as the most “left-leaning” of the candidates, except for Sanders, who is some kind of Marxist-Socialist, and would never win. If I really thought that Warren would win, I might well support her as the best candidate. We saw what happened to McGovern, who was portrayed as a Socialist. It wouldn’t be as bad this time, but we’d still lose, I think.

      • William,

        The main thing Jon Tester has going for him is that he is a white male, not his legislative achievements, and that is the primary reason you thought he would be hard to beat in the general. Well, this is deja vu all over again because the media felt that Hillary couldn’t win either, but she did. cheating to win the presidency with the help of a foreign adversary is not “winning”, it’s stealing and any man running against trump would have contested that 2016 election and would have had the support of the media and the public because white men are allowed to contest and complain. But not Hillary, she’s a power hungry woman who would do anything to obtain power!

        So, what you are saying is that the majority of women would not support Warren because she is a socialist (the label put on her by the media and the republicans) but explain how that same media is saying bernie could win and he calls himself a socialist and is not even a democrat! The ONLY difference in their determination of bernie’s electability is that he’s a white male and Warren is a woman. That rationale doesn’t work for me and millions of women after what we witnessed happened to Hillary again in 2016. I believe a progressive woman like Warren could win if women turn out and support her because she has proven to be deserving of our trust because she has an extraordinary history of being a champion for the people and not her career, as the men usually are once they get in the Oval Office.

        I know the media has taken great pains to paint Joe as a favorite of both men and women but I’m not so sure he could withstand the scrutiny throughout the primary because he is prone to opening mouth and inserting foot and his legislative record is a legitimate concern that should be debated. More importantly, I don’t think he would be as good a president, as Warren, Harris or Klobuchar.

        Answer this, why should this country put its faith in another white man in the WH when it has been white men (except for one black man) who have caused all of the problems we are dealing with today?

  9. Another answer is to avoid the deranged donny’s tax, aka tariffs, by limiting purchases… always a powerful tool that somehow wakes politicians from their compromised coma.

  10. So Trump’s tax returns mid eighties through mid nineties show he lost more money in business than any other person in the entire US during that time period.

    The only financial/business endeavors in which he can proclaim he’s number 1.

    • Awhile back, a talking head from a southern state said trump’s constituents don’t care about his ties to Russia, his self enrichment, not seeing his tax returns, climate change denial, trade and nuclear deals being revoked, pissing off our allies, racism, misogyny, islamophobia or threats to our national security. She said, however, the one thing they won’t tolerate is him not being the insanely wealthy, spectacularly successful businessman he played on TV. I hope she is right.

    • Well, to me the really interesting thing in the Times report was this:

      He would acquire shares in a company with borrowed money, suggest publicly that he was contemplating buying enough to become a majority owner, then quietly sell on the resulting rise in the stock price.

      The tactic worked for a brief period — earning Mr. Trump millions of dollars in gains — until investors realized that he would not follow through. That much has been known for years.

      This is the very definition of “pump and dump” securities fraud. Countless grifters have been jailed for this – if it was so widely known, why wasn’t Trump prosecuted? Also, borrowing money in an attempt to evade margin requirements to buy securities is also a violation of US securities laws, IIRC.

      • Well observed. And I have no idea why the IRS never went after Trump, nor the SEC. The SEC doesn’t go after certain people, particularly if they have “connected ” friends? We are going to see more clearly than ever, that there simply are two sets of laws for people; those who are regular citizens, and those who have money, power, or influence, and apparently are given special considerations. The bitter irony is that Trump somehow managed to convince a bunch of voters that he was the friend of the working person, when he had been fleecing them, directly and indirectly, for his whole life.

  11. All the lovers of Fox and Friends who decry Socialism while cashing their Social Security checks and flashing their Medicare cards. Sickening.

    • I will date myself by saying that I remember when the Republicans en masse decried Medicare as socialized medicine. The only way that Medicare got through, was because the 1964 elections had brought in an immense Democratic majority in both houses off Congress, and LBJ, to his credit, pushed for such a bill. Republicans have been trying to get rid of it ever since. The most recent method is to have lowered the cap at which a taxpayer no longer has taxes taken out to go to the Medicare fund. If they simply raised the cap a few thousand higher in earnings, the fund would be completely solvent. I don’t remember it being brought up, but I am surprised than when Obama came in with majorities in both houses, the cap was not raised.

      • As you wrote, William, practically every social program we value was passed by Democrats in Congress and signed into law by a Democratic President.

        • Sue, if there is a history which will be written, it will deal with the fact that of the only two relevant political parties in our country, one is irrevocably broken and corrupted. How many Republicans on office in the entire nation, can be looked upon as reasonable people who care about democratic institutions, or in doing anything good for anyone who is not immensely wealthy, or a hater? Remember when there were always some Republicans would would stand up for constitutional principles? They’re all gone, and no one in that party is coming up to redeem it. So we somehow have to run a country with only one party, but that is hard to do, because it is a binary system, and many will vote against the Democrats, which inevitably means that they will vote for the Republican, who is the enemy of democracy. And the media has to have a both sides, to get viewers. If the reins of power are shared, the democracy disappears more each day, because (see above) all the Republicans care about is winning, pleasing their biillionaire donors, and their hate-filled base.

          Biden says the thinks that Trump is an aberration, but he really is not. What does he think that “good guy” Pence would do if President? The Republicans have been leading to this for many decades. GW Bush’s regime was an obvious forerunner. Let’s say that at some point we ended up with a Haley or Rubio or Christie as President; how much better would we be on any important issue like dealing with climate change, or gun control, or saving Medicare and Social Security? Not much. So the existential political question is, how do we keep a democracy when only one of the two parties believes in it, and in progressive policies, but the other one has most of the money and the media? I keep thinking that Biden is not the person to swing the tide of all of this, but Obama wasn’t, either. Actually, I think that Pelosi perhaps could, but she is not running for President, and is in her late ’70’s. Hillary certainly could have, though she would have faced endless attacks from the usual sources. She was our best chance. I rather like Beto O’Rourke, but he’s not going to be nominated. Warren would not win. Harris could, but I don’t see her as a game-changer on policy, but as much like Obama, and that in no way is meant with respect to ethnicity. Klobuchar is pragmatic, but has no traction. Buttigieg is interesting, but rather full of himself, and a Sanders acolyte. I like Swallwell, but he’ll never win. The times require greatness, but where is it? This might sound silly, but I’d probably prefer Mimi Rocah to the whole bunch of these candidates, but she is not a politician. When can Katie Hill run?

      • “I don’t remember it being brought up, but I am surprised than when Obama came in with majorities in both houses, the cap was not raised.”

        IIRC, Hillary suggested raising or eliminating the FICA cap in both 2008 and 2016. Obama didn’t do it, of course, because he was really a Republican with a “D” by his name.

  12. On the positive side, I do think that the tax returns of Trump will damage his image as the imagined person who is smarter than everyone else in the world of business, and thus by some kind of extrapolation, smarter than people on policy. We know that this whole thing is a fabrication believed by many people who keep desperately looking for a fantasy projection figure. Sanders is that for the Left, Trump for the Far Right. Now Trump is shown as someone who either was abysmally bad at business, and repeatedly bailed out by hundreds of millions of dollars of this father’s money, and/or a tax cheat who continually lied about his assets and losses. It is like a balloon puncturing. Oh, he’ll keep many of his frenzied supporters, but if we can get some more of these records, it may be that they will never believe in him the same way again. And passion is what usually matters in elections.

    • I agree and find it astounding that all of his dreadful, craven, cruel and nation threatening actions didn’t do it, but finding out he’s actually not rich will disillusion his crazed followers.

    • Well, I disagree with your evaluation of Sanders but I sincerely hope you’re right about Trump. I find it hard to remain optimistic, though. I was listening to Thom Hartmann yesterday and he had a rather unusual guest on: Julio Rivera (founder of Reactionary Times and frequent contributor to such illustrious sites asTownhall, Red State, Newsmax, etc.). In other words, he’s a certified member of the Great Right Wing Noise Machine. He was completely unfazed by anything in the Times, and could not care less if Trump lied about anything. I honestly think Trump was right when he said he could shoot someone in broad daylight and get away with it. I wonder how many on his side of the fence are similarly impervious to evidence.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: