I'm reading a book written by Malcolm
Nance, “The Plot to Destroy Democracy”. I know, the title seems
a little hyperbolic. But I thought I would give it a chance given
the events surrounding, and the result of, our 2016 presidential
election. I am only a short way into it so won't give it either an
up or down review. So far it is readable and the case he makes is
interesting. But the reason I bring it up is because of a newspaper
article that I just read in my paper today. It was another instance
where Russia seemed to be a player in some way, shape or from in the
events that transpired.
The article was regarding the
resignation of Austrian Vice-Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache, a
far-right leader who was filmed in 2017 promising government
contracts to a woman claiming to be the niece of a Russian oligarch.
Strache was known for his derogatory attitude toward the press and
his admiration for Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban's success at
curtailing freedom of the press in that country. The article I read
was from The New York Times. But as they want you to subscribe I
will post a BBC article.
Germany's DW has a portion of the video
here:
If I had only read the article, and
wasn't reading the book, I probably would have shrugged this off as
just another corruption scandal. Or just another sign of the inroads
the extreme far right have made in Europe, just as they have in
America.
Then I heard that Trump just welcomed
Orban to the White House.
While I wouldn't go so far as to say
that Russia has orchestrated all of this there seems to be a
collection of useful fools type of scenario taking place with events
moving in a positive spin for that country. But then I haven't
finished the book yet, it may present a substantial case for bear
tracks.
89 comments:
Honestly I keep tripping over Russians. I was just watching 60 Minutes and they had a piece on about Danske Bank which laundered some $230 billion in dirty Russian money. One man blew the whistle and multiple people at that bank are facing charges. A number of big banks had relationships with Danske, JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America & Deutsche Bank. JP Morgan did notice and report the odd transactions.
At this time no one knows where exactly the money came from or where it went. Some think it was funneled into real estate in London and New York.
"Some think it was funneled into real estate in London and New York."
I think some of it was funneled into real estate in Florida as well.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Sweden has officially requested Great Britain detain Julian Assange pending issuance of a formal arrest warrant for rape. ABCNews
Headline of the Morning comes from NBCNews:
"Deutsche Bank employees reportedly flagged suspicious
transactions involving Trump and Kushner
" Tammy McFadden, a former Deutsche Bank employee, said
she reviewed transactions that involved Kushner's company
and Russians in the summer of 2016"
Higher ups at the Deutsche Bank then decided to not report the suspicious transactions to American authorities, in spite of their investigator's recommendations.
The Ukraine's new President has disbanded the Ukrainian Parliament. (There are those who argue that he did not have that power--at least not for the next 30 days, on account of one of the parties to the last governing coalition had announced it was withdrawing from the coalition, and that supposedly freezes the Parliament for 30 days--but others claim the governing coalition had already collapsed and that the notice of withdrawal from said coalition did not count. We'll have to wait and see how that works out.) The new President's order, if upheld, will begin the process of new elections for Parliament. Bold move. Hope he turns out to be real democratic reformer, and wish him well if he does.
I think some of it was funneled into real estate in Florida as well.
I think I heard that too before...maybe you mentioned it.
Higher ups at the Deutsche Bank then decided to not report the suspicious transactions to American authorities, in spite of their investigator's recommendations.
If I remember right, Mueller was asking for documents from Deutsche Bank during his investigation. Maybe that's what he was looking into. I don't know if he ever got them or not. Maybe Deutsche Bank is the foreign owned company that has been stonewalling and racking up fines for non compliance of a court subpoena.
Someone made an interesting point on one of the news shows the other day. Americans who believe Trump should be impeached are at around the 36% level. The point they made was that, while that may seem low, the number of Americans who believed Nixon should be impeached, before the proceedings started, was around 19%.
The new President's order, if upheld, will begin the process of new elections for Parliament. Bold move. Hope he turns out to be real democratic reformer, and wish him well if he does.
Me too. It would be nice to see the good guys win one again.
So, would laundering money for Russia be considered a high crime or misdemeanor?
"…would laundering money for Russia be considered a
high crime or misdemeanor?"
Not in the Republican Senate. (It would be a different story if Obama had done it.)
I'm starting to wonder what the deal is with Mueller testifying. Mueller doesn't want to appear "political". If his report is the truth then politics are not an issue. Nadler does raise a good question, why is Mueller still working at the Justice Department if he is done?
There appear to be two versions of the Mueller story. First version is that Mueller is reluctant to testify in open, public session, because he's afraid his testimony will be perceived as "political". The second version is that Barr's folks are providing the leaks that promote the "first version".
I'm not at all clear on why Mueller's still on the payroll, but he is.
I'm content at this point to wait for him to give his own version. Things will become clearer soon enough I reckon.
Maybe Mueller is a bit of diversion for other things.
Btw, that book I'm reading is very interesting. He's done a great deal of research. It's rather scary how the extreme right in this country is following an ideology created in Russia. Even down to the catch phrase "drain the swamp". Fools of a feather flock together.
Btw, I've been meaning to ask, are you going to read the Mueller report? They actually have copies of it at Walmart and I may pick one up. There was a letter in our paper the other day by a woman who read it and she said so many people asked her what was in it. Her response was that every American should read it. I was kind of hesitating because there were so many redactions.
"…are you going to read the Mueller report?"
I been figurin' to wait for the non-redacted version¹; I figure that's due out around the end of the year, after the Supreme Trumpkins don't have the balls to support Trump on this one.
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
¹ Mostly non-redacted anyway; I figure they'll allow some "security" redactions for the safety of the intelligence services.
11 Dec 2018:
"I am proud to shut down the government for border security,
Chuck. … I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it
down."
Donald John Trump
22 May 2019:
""Let them play their games. *** We're going to go down one track at
a time.
***
"I want to do infrastructure. *** I'd be really good at that.
That is what I do. But you know what, you can't do it under these
circumstances."
Donald John Trump
Buy him books and buy him books, and it don't never help; he just don't learn.
After getting farther in the book I mentioned in the post I am thinking it should be required reading for every American. While he does do some speculating there are enough facts, with sources, that paint a rather concerning picture of Russia's, and Putin's, activities.
I'd heard of the book before. I'll have to keep an eye out for a copy.
TheNewYorker: Not too long and fairly lucid argument in support of Pelosi's ‛go slow’ approach to impeachment.
I noticed that, overnight, Trump has given the Attorney General, Bill Barr, the authority to ‛declassify’ specific intelligence relating to the FBI's decision to investigate the Trump 2016 presidential campaign. This includes intelligence held by ‛sister’ intelligence agencies--the CIA, NSA, etc.
I believe it beyond reasonable doubt that Barr will take that as his marching orders to declassify all and only intelligence which might be bent to serve, or taken out of context to serve, or which might otherwise serve to cast doubt on the FBI and the American intelligence "community" in general, or which might suggest Trump is not guilty of any ‛high crimes or misdemeanors’. Evidence not favorable to Trump's preferred narrative will remain fully classified.
This is a rather more intelligent plan of action than Trump is normally known for, and I'd reckon that Barr probably suggested it.
It would appear the Mueller's reticence regarding testifying in public doesn't really have to do with him thinking his testimony will be perceived as ‛political’. Rather, he's thinking the Congressmen will be going for political ‛spectacle’ (both sides probably), and he doesn't really want in on any of that.
Can't say I blame him. But, I think he has an obligation to endure it for the sake of the nation.
Pelosi does seem to have a knack for getting under Trump's skin. I have never liked her more.
As for Robert Mueller, I agree, he should testify before Congress and the American people should be able to hear all of it.
What Trump is doing is taking a leaf out of a playbook for a road that we as a nation have never in the past went down, that of tsarist Russia or fascist Germany. As long as we have a public who is too self absorbed to pay attention our nation will be in danger of becoming something very unpleasant.
I think a more accurate comparison would be to fascist Italy, Il Duce, Benito Mussolini.
By the way, I can confirm that Barr was indeed the one who thought up the idea of letting Barr decide what intelligence to declassify and present to the public and not be leaving those decisions to the whims of Trump.
Is there any hope that Barr actually has some loyalty to his country that would check any release of the really sensitive information that could harm it? Or has he too drunk the Trump political kool-aid?
"…any release of the really sensitive information…"
I suppose he might hold back from releasing the actual name of our senior mole in Putin's organization.
But, in general, he didn't ask for unrestricted authority and make it a point to have Trump go public with that and have Trump take the extra step to specify his (Barr's) primacy over our senior intelligence directors on account of Barr intends to observe any practical restrictions on his ability to spin the intelligence to suit Trump's pleasure.
It could be something Barr could hold over the heads of our intelligence agencies. Going public with his new powers is a warning. Just another way to try to control the narrative of Trump's presidency.
After all it is still rather hard to just kill anyone who opposes you like his mentor, Putin, does.
"Going public with his new powers is a warning."
Yes, indeed.
And it was also an announcement to his dedicated Trumpkins that he's tearing down the current national government structure, as promised; he's doing the damage that they want done.
Bad news in Europe. As Marcus seemed to predict the far right has made more inroads into multiple countries there, eroding the center.
Amy Klobuchar mentioned at a rally that John McCain, whom she was sitting by at Trump's inauguration, was reciting the names of dictators during Trump's speech. I could see him doing that. He had Trump's number even then.
Raining here to beat the band and our street, which they have been redoing, is flooded. It's one big muddy river.
Lots of rain in the midwest this year (tornadoes too). We've had better than three times the May average, and more rain expected before the month ends.
"…the far right has made more inroads into multiple countries…"
It's the EU Parliament, which is more symbolic than a seat of power. Still, it is bad news, even if it wasn't unexpected.
It's become apparent that the Trump administration is fairly incompetent at most administrative tasks. It's not much better at pressing policy changes. (Creating chaos doesn't exactly count as implementing an agenda, even in foreign policy.) The establishment Republicans have done a fairly brisk business in pushing the establishment Republican agenda into the vacuum that is the result of Trump's incompetence at formulating and implementing his agenda, but that's hardly a win for Trump (although he claims it for his own, having no actual wins of his own to talk about).
So, we're discovering that Trump brings chaos and division and anger to the public forum. And that's been sufficient to keep the dedicated Trumpkins happy.
My question is this: Will the European ‛populists’ actually be able to deliver on anything except gridlock and bedlam? Or, if that's all they can deliver, will the European right-leaning voters be equally as happy as the dedicated Trumpkins with having sound and fury as their sole reward for voting the European right-winger ‛populist’ types into power?
I suspect that given the extreme right doesn't have a controlling majority in Europe, yet, that we will see similar gridlock there. That is really sufficient for their main backer, Russia, to be happy, though.
As for will the European voters that voted in these people by happy, I suspect that, like here, there will be those who will regret their decision. Those are the ones who have been drawn in out of anger, not so much ideology.
The real problem here in the United States is that there are too many people not paying attention. They have become so used to our freedoms that they are taken for granted. They don't realize that they were hard won and need to be protected. It makes it easier for those who feel ill will toward our country to sow seeds of division.
I see that Mueller is to make a statement this morning. But he is not taking questions. So does that mean questions from Congress or questions from the press? If it means both then it would appear that he won't actually testify.
The White House has said they will not comment until after his statement. But I see that Trump is busy shaping the environment with false statements.
I mentioned in the last thread that my reading of Mueller was that he had turned out to be an especially timid ‛special prosecutor’.
After reading his statement (he apparently read it himself, for the cameras) I stand by my assessment of him as an especially timid investigator and prosecutor.
C'est la vie.
I don't think I agree with you on that. I think he is very careful and methodical in his actions. There are too many people who are aligned with the President to be less than careful.
I agree with this analysis of his remarks today. But the most telling is what he reminded people of at the end, and that was Russian interference in our election process. Whatever we do or do not think of Trump and his Republican supporters it is this that people need to be wary of, because it is not over.
He didn't insist on an interview with President Trump because Trump would resist his subpoena.
He didn't insist on an interview with Trump Junior because it would upset Trump.
He didn't inquire into the scope of Trump's financial obligations to Russian oligarchs because Trump declared his financial matters to be off limits.
I could go on.
Are you sure about all of those points?
The second point is conjecture. Mueller's stated reason, that there were "First Amendment questions" about whether or not a campaign could accept campaign assistance from hostile foreign governments, makes no sense. Mueller could have compelled Trump Jr.'s testimony in any event. He might have learned something of value anyway (even Jr. was surprised when Mueller didn't charge him)--solid chance learning something from Jr. But, Jr. "declined to interviewed voluntarily". And so Mueller blew it off.
(I begin to suspect that you are one of those folks who hold out a secret hope that there's an counter-intelligence operation still being run by the CIA or one of those other letter combinations, and they can't go around charging people for fear of blowing the super-secret investigation still going on.)
lol!
I have no idea whether there is any super secret investigation going on, by anyone. I am just taking Mueller at his word that he wasn't in a position to indict a sitting president, and that his investigation had a narrow focus. So, if Mueller had information regarding Trump's financial dealings he may not have been in a position to do anything about it. However, he probably would have passed that information on to someone else.
Well, I'm glad to have those incipient suspicions dispatched. (There are those still looking for some sort of deus ex machina solution to Trump.)
Complete transcript of the CBS (Jan Crawford) interview with Attorney General, William Barr. The man's slick and unflappable, no shame at all (he shares that with Trump, but he reminds me more and more of Dick Cheney every time I see him perform). One of the saving graces of the Trump administration was that the members ranged minimally competent to totally incompetent, Trump included. Unfortunately, with Bill Barr they've broken that pattern.
(There are those still looking for some sort of deus ex machina solution to Trump.)
Well, I still think he deserves impeachment, but I suspect it will be up to the American people to get rid of him. Which I very much hope they do.
Perhaps if he taxes their beer, their cars and their food enough they will start to notice.
I am planting garden today, so hopefully I will have fresh veggies, if the rabbit doesn't get them. A garden might come in handy. I've got a couple of older cars that still run good, so I don't have to shop for that, and I've never really been a beer fan. However, a tanking stock market won't help my retirement plan too much. People may start to notice that too.
I'm looking to sell some wheels, not buy more. And there ain't enough aluminum in beer to warrant my worries. I am wondering if I should have put in a garden though.
Apparently the DOJ believes they don't have to comply with a judge's order to release transcripts of Michael Flynn. So I wonder if they think this is so sensitive does the same apply to information pertaining to the start of the Russia investigation that Barr is looking into?
Also, China is firing back at the US ban of Huawei by creating blacklist of firms and groups.
My guess is that the DOJ is simply trying to establish that they decide whether or not they have to abide boy orders of the federal courts. That will come in handy in many pending court fights the Trump administration is taking up in the coming days.
"…abide by…"
Funny you should mention court fights. Not only is the Trump administration involved in numerous lawsuits, but so is the Donald Trump business organization. Oddly enough a major reason for that decision that a sitting president could not be indicted was that a court case would be a distraction and he/she wouldn't be able to concentrate on the job of president.
Trump kind of contradicts that reasoning. Unless people would argue that his personal court battles are what is causing him to exhibit such a poor job performance.
Politico has a piece on that: Can Trump Still Sue His Way Out of Trouble?
Saw fireflies tonight. I hadn't seen any fireflies for a couple of years. I'd been wondering if it was global warming that got 'em or maybe indiscriminate use of pesticides by the neighbors. (Didn't think they'd get all my fireflies with pesticides, but had to admit to the possibility.)
Anyway, tonight there's fireflies again for the first time in a couple of years. Could be they're adapting, or maybe a new strain has moved its territory north a bit.
I've planted a number of sunflower seeds, as well as other flowers, in hopes that a few will survive. The bees like them. We seem to be short on bees lately, so I am trying to do my part.
I have also considered trying to make my yard more animal friendly rather than the green desert it is. I admit to slacking off on my dandelion killing. I have been pulling them when they get too annoying.
I see that Trump is still thumbing his nose at Congress, ordering Hope Hicks and Annie Donaldson to turn over any documents requested by their committee.
An excerpt from an article in Foreign Affairs, "How Democracies Fall Apart," as quoted in that book I'm reading.
They note the increase in democratically elected "strongmen" such as Putin, Duterte in the Philippines, and Erdogan in Turkey, is due to their ability to capitalize on citizen grievances: "These leaders first come to power through democratic elections and subsequently harness widespread discontent to gradually undermine institutional constraints on their rule, marginalize the opposition, and erode civil society."
That sounds vaguely familiar.
"…ordering Hope Hicks and Annie Donaldson to [not] turn over
any documents…
He promised to tear down America's ability to govern itself democratically. The Trumpkins voted for him on the basis of that promise. And now he's delivering on that promise.
We are not short of bees. Buggers are everywhere. All kinds of 'em.
He promised to tear down America's ability to govern itself democratically. The Trumpkins voted for him on the basis of that promise.
They forget at their peril, however, that key phrase..."it's the economy, stupid."
I sense a troubling, for Trump anyway, discontent in the ranks. Yes, even the Republican "yes" men are having second thoughts about the new tariff threat against Mexico. We also have economists suggesting there is a 60% chance of a recession in late 2020. Now that would be inconvenient timing for Trump & Co.
"Republican 'yes' men are having second thoughts about the
new tariff threat against Mexico."
Probably too late for them to be rethinking their position as ‛yes men’. Trump's in campaign mode already, and he needs to claim to be doin' something about the swelling numbers of refugees showing up at the southern border. And, bein' as he's pretty much a one-trick pony, he's gonna be workin' his one trick again, and they'd just damn well better get comfortable with that idea.
(Turns out demagoguery doesn't actually solve problems, which leaves Trump with an immigration situation that's gotten worse on his watch instead of better. But, he's still only got the one trick. So, they're stuck with it.)
Hmmm...is it possible that the Republicans in the Senate have grown a spine? They are making noises like they are ready to break with Trump on tariffs against Mexico even to the point of overriding any veto he may enact.
We'll see.....maybe they did remember...
"…...is it possible that the Republicans in the Senate have
grown a spine?"
No.
(They're just making noises to try to keep their donor base donating even after the tariffs are imposed. Shortly they'll start making noises about how it's futile to buck Trump when the Republicans in the House won't go along with a veto override. But, first the noises for the donor base, then… back to reality.)
That's so pessimistic! It's just as bad as those 54% of Americans who think Trump will win in 2020.
Sheesh! I'm even getting sick of his name.
"54% of Americans…think Trump will win in 2020."
I am not among those. It's possible he'll win, of course. He has the added advantage of the incumbency this time. And he's not afraid to cheat, and Putin's still backing him (as are some other folks who don't wish America well--hmmmm--that description fits Marcus--but, I digress…).
I think he's got an uphill climb in front of him. His dedicated Trumpkins are still dedicated, even more fanatical than before in fact. But, he's not expanded his base; shrunk it a fair bit instead. So, at this point in time I'd be predicting a blow-out, embarrassing loss for him.
I certainly hope you are right about that.
I see that Nancy Pelosi's dream is to see Trump in prison. He certainly has that orange color thing going on. I could see him in a cell next to Bernie Madoff.
Apparently Eric & Donald Jr. were doing the Irish pub crawl thing the other night. There are actually people there who like them as they are a major employer. I doubt Petes is one of them.
Petes was fairly pro-Trump when he was last seen here.
Ahhh, maybe pro Trump in America, but I'm not so sure about in Ireland. If I recall he didn't seem overly impressed with Trump's golf course.
I noticed that Trump was trying to spin the immigrant/tariff talks as going well for his reëlection campaign. Trouble with that is that it's impossible to make any assumptions about what's really going on there based on what he's saying about what's going on there.
I reckon we'll have to wait until Monday to see if he orders the tariffs or if he don't.
He's making noises like there has been a deal reached. However, I think you are right, we will have to wait to see what happens Monday.
I almost would have preferred to see the Senate make him back down. If, that is, they weren't blowing smoke about being against his latest tariff debacle.
He tweeted that he had a "signed" deal. Maybe; maybe not.
I'll have to wait and see.
I don't yet know if there was a "signed" deal, but, from what I can make out this early, the U.S./Mexican tariff/immigration agreement was designed chiefly to provide Trump with the opportunity to fly his very own "Mission Accomplished" sign on the tower behind him during his next campaign stop.
Whether the agreement will in fact lead to a lessening of immigration appears to be a rather more dubious proposition.
"Petes was fairly pro-Trump when he was last seen here."
He was kind of a goofball on many topics, but was always more sane than you two. He at least knew what he was talking about, even when he was wrong, which he was on many occations due to his belief in scripture which oddly crashed with his belief in science.
BTW: Trump will win again in 2020, bet that.
Speaking of those who're "pro-Trump"…
BTW: Trump will win again in 2020, bet that.
Trump only won in 2016 because of the electoral college rules, he lost the popular vote. The right showed up but the left didn't.
Now what happens in 2020 if there is an issue people on the left are passionate about, enough so to turn out and vote in large numbers?
And what happens if there is an issue that people were passionate about in 2016 that Trump has not come through on? Or manages to screw up before November 2020?
Any guesses on the two issues I'm referring to?
PR on the Trump/Mexico tariff/immigrant deal is settling into a familiar pattern. Most of the mainstream media are looking at it as much ado about nothing (Mexico was already doing the stuff that Trump trumpets as his great victory--they just promised to keep doin' what they'd already been doin' and he promised to quit makin' threats that the congressional Republicans didn't want him to follow through on anyway.)
So, lotta noise; nothing much changes. Trump claims victory over the Mexicans; Mexicans shrug--tariffs avoided, that's all they wanted outta the deal and they got that. FoxNews loyally reports Trump's great victory. The dedicated Trumpkins are happy.
(Except that this time FoxNews isn't rushing to report it as a great victory for Trump. They'll probably fall in line by Monday when Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham and Lou Dobbs and all the Trumpsuckers get back on that air, but for now--not so much cheerleading on the weekend news as there might be. They're draggin' their feet on that, for reasons that ain't quite clear to me.)
Maybe even some people at Fox are feeling Trump fatigue?
The moneymakers ain't. And they'll be back on the job come Monday.
In fact, Hugh Hewitt was on the job this weekend. (Op-Ed in the WashingtonPost
However, like Limbaugh and Beck, he's on his own independent syndication, but the FoxNews Trumpsuckers will be back on it by Monday.
By the way, Trumptweet notwithstanding, there was no "signed agreement with Mexico" on Thursday, still isn't one. Republican Senator Roy Blunt described it this morning as "an agreement in principle" on CBS's Face the Nation.
That did appear to be Trump trying to take credit for something that wasn't real...again. His way of saving face when he didn't put on the tariffs.
Meanwhile, it seems that the mystery company that was subpoenaed for records and being fined $50,000.00 a day is off the hook. The judge ruled that they have apparently coughed up enough records, despite the fact that there seems to be a gap in time in some of those records. But the investigation is not complete. No information about the name or country of origin of the company, or what it does. There is, however, a lot of speculation. Some are speculating that it is a central bank.
"…he mystery company that was subpoenaed for records and
being fined $50,000.00 a day is off the hook."
Saw that.
Also saw that AG Bill Barr has made a deal with the House Judiciary Committee Chairman to get the Committee to hold off on holding Barr in contempt. Barr will have the Justice Department start turning over for inspection some of the subpoenaed documents he'd been refusing to cough up. The Democrats on the committee have agreed to hold off the contempt citation pending their review of the documentation and it's up in the air whether they'll ask for more than Barr's willing to deliver, but they've merely ‛suspended’ the vote on contempt. Could still happen, but, meantime, Barr's the one who blinked here.
I see that Trump has been retweeting Lou Dobbs (FoxNews' Trumpsucker) from yesterday. They've been back on the job as of yesterday it seems.
(Trump's bein' more than a little defensive about the negative press the Mexico/immigrant/tariff deal has been getting him.)
(Trump's bein' more than a little defensive about the negative press the Mexico/immigrant/tariff deal has been getting him.)
Probably should be, he got even his loyal cohorts in the Senate up in arms.
The rift between Trump and Pelosi seems to have widened, with her stating she is "done with him". I guess he didn't like the leaked prison comment she supposedly made about him.
His "loyal cohorts in the Senate" bother him only because he so desperately needs them to back his faerie tale about his ‛great victory’ on this issue--this issue especially; this issue is a major issue with his dedicated Trumpkin base and he badly needs to be seen as delivering on immigration.
Right now what they're seein' is that illegal immigration is up not down, and these illegals are comin' to stay, to set down roots and raise brown childrens, not to pick fruit and go home after the harvest season's over.
"…The rift between Trump and Pelosi seems to have widened…"
I think mostly Trump's just getting louder. She's got his number and that bothers him tremendously. Nothin' he does seems to effect her--just rolls right off, and that's drivin' 'im nuts.
Nothin' he does seems to effect her--just rolls right off, and that's drivin' 'im nuts.
He is trying to impede just about everything the House is trying to investigate. The latest being claiming executive privilege over the census memos. I would guess he is enjoying putting a stumbling block in front of them.
Meanwhile there are some important cases coming to a head in the Supreme Court, including gerrymandering and the census question. It will be interesting to see how Roberts handles those.
"Meanwhile there are some important cases coming to a head in
the Supreme Court, including gerrymandering and the census question."
The Republicans packed the Supreme Court with right-wingers specifically to enable them to disenfranchise the (Democratically inclined) general electorate. If their gambit doesn't pay off they're gonna be really, really pissed. And their select Justices know it. So, I expect Republican approved decisions, the currently controlling law be damned.
Post a Comment