Tag: former President Trump

Your Thoughts?

Former President Trump is arraigned in a Miami court Tuesday afternoon in the 37-count indictment for allegedly keeping sensitive federal documents at his Mar-a-Lago home and resort. 

Attempts to ban books in public and school libraries reached record levels in the U.S. last year, according to a Stacker investigative report posted below in the center column. Use the track bar on the far right and scroll down to read the story.

Comment on these and other news and issues in the appropriate section below, or in the left column, or email editors@thehustings.news. Indicate in the subject line whether you lean right or left.

_____

Editorial Slams Pompeo on Khashoggi

The Washington Post’s editorial board tackles Trump administration Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s book, Never Give an Inch in “Mike Pompeo’s revolting embrace of MBS after the Khashoggi murder,” published Wednesday. The editorial lays out how Pompeo, who aspires to run for president in 2024, embraces the sort of authoritarian foreign government Donald J. Trump cozied up to during his presidency. It quotes Pompeo’s book (which it never names by title) as describing Saudi Arabian Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) as “leading the greatest cultural reform in the kingdom’s history.”

Khashoggi’s WaPo columns pushed for a freer Arab world and a more open, tolerant Saudi Arabia, the op-ed says, before he was brutally tortured and then murdered by MBS’s strongmen at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2, 2018. Khashoggi’s body never was found.

The revolting embrace? Trump sent Pompeo to Saudi Arabia after his administration refused to impose penalties or sanctions. The ex-secretary of state “smeared” Khashoggi as an “activist” and not a journalist. 

“Hey Mike, go and have a good time,” Trump told Pompeo, according to the book. “Tell him he owes us.” 

•••

What do you want to discuss? What are your thoughts on these and other recent political stories and issues? Go to the Commentssection in this column, or the one in the right column if that’s how you lean, or email editors@thehustings.news and write “for the left column” or “for the right column” in the subject line.

_____

Four Criminal Referrals for Trump

By Todd Lassa

The House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol has issued to the Justice Department four referrals for criminal charges against former President Donald J. Trump over attempts to overturn the 2020 election. The charges did not include seditious conspiracy, the charges for which two Oath Keepers, including founder Stewart Rhodes III, were found guilty last month for their involvement in the attack. 

The charges are: I.) Obstruction of an official proceeding; II.) Conspiracy to Defraud the United States; III.) Conspiracy to Make a False Statement; and IV.) “Incite,” “Assist,” “Aid or Comfort” an insurrection.

The fourth referral, if prosecuted by the Justice Department, would prevent Trump from running for any federal or state office.

“He is unfit for any office,” committee Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney (R-WY) said.

John Eastman, the attorney who allegedly advised Trump that Vice President Mike Pence could reject the Electoral College results on January 6, also was named in the referrals. All referrals may be applied to “others” identified in the Justice Department’s investigation, panel member Adam Schiff (D-CA) noted in comments to reporters after the hearing.

Additionally, four Congress members will be referred to the House Ethics Committee for ignoring subpoenas to testify before the 1/6 committee, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said. They are Reps. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Scott Perry (R-PA), Roll Call reports. A fifth, Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) is retiring and was left out of the referrals.

The House Ethics Committee currently has four Democratic and four Republican members, NPR says, and is unlikely to take actions against the four members before a new Congress convenes next month. 

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) said the panel has evidence of attempted witness tampering. An attorney for Trump told a witness to say under testimony that she didn’t “retain facts” and in exchange would be offered a job that “would make her very comfortable.” 

In his post-hearing comments, Schiff said there was evidence that some witnesses may not have been completely forthright with the committee. Asked whether the panel has evidence backing star witness Cassidy Hutchinson’s second-hand testimony that Trump physically attacked a Secret Service agent who would not drive him to the Capitol as the insurrection began 

 https://thehustings.news/surprise-witness-cassidy-hutchinson/

Schiff said; “I found Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony to be entirely credible and I leave it to you to assess the witness’ credibility.”

The 1/6 committee released the first part of its final report here:

 https://january6th.house.gov/report-executive-summary

The panel will release the full report before the end of this year, Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) said.

_____
COMMENTS: editors@thehustings.news

FBI Removed 11 Sets of Docs from Mar-a-Lago

(FRI 8/12/22)

Some marked ‘top secret’ … and meant to be only available in special government facilities, according to documents taken from ex-President Trump’s Florida estate, as reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. The FBI took about 20 boxes of items, binders of photos, a handwritten note and Trump’s executive grant of clemency to his ally, Roger Stone. Information about the “President of France” was included in the list, which is in a seven-page document included with the search warrant granted by a federal magistrate judge in Florida.

The FBI’s list includes one set of documents marked “Various classified/TS/SCI documents,” (for “top secret/sensitive compartmented information”) the WSJ reports. Agents collected four sets of top secret documents and three sets each of secret documents and of confidential documents. The list gave no other details. 

Trump’s attorneys say that he used his authority to declassify the material before he left office. The president has power to do this, according to the WSJ, but only under a process described by federal regulations. 

Regarding that French president: The FBI searched Trump’s Mar-a-Lago to look for nuclear documents and other items, The Washington Post reported earlier. France, for what it’s worth, is Continental Europe’s only designated nuclear weapons state.

Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich’s response: “The Biden administration is in obvious damage control after their botched raid where they seized the President’s picture books, a ‘hand written note’ and declassified documents. This raid of President Trump’s home was not just unprecedented, but unnecessary.”

Fact-check:

•It was a legal FBI search, not a “raid.” 

•Trump is ex-president, not president. 

•According to the White House, Biden had no knowledge of the search until Trump himself announced it Monday night.

Some Republicans back off: Congressional Republicans are “contorting” themselves over details of the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago, Politico reports. “As new information emerged about the circumstances behind the FBI search … the contrast drew starker between Republicans advancing a knee-jerk defense of the former president and those who are simply calling for additional disclosures” by the Justice Department, including Ohio’s Rep. Mike Turner, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee.

--Todd Lassa

_____________________________________

Garland Seeks to Unseal Mar-a-Lago Warrant (FRI 8/12/22)

By Todd Lassa

UPDATE: Ex-President Trump has called for the "immediate release" of the Justice Department's search warrant and property receipt for the FBI search at Mar-a-Lago, per NPR, though Trump's own lawyers have always had the right to release these documents themselves.

The Justice Department has filed a motion in the Southern District of Florida seeking to unseal the search warrant and property receipt for the FBI search of Donald J. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago, Attorney Gen. Merrick Garland announced in a rare public statement Thursday afternoon. Garland confirmed that the search was conducted in his authority and used the public forum to defend the actions of his department and of the FBI. 

Copies of the warrant and FBI receipt were provided to the former president’s counsel at Mar-a-Lago on the day of the search, as required by law, Garland said. In accordance with federal law and ethics rules and obligations, the AG was not able to give further details, but Garland said he had to make “certain points” after the strong reaction to the search by pro-Trump followers and pro-MAGA media:

•“I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter.”

•“The department does not take such decisions lightly. When possible, it is standard practice to seek less-intrusive means as an alternative to a search and to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken.”

•On the  “unfounded attacks on the FBI and Justice Department agents and prosecutors; I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked. The men and women of the FBI and the Justice Department are dedicated, patriotic public servants. Every day they protect the American people from violent crime, terrorism and other threats to their safety while safeguarding our personal rights. They do so at great sacrifice and risk to themselves…

“I am honored to work alongside them.”

_____________________________________

...meanwhile... (THU 8/11/22)

'Deplorable and dangerous' ... FBI Director Christopher Wray's reaction to Trump supporters circulating threats online toward his agents after carrying out a search warrant on Mar-a-Lago Monday. "I'm always concerned about threats to law enforcement," the FBI chief, appointed by President Trump in 2017, said in a press conference following a visit to the Omaha field office. "Violence against law enforcement is not the answer, no matter who you're upset with." (Per USA Today.)

•••

Gas drops below $4/gallon ... The average price per gallon for regular unleaded in the U.S. is $3.99 as of Thursday, AAA reports, down from a peak of $5.016 per gallon on June 14.

•••

Fomenting civil war? ... Rhetoric from what constitutes the right wing these days raged on over the FBI’s search of Donald J. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago to recover a dozen boxes of classified government documents airlifted with the ex-president to his Florida compound. 

Trump was in Manhattan Monday when the FBI descended on the compound with warrant in hand, and Wednesday he appeared before New York State Attorney Gen. Letitia James for her questioning in the Trump Organization’s civil trial. Of course, Trump evoked the Fifth Amendment to all but one question, The New York Times reports – he confirmed his identity. Of course, Trump’s detractors dug up a tape of him on the campaign trail in 2016, calling the Fifth a mobster tactic and asking why anyone would use it except for evade the truth. Of course he replied to his detractors by saying that now, finally, he knows what good pleading the Fifth is for.

Pleading the Fifth was a smart tactic, and good advice from Trump’s lawyers, University of Michigan law professor and former U.S. attorney Barbara McQuade told NPR’s All Things Considered. Any testimony Trump would give in his company's civil trial could be used as evidence in the criminal trial, McQuade said.

--Todd Lassa

_____
COMMENTS: editors@thehustings.news

The Final Steps to Trump’s Acquittal

By Todd Lassa

Once the votes were counted Saturday afternoon and Donald Trump was acquitted in his second Senate impeachment trial, both sides declared a victory. Because 10 Republicans joined 48 Democrats and the two independents who caucus with the latter party, lead House impeachment manager, Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-MD, could lay claim to the “most bipartisan” trial vote ever (click on Forum to read Stephen Macaulay’s commentary on the impeachment trial, “The Long Con”). 

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-KY, had it both ways, too, having been among the 43 Republicans in the minority who nonetheless snagged an acquittal because the 57-43 vote was 10 “guilties” short of the two-thirds needed to convict. 

“They did this because they followed the wrong words of the most powerful man on earth,” McConnell said on the Senate floor after the vote, in what pundits were describing as the most critical excoriation of Trump made by either side. “There is no question, none, that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day.”

McConnell, who when he still was Senate majority leader before President Biden’s inauguration, told his caucus they could vote their conscious in the impeachment trial, said he voted “not guilty” Saturday because the trial of a president after leaving office is unconstitutional. Last Tuesday, the Senate voted 56-44 that trying an ex-president is indeed constitutional, in a decision that required only a majority decision. A major point in the House impeachment managers’ argument was that if an ex-president could not be tried thusly, it would risk the nation with a “January surprise,” with carte-blanche to commit high crimes and misdemeanors as a lame-duck. 

But McConnell forced delaying the trial until after the inauguration, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, said Saturday afternoon. The House voted for impeachment on January 15, while Trump was still in office.

Prior to the final Senate vote, Raskin moved to call a witness to give a video deposition in the case. Trump attorney Michael van der Veen objected, and Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-SC, threatened to call many witnesses for the defense, including House Speaker Pelosi, and draw out the trial to disrupt Biden’s agenda for weeks or even months to come.

In the end, the two sides agreed that the statement of Raskin’s intended witness, Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-WA, would be admitted as evidence and that defense would stipulate to its veracity. 

Herrera Beutler’s statement is that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-CA, had called Trump during the siege urging him to call off the violent protesters. Trump had replied that the violent protesters were Antifa and Black Lives Matter, not pro-MAGA. 

“Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are,” Trump replied, according to Herrera Beutler. CNN reported her description of the call Friday night, but according to various news reports, Herrera Beutler told about overhearing the conversation to a local Washington state newspaper and to constituents. 

In his closing arguments, van der Veen said the defense was not admitting to the statement’s truthfulness, though the House impeachment managers apparently were satisfied with the outcome.

The trial itself came down to House impeachment managers building a case that then-President Trump called for his supporters to rally on the Capitol January 6 to “Stop the Steal” of his November 3 “landslide victory,” a.k.a., “the Big Lie,” and did nothing to prevent members of Congress and vice president Mike Pence, from the danger of the mob. Trump’s defense attorneys argued that the impeachment was a continuation of Democratic and mainstream Republican “hatred” since before he took office January 20, 2017, and that the trial was unconstitutional.

But the nine House impeachment managers appear satisfied that the trial and its bipartisan verdict achieved their goal overall and are looking forward to investigations in New York for Trump’s business practices, and especially in Fulton County, Georgia, for his phone call with secretary of state Ben Raffensperger. In the meantime, however, Trump continues to maintain control of the GOP, especially on state and local levels. Rep. Herrera Beutler, for example, faces potential censure from Washington state’s GOP and a Trump PAC-funded primary challenger next year for her statement in the impeachment trial.

•Click on Forum to read Pundit-at-Large Stephen Macaulay’s take on Trump’s impeachment trial.
•Address comments to editors@thehustings.news

Will Trump’s Impeachment Trial be a Waste of Time?

By Todd Lassa

Contrasting with the flurry of more than 30 executive orders being signed by President Biden in the last few days and his cabinet picks working their way through the Senate at a rapid pace, things aren't going as well between newly promoted Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, and similarly demoted Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-KY, and his caucus on how, when and even if to conduct the trial of former President Trump. It appeared the Senate was headed for Trump-style deal-making that would have pit Senate Democrats’ effort to kill the legislative veto and give their 50-plus-Vice President Harris-majority more teeth against Senate Republicans’ wish to delay Trump’s impeachment trial, if not to spike it indefinitely. 

Schumer has since agreed to delay Trump’s impeachment trial to the week of February 8. McConnell on Monday night gave in to Schumer’s demands for a vote to rescind the legislative filibuster that forces a 60-vote majority to pass bills, in exchange for an agreement on Senate organization. But the deal may prove empty if two centrist Democrats, Krystin Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia honor their promise to vote with Republicans and retain the filibuster.

In the middle of all this, various news outlets, regardless of alleged political leanings, reported either a.) there are nowhere near the 17 Republican Senate votes needed to accompany an assumed unanimous Democratic vote in order to reach the 2/3-majority necessary to convict; or b.) a sufficient number of Republican senators have privately, anonymously committed to help Democrats reach the 67 votes necessary. 

The least Democrats can count on for now is that Sen. Mitt Romney, R-UT, appears ready and willing to vote for conviction. The editorial We might assume Schumer is also counting on Republicans Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska, Susan Collins, of Maine and Ben Sasse, of Nebraska. Throw in possibly Sen. Rob Portman, R-OH, who has just announced he will retire after three terms, and fellow 2022 retiring Republican Sens. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Richard Burr of North Carolina, perhaps add in McConnell, who has already said he will not whip the Republican caucus on how to vote, count on all Democrats including two independents who caucus with them, and you may be up to 58 votes to convict, nine short of the number necessary to convict. 

Some Republicans who have joined the anti-Trump and never-Trump unofficial sub-caucus and Democrats hope that a Trump conviction will be followed by a vote on whether to ban the former president from ever running for federal office again, which may only require a 51-vote majority depending on the rules set forth for the impeachment trial. 

Because the week of February 8 will mark the first-ever impeachment trial of a former president, Chief Justice John Roberts will not preside. Instead, that honor goes to President pro-tem Patrick Leahy, Democrat from Vermont.

What should happen? What will happen in this historic anomaly? Pundit-at-large Stephen Macaulay tackles those questions for the left column, and contributing pundit Bryan Williams considers the questions on the right.

—–
Click on News & Notes for details of the impeachment article against former President Trump

Immigration Executive Order are Only a pre-Trump ‘Reset’

By Nic Woods

President Joe Biden, in his first day in office, signed a slew of executive orders, memoranda and proclamations that included some attempts to overturn his predecessors’ immigration policy, which were, essentially, done with executive orders signed mainly to undo the work of his predecessor.

Just like the tit-for-tat, the policy signals in the immigration executive orders aren’t new. Much either resets immigration policy to where it was before Trump was inaugurated, or underscores what was the pre-Trump normal. 

Unlike former President Trump, Biden is signaling that he’d prefer legislation be passed to bolster the executive orders and is currently preparing a legislative package that further codifies the policy, but key Republicans have started to balk, claiming that because he was signing executive orders already, he didn’t actually mean what he said in his inaugural address about unifying, and governing, as one nation.

But Biden’s immigration asks are not that egregious. One EO basically requires the Census Bureau to do what it is already required to do by the U.S. Constitution – count every person, citizen or not. But this differs from Trump’s efforts to carve out non-citizens from the Census count. 

The main ask – a streamlined, eight-year process for an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants to become citizens – would make the Census EO redundant, as people in the pipeline for citizenship would likely have less to fear from Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials and are more likely to be comfortable with answering a Census worker’s questions.

Many of the other immigration EOs, such as lifting the ban of travelers from Muslim nations, either returns us to “normalcy” or it brings back to the table issues Trump tried to avoid or end altogether, e.g. protection from deportation for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) or programs for refugees and asylum seekers, some of whom were in mortal danger for assisting U.S. troops in such trouble spots as Iraq. 

Others overturn Trump executive orders that pushed for the aggressive deportation of unauthorized immigrants and deported Liberians who have been living in the U.S. For these, Biden has directed the State department to restart visa processing and develop ways to address the harm from having that process be in limbo for so long.

In yet another EO, Biden ends construction of Trump’s border wall in favor of bolstering the borders with new technology that does similar work at, perhaps, less cost.

What Biden isn’t doing is throwing open the U.S. borders for everyone to get in unvetted. No one wants that and, as a centrist, such an extreme position isn’t in his wheelhouse. But he seems to be making a bold move to succeed where presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush failed by finally providing a clear, legal, more humane route to U.S. citizenship.

Other Biden first day initiatives:

• A 100-day “masking challenge” that entails mask requirements in federal buildings and on federal land, as well as public transit. Biden called for mask requirements on trains, airplanes and buses, and in public airports. 

• Establishment of a directorate for global health security and biodefense, with the goal of having protocols in place determined by past pandemics in order to be prepared for future pandemics.

•At first a fan of China’s early response to COVID-19, former President Trump quickly came to criticize and then pull representation from the World Health Organization for not being tougher on the country. Other critics agreed the WHO for failing to take a tough stance on China’s slow response to early outbreaks, The Washington Post says. Thanks to Chinese bureaucracy and restrictions, the Post reports, it took nearly a year for WHO to gain access to the country, which finally happened this month. But WHO helps with worldwide distribution of medical supplies and holds regular meetings on the coronavirus, which Anthony Fauci, the top infectious disease official in the U.S., attended by webinar Thursday.

• Eviction and foreclosure moratoriums that were part of the March 2020 CARES Act were extended by Trump in December, set to expire at the end of January. Biden’s EO extends the moratoriums through September 30.

• Like the eviction and foreclosure moratoriums, Trump extended to the end of January a freeze on student loan payments otherwise due to expire with the CARES Act in late December. Biden’s EO also extends the freeze, again, to September 30.

• Trump exited the Paris Climate Agreement, which the Obama administration signed on to in 2015, calling climate change a “hoax” and claiming the international treaty was unfair to the U.S. But Biden has nominated John Kerry to a new cabinet-level position, special presidential envoy for climate, with the intention to rejoin and continue work on the treaty.

• Canada’s TC Energy’s Keystone XL pipeline has been in the works for nearly a decade, connecting Alberta’s oil sands with Montana. While some state Democrats, as well as most Republicans support the $8-billion project, Native American tribes and ecology groups have fought it since the beginning, and the U.S. achieved energy independence during the Obama administration. Biden has issued a moratorium and TC Energy has suspended its development. Biden is to meet with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau Friday.

—–