Trumpwatch: Courage Calls to Courage Everywhere

[lionheart]

Let's hope he is done soon.

Either way, the point is made I think.

I got it.

I've seen that Guardian report circulating on social media and other outlets and wonder what the consequences might be (if any).

A line drawn.

losangeles.cbslocal.com/2018/05/05/neo-nazi-candidate-kicked-out-of-california-gop-convention/

Look at this:

Colin Kahl
Verified account
@ColinKahl (Former DepAsst to Pres. Obama & NatSecAdvisor to VP Biden)

According to this story, in May of last year, Team Trump asked an Israeli intel firm to dig up dirt on me as part of an effort to discredit the Iran deal.

Tonight, as my wife read this story, that date triggered a very creepy memory.

Last year, my wife was serving on the fundraising committee of my daughter's public charter school in DC. One day, out of the blue, she received an email from someone claiming to represent a socially responsible private equity firm in the UK. 2/10

This "UK person" said "she" was flying to DC soon and wanted to have coffee with my wife to discuss the possibility of including my daughter's school in their educational fund network. 3/10

This was not a generic "Nigerian prince" scam. This person had all sorts of specific information on my wife's volunteer duties at an obscure DC elementary school. 4/10

There was a website for the firm (which no longer exists, by the way), but it had no depth to it, and there was no detailed information about the "UK person" who reached out to my wife. 5/10

My wife shared the email with me and a few people we know in both the finance and education fields. All agreed that the entire scenario seemed implausible and seemed like an approach by a foreign intelligence entity. 6/10

To test the implausibility, my wife kept trying to encourage the "UK person" over email to meet with other school fundraising officers & leadership while "she" was in DC, providing relevant contact info. But the "UK person" kept insisting that "she" had to meet with my wife. 7/10

At that point, my wife stopped corresponding.

This all happened in late May and early June of last year. 8/10

Perhaps it was just a coincidence that this obvious scam targeting my family had all the hallmarks of an intel op and coincided with Team Trump's reported efforts to "dig up dirt" on me. 9/10

But the fact that I even have to think about the possibility that my family was targeted by people working for the President is yet another sign of the fundamental degradation of our country that Trump has produced. 10/10

Norm Eisen
‏
Verified account

@NormEisen
11h11 hours ago

There’s a reason this has not happened since Nixon. It exposes the Trump aides to criminal and civil liability, depending on the nature of the “dirty ops,” see eg 18 USC 242, 50 USC 1809, 42 USC 1983. Team Trump is out of control. Expect an investigation.

www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/05/donald-trumps-attacks-on-the-justice-system-are-helping-don-blankenships-campaign/

www.wsj.com/articles/the-stormy-daniels-damage-1525388358

"Mr. Trump should worry that Americans will stop believing anything he says."

Neal Katyal
‏
Verified account

@neal_katyal

1. Conversations with @walterdellinger & Ted Olson have usefully distinguished between whether a sitting President can be indicted and whether he can be tried while in office.The weight of constitutional law thinking is “no” on second but yes on firstQ. No President is above the law.

1. This means a President can be formally accused of being a criminal, but that, as SCOTUS said about President Clinton’s Paula Jones lawsuit, the President would have flex in scheduling ct proceedings. B/c criminal matters, a Pres may be able to delay until out of office/impeached.

1. The fact Giuliani and others are suggesting President might invoke his 5th Am right against “self incrimination” is a small tea leaf suggesting President’s legal team shares this view. Suggests at least they don’t really buy the Nixonian “if pres does it it’s not illegal” defense.

ABC News
‏
Verified account

@ABC

Pres. Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani says he can't be confident the president won't invoke the Fifth Amendment if he speaks with the special counsel: "I've got a client who wants to testify... I hope we get a chance to tell him the risk that he's taking."

slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/why-a-judge-challenged-muellers-authority-to-charge-manafort.html

1. Conversations with @walterdellinger & Ted Olson have usefully distinguished between whether a sitting President can be indicted and whether he can be tried while in office.The weight of constitutional law thinking is “no” on second but yes on firstQ. No President is above the law.

2. This means a President can be formally accused of being a criminal, but that, as SCOTUS said about President Clinton’s Paula Jones lawsuit, the President would have flex in scheduling ct proceedings. B/c criminal matters, a Pres may be able to delay until out of office/impeached.

A good thing to remember is that a govt official (including Scrotus) does not have to be convicted of a crime by our justice system. He doesn't even have to have been indicted. An official is impeached if the House (not a criminal court) finds him/her guilty of something that reaches the level of a 'high crime or misdemeanor'. Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson were impeached although neither of them were ever criminally indicted nor tried for any offenses.

But remember, too, that impeachment does not remove an official from office. That requires a guilty vote in the Senate. Something that failed in the Clinton and Johnson impeachment proceedings and both finished their terms.

This is the importance of the mid-term elections and the Blue Wave. Impeachment isn't likely even if the Democrats gain majority in both couses. Removal from office requires a 'Senate Supermajority' (67 votes) and it's unlikely the Dems would gain that many seats. The most we can hope for (IMO) is to make Scrotus unelectable for a second term and ride out this storm as best we can, pushing back when we can.

couses=houses.

www.vox.com/2018/5/4/17320352/tps-honduras-cancel-trump-temporary-protected-status

What would happen after he left office Across? Unbridled prosecution?

www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2018/05/whiter-shade-hate-long-history-american-far-right

Strange.

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mining-claim-bears-ears-national-monument_us_5ada070ae4b0e4d0716000b7

'The process of staking a claim has changed little since the days of Manifest Destiny. It’s still governed by the General Mining Act of 1872, which itself is based on an acquisition system prospectors used around the time of California’s Gold Rush. You read that right: The law our entire federal mining system is based on is almost exactly the same as it was 146 years ago.'

www.thedailybeast.com/hillary-clinton-could-never-have-gotten-away-with-the-sick-confidence-games-of-a-mediocre-white-man?ref=home

If a POTUS is removed from office via impeachment, he (or she) would lose the official 'perks' of having been POTUS, and there are quite a few valuable perks. I suppose that's because they would have been removed for wrong-doing. Nixon kept the benefits because he resigned.

What happens after removal would be up to the courts, lion. If they felt a prosecutable offense had been committed by an impeached POTUS, then the justice system would take over once that POTUS was removed from office by the Senate and the DOJ would proceed as they would with any other miscreant.

As far Scrotus is concerned, as much as I'd love to see him swing from the yardarm, I have a feeling that if things get as far as they did with Nixon/Watergate, Scrotus might be inclined to offer to resign in exchange for a pardon in order to avoid the public humiliation of being the first POTUS removed from office and prosecuted by the DOJ. And I think that TPTB would be eager enough to get rid of him to agree. Indeed, they may be the ones to approach him to 'do a deal' of that sort.

Thanks Across.

The pardon would not work for state prosecuted crimes would it?

www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/touring-the-nras-annual-convention?mbid=social_twitter

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/06/stormy-daniels-lawyer-michael-avenatti-donald-trump

No. You can only have the relevant Governor's pardon for state-related crimes as far as I know.

Interesting Comey interview.

Very interesting. (And he looks almost average size, sitting there! )