• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: quid pro quo

James Staab: The Case for Impeachment is Clear

06 Friday Dec 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bribery, Donald Trump, extortion, impeachment, James Staab, quid pro quo

House Democrats have been remarkably cautious in considering whether to impeach Donald Trump. Even after the Mueller Report, which did not exonerate the president from obstruction of justice in the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, they did not call for his impeachment. However, the concerns raised in the current impeachment inquiry directly implicate the president. The most alarming evidence is the July 25, 2019 transcript of the telephone conversation between President Trump and the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. After preliminary words of congratulations for the recent parliamentary elections in Ukraine, President Trump asked President Zelensky for a “favor.” He mentioned two specific things he would like to have investigated. First, the president mentioned “CrowdStrike,” the discredited conspiracy theory that the Ukrainians, not the Russians, tried to influence the 2016 election. He then turned to the Bidens and the former Ukrainian prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin, who was fired in March 2016. President Trump expressed regret that the former prosecutor had been “shut down” and suggested (based on another debunked conspiracy theory) that Vice President Biden wanted him fired to prevent an investigation of the company (Burisma) that his son, Hunter Biden, worked for.

We now know that President Trump was leveraging an official state visit with President Zelensky during their phone conversation. After President Zelenksy was elected in April, President Trump called the newly-elected president to congratulate him and mentioned that he would like him to visit the U.S. Through various back-channels, Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, connected the official state visit with Zelensky’s public announcement of the investigations mentioned during the July 25 phone call. On July 10, two weeks before the conversation between the two heads of state, Gordon Sondland, the Ambassador to the European Union, raised the quid pro quo arrangement in a meeting in Washington D.C. with both Ukrainian and U.S. officials present. Alexander Vindman, National Security Council Director of European Affairs, and Fiona Hill, former White House Russia adviser, expressed concerns that such requests were “inappropriate.” John Bolton, the former National Security Adviser, abruptly ended the meeting and later described the arrangement as a “drug deal,” according to Hill’s testimony. At the end of the July 25th phone call, President Zelensky acknowledged the link between the official state visit to the United States and the requested investigations.

Another source of leverage that President Trump attempted to use was money. Congress had previously committed $392 million dollars to Ukraine for military support to protect against Russian aggression. On July 18, President Trump unilaterally withheld that money. The money to Ukraine was eventually released in September, but not before top State Department officials raised questions about why it was being withheld and the House became aware of a whistleblower complaint filed back in August. Bill Taylor, the top diplomat to Ukraine, said it was “crazy” for President Trump to withhold money to a foreign country to help with his own political campaign.

Historically speaking, the impeachment case against Donald Trump satisfies the constitutional standard of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” better than any previous one, except perhaps Richard Nixon’s. What President Trump engaged in during the July 25 conversation with President Zelensky was nothing short of bribery. Andrew Johnson did unpopular political acts during his presidency, but he did nothing illegal. In fact, his removal of Edwin Stanton, the Secretary of War, was proven to be within his constitutional authority historically. Bill Clinton exercised incredibly poor judgment in having a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky, a White House intern, but it did not warrant removal from office. The clearest parallel to the current investigation is Richard Nixon’s. Nixon ordered the burglary of the Watergate building to learn what the Democrats were planning in the 1972 election and then orchestrated a coverup. When the Supreme Court ruled that the Oval Office audiotapes had to be released, Nixon had no choice but to resign. Similarly, Donald Trump wanted information against a political rival that would give him an advantage in his reelection bid for 2020. But Trump’s actions were arguably worse than Richard Nixon’s because he wanted to involve a foreign government in U.S. elections! No president should be able to call on a foreign leader to ask for a personal favor in a domestic election. If your members of Congress do not review the evidence of this investigation with the degree of seriousness it deserves, then you should vote them out of office.

– 30 –

James B. Staab is a Professor of Political Science and Constitutional Law at the University of Central Missouri. He has authored or co-authored articles or book chapters on various Supreme Court justices, including Levi Woodbury, Benjamin Cardozo, and Antonin Scalia. In 2006, he published a book on Justice Scalia titled The Political Thought of Justice Antonin Scalia: A Hamiltonian on the Supreme Court (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield). He is currently working on a book project tentatively titled, “The Limits of Constraint: The Originalist Jurisprudence of Hugo Black, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas.”

Previously:

Because a footnote in Marbury v Madison (1803) gives Wayne LaPierre the final word? (January 24, 2013)

The Tea Party is Anti-Federalist (October 16, 2013)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r) “Four legs good, two legs better.”

05 Thursday Dec 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

4th Congressional District, bribery, corruption, Donald Trump, extortion, impeachment, Misouri, obstruction, quid pro quo, Russia, social media, Twitter, Ukraine, Vicky Hartzler

Eric Blair should be so proud. Or, more probably, horrified.

From the Federal Election Commission [pdf]:

OFFICIAL 2016 PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS
General Election Date: 11/08/2016
DATE: January 30, 2017 SOURCE: State Elections Offices

CA Clinton 8,753,788 Trump 4,483,810

MO Clinton 1,071,068 Trump 1,594,511

NY Clinton 4,556,124 Trump 2,819,534

Total Clinton 65,853,516 48.18% Trump 62,984,825 46.09%

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r) [2016 file photo].

This morning, from Representative Vicky Hartzler (r):

Rep. Vicky Hartzler @RepHartzler
This impeachment inquiry has been a political attack against Trump. This is a move started by and supported by only Democrats.

This is what happens when California and New York Democrats want to undo the decision of the 1.6 million Missourians who voted for @realDonaldTrump.
8:52 AM · Dec 5, 2019

Math is hard, high dudgeon is cheap and easy.

As usual, there was much hilarity in the responses:

You’re peddling fiction.

Just like you did on birtherism.
Just like you did promising to lower our national debt.
Just like you did promising not to support tariffs.
Just like you do on climate change.
Just like you do on evolution.

You lie. Over and over. [….]

You know better. He did it. He is immoral, indecent, and probably, illegitimate. Our great country and our democracy is under attack by him, putin, and more. He’s debilitated our State Department, along with the EPA, along with any public entity that serves our citizens. Shame.

Nice tactic Vicky. Call out those coastal “elites”. Can’t wait to be rid of you in 2020.

Nope, this is what happens when presidents are DIRTY.

Shame on you for making it political, you know better.

You couldn’t be more wrong. It’s a shame you’ve decided to choose that orange malignancy in the Oval Office over your country and your oath to the Constitution. But that’s OK. You officially won’t have to care about that oath after next Election Day anyway.

Ma’am, politics has absolutely NOTHING to do with what the Speaker is doing. Our President broke his oath to the constitution & to the American people. The evidence is irrefutable.

Wrong. It was started by the corruption of this Administraton – that was revealed and exposed.

Missouri voter here: impeach and remove.

Same

read the transcript!

The inferiority complex is strong in this one.

The rest of the country better become the new resistance, or we will become a two state nation!! East of the Mississippi will be New York and west will be California. Theirs will be the only votes that count!

/whine Math is hard.

I can’t wait to see you at the Harrisonville Walmart so I can publicly shame you. You’ll hear me before you’ll see me, that’s for sure. [….]

Such courage you have (sarcasm). When was the last time you had a town hall in Columbia to face your constituents? Come and share with us voters your defense of extortion, bribery and obstruction of Congress. [….]

“…Subject startles easily at the sight of concerned consituents…”

We understand there might be a future open public townhall at the national anti-union chain store branch in Harrisonville.

Ummmm how many people voted against trump? Really better track up those numbers again. He lost the popular vote.

No. This has nothing to do with undoing votes. It has to do with the LAW.

Thanks for reminding us that the GOP has no interest in oversight or accountability. Given this dereliction of duty, maybe you should find another line of work.

This is about abuse of power. If you support him, you must be compromised.

What is your defense for the accusations and testimonies against him? You can’t just dismiss them all because “only democrats support impeachment.” That’s not a defense.

Your disingenuousness & lack of spine will be quite lovely to read about in the history books. Hope you’re ready for the public shaming of your family for decades to come. You’re on the wrong side of this issue and you know it. Here’s hoping that karma will be extra bitchy.

Impeachment doesn’t undo an election any more than jailing a criminal “undoes” their right to freedom. Impeachment is called for under the Constitution when a President abuses his office.

Independent voter here. I always understood the value of ideas left vs right in politics. But I don’t understand why you are protecting corruption for a president who does not value the importance of the office he holds. Continue on this path and all moderates will leave you.

Interesting. The “last straw” wasn’t the overt racism of birtherism or the Muslim ban, nor mocking a reporter with a physical disability, nor attacking Gold Star parents, nor separating children from their parents and holding them in cages…

No this is what happens when a game show host crimes in the White House.

Trump withheld aid from a foreign country to get dirt on a political rival. That’s Bribery. This isn’t the Democrats doing, this is trump and his crooked administration.

“I need you to do us a favor, though.”

No this is what happens when Republicans stand up for Republicans and not the United States, you will NEVER receive my vote again for anything.

The only New Yorker responsible for Donald Trump’s malfeasance is Donald Trump.

No, this is what happens when someone actually has the balls to stand up and protect the constitution against high crimes and misdemeanors. Trump’s a crime boss and you’re a family member.

It’s all about abuse of power, obstruction of justice, the rule of law and upholding the Constitution, which was part of your oath of office. Get a clue or resign.

This impeachment is a slap in the face of every little city in rural America who voted for @realDonaldTrump. Democrats who live in big cities desire to rule over all. It’s past time for a Civil War or Breakup of the USA into 3 or 4 Autonomous Republics.

That there’s a real patriot. Good luck on your own, sucker. Until the revenues generated by the citizens of New York and California to subsidize those other states disappear, right?

Bullshit. I’ve voted against you in every single election you’ve run. I knocked on doors, put up signs. Every day you dismiss half the electorate of this state like you’ve got some kind of carte blanche to enact their corporate bought and paid agenda. You are the worst.

Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound? Or is that on purpose?

We’re gonna go with a “no” on the first one.

Trump is a criminal – and so are you for being his accomplice

Even Republican voters have Trump fatigue

#TrumpIsALaughingStock

Let us be clear about this Vicky, you support a criminal and a traitor.

The election you and your party are vaunting was objectively attacked by a foreign power to help donald trump win.

I don’t see the will of 1.6M Missourians, I see the will of Vladimir Putin.

“Make America Great Again” – in Russian.

You’re on the wrong side of history and are spouting a false message.

Why are Republicans parroting Putin propaganda & disinformation? Why don’t Repubs defend Constitution? Your oath was meaningless. You know if a Democratic president had done any ONE of the things 45 has done, you’d impeach.
#Hypocrites

“Россия” (Russia) – a variant of the Russian presidential flag.

You believe a President can never be impeached because it would be “undoing” the decision of certain voters?

This conflicts with the express terms of the Constitution which mandates Impeachment for Bribery, Treason, or High Crimea and Misdemeanors.

No one is above the law.

No, that’s what happens when Missourians get hustled into voting for a lifelong New York Democrat as if he’s the brand standard of the Republican Party. Y’all got bamboozled. People like you are the reason i left the party. Grow a spine and standup for what’s right.

He changed his vote registration to Florida.

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): Oopsie, again…

27 Wednesday Nov 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

4th Congressional District, bribery, corruption, Donald Trump, extortion, impeachment, missouri, quid pro quo, social media, sycophant, Twitter, Vicky Hartzler

Yesterday:

U.S. Representative Lawrence Clarifies Statement on LeDuff Podcast
November 26, 2019 Press Release

Detroit, MI – Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence (MI-14) issued the following statement in clarification of her interview with Charlie LeDuff:

“I was an early supporter for impeachment in 2017. The House Intelligence Committee followed a very thorough process in holding hearings these past two weeks. The information they revealed confirmed that this President has abused the power of his office, therefore I continue to support impeachment.

However, I am very concerned about Senate Republicans and the fact that they would find this behavior by the President acceptable.”

###

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r) [2016 file photo].

Yesterday morning:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler @RepHartzler
The impeachment inquiry only highlights divides in our nation. It has prevented us from working together to deliver real results for hardworking people.

The election is 11 months away. Let the American people decide President Trump’s political future.
[….]
10:36 AM · Nov 26, 2019

The American people decided Donald Trump’s political future on November 6, 2018. Don’t you remember?

As usual, there was much hilarity in the responses:

No, Vicky, the impeachment inquiry highlights that trump is utterly corrupt and should be removed from office. Impeach, Convict, Remove! Then in November 2020, VOTE BLUE!

there is a criminal in the white house and he should be held accountable.

Okay.

I decide… to impeach and remove Donald J. Trump from office.

But in the meantime u want us to turn a blind eye to the lawlessness of what he HAS done??

Sure sounds like that, don’t it?

@HouseGOP @FoxNews “Republicans hope lying will work better then their current start of defending the indefensible”

Vicky endorses trump’s crimes

It actually highlights the departure from truth and consequence by all @GOP. You’d have to be a fool to believe a word from @potus or any republican. Have a nice day, Vicky.

That’s the same as “bless your heart” if you live north of the river, right?

No, the highlights are that the American people are seeing the depth of corruption in our government, and not just from this administration, others also. The American people need to stand up for the constitution & hold even Presidents accountable, impeach and set the example.

That is not a defense.

BTW
– the gov’t has been divided since 2010
– trump & the GOP have made it worse
– 200+ bills waiting for
@senatemajldr to act

Got caught in the act. Withholding military aid in exchange for a personal favor is bribery (aka quid pro quo). Aid was released when the coverup scheme blew up

A crinimal potus who likens himself to Jesus Christ, compromises our national security and believes he is above the law, is what’s dividing our nation. My question is why doesn’t this bother you?
#CorruptGOP

Lol. Nope. Trump for prison.

How about we respect rule of law and punish those not following it? Crazy idea, huh?

Where is your responsibility in check a branches abuse of power?

No. Goddammit. He is corrupt and I’m sick & tired of the GOP pretending he is not. His entire entourage are corrupt. Most have had to resign because of ethics violations. Others have gone to prison. This corrupt administration is insufferable. What happens when he defies SCOTUS?

by that time, it’ll be too late. Just watch.

“It has prevented us from working together.” SERIOUSLY? Are you high??? They have committed crimes!

That is a fatuous argument.

@realDonaldTrump is accused of cheating on the last election and attempting to cheat on the next election. Are we guaranteed that he won’t still try to cheat? No.

He can’t be trusted. Let the investigation finish, and probably #ImpeachAndRemove.

Had to look that one up. Heh.

this from the party who said “we’re going to make sure Obama is a one-term president”

working together, it seems is convenient when your party is on the defense

#HeyGOPAmericansArentStupid

But, maybe their base is.

This is always your answer except if you had the chance to put another justice on the court your mantra would change. You continue to lie to the American people!

Please provide the name of the survey to which you are referencing? I believe the number were just released last night showing no change in the last 7 days. Naming your Source is the always best practice. Bills are moving forward to die in $ Moscow Mitch’s Graveyard.

Eat shit #welfarevicky

Well. That individual certainly has a strong opinion.

Sure vicky. Who cares if he broke the law. Nice concept

Impeachment or not, it is good to know what Trump is doing behind our backs. Who knows what else he will do to this country before the next election. Do you really want to wait that long and see the division getting even wider with more violence?

So you are saying trump hasn’t been divisive? You are saying if their is wrongdoing let it go?

Well, he is. And he’s confessed on TV.

So someone who is cheating and abusing their power, to win an election. To say that we should wait until after that election to do anything is just dumb. You know when everyone who worked on this says that he is guilty. It takes a special kind of stupid to say let’s wait.

You are an idiot. It’s about the soul of our country and holding this President and future Presidents accountable. If you do not understand that, I strongly suggest you resign immediately

Or you could stop kissing the ass of a traitor.

There is that.

Go to school, do your homework, and never, ever, engage in sloppy conspiracy theories with people who are just as dumb as you

24 Sunday Nov 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

American Oversight, bribery, corruption, Donald Trump, extortion, impeachment, Mike Pompeo, quid pro quo, Rudy Giuliani, transliteration, Ukraine

On the fake “do not prosecute” list:

“…THE CHAIRMAN: Can you tell us what that letter was and what you know of its provenance?

MR. KENT: Well, that was part of series of news articles that came out I believe starting March 20th, this spring. There with a number of articles that were initially led by John Solomon of The Hill, who gave — who took an interview with Yuriy Lutsenko earlier in March. And so, there was, I believe, video somewhere, there certainly were pictures of them doing interview. And it’s part of a series of articles, it was an intense campaign. One of those articles released because the interview on the first day Lutsenko had claimed that Ambassador Yovanovitch had given him a list in their first meeting of people not to prosecute. Several days later, a list of names was circulated on the internet, with — the photograph had a copy of my temporary business card that I used for a short period of time in 2015. So it was a real — it didn’t look like a regular business card. It was the one that we did on the embassy printer. So I think the card was genuine, and someone attached that to a list of names that was a hodgepodge of names. Some of the people I had to google, I had not heard of. Half the names were misspelled. Not the way that any American, or even Ukrainian, or Russian would transliterate Ukrainian names. My best guess, just from a linguistics semantic point is the person who created the fake list was either Czech or Serbian…” – INTERVIEW OF: GEORGE KENT – Tuesday, 0ctober 15, 2019 – Washington, D. C.

Transliteration – Tchaikovsky, Tschaikovsky, or Tschaikowsky? It’s important to pay attention in language school.

“…There were about 15 names, and I remember it was very odd. It included the country’s leading rock star, Slava Vakarchuk, who is now the leader of one of the parties in parliament. It included very bizarrely a person who was a friend of the current — the ex-President Poroshenko and was head of the overseer of the defense industry named Gladkovskiy, and in parentheses it had his previous name, Svinarchuk. The reason why that’s memorable is because it means a pig or a pig farmer, and he changed his name before he went into government so he didn’t have a name that said basically Mr. Piggy. But no one knew that that was really — knew that was his name when the list allegedly was created in 2015. That was a story line from 2019…” – George P. Kent, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs: “Mr. Piggy” and the list (November 11, 2019)

In 2015 and 2016 the story of Mr. Piggy’s name change was not known.

“…they were quoting Giuliani saying to a Ukranian that the President really wants Ambassador Yovanovitch to go. And this seemed to be — the implication was that this was a roundabout way the President was trying to get rid of the Ambassador through this smear campaign.

I found it at the beginning very — I found it very hard to understand why a President of the United States would do it that way when he can just — I mean, all Ambassadors are Presidential appointees, they serve at the pleasure of the President, so it didn’t — it didn’t add up to me. I didn’t understand why that would be…” – Ambassador David Hale, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (November 19, 2019)

Donald Trump (r) could have removed Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch from her post by just simply removing her from her post. Instead, she was subjected to a campaign impugning her professionalism and character. For what reason?

Very late on Friday, in response to a court order in a lawsuit by American Oversight:

Publish Date: November 22, 2019
State Department Releases Ukraine Documents to American Oversight

On Friday evening, the State Department released nearly 100 pages of records in response to American Oversight’s lawsuit seeking a range of documents related to the Trump administration’s dealings with Ukraine.

Among other records, the production includes emails that confirm multiple contacts in March of 2019 between Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, at least one of which was facilitated by President Trump’s assistant Madeleine Westerhout.

[….]

From the material (C06852069) released to American Oversight:

The cover envelope. Note the “return address”.

“Timelines” folder. Note the “Trump Hotels” imprint.

“Outline”. “Source of this document?”

The “list”.

Mar. April 2016
Prosecutor General Lutsenko meets with US Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch. Yovanovitch tells Lutsenko that he must drop investigation of individuals and institutions. The list includes an organization run by George Soros. Lutsenko is aware that Yovanovitch is very close to Biden and Soros.

And, in one of the articles:

…’Unfortunately, from the first meeting with the U.S. Ambassador in Kiev, [Yovanovitch] gave me a list of people whom we should not prosecute,’ Lutsenko, who took his post in 20016, told [The Hill] last week…

It’s evident that the campaign to impugn the character of Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch was used, in part, to neutralize any questioning of the validity of the accusations aimed at the Bidens which were contained in this “package”. If, in their world, Marie Yovanovitch’s character and professionalism have no value, then any challenges to the accuracy of the information in their “package” have no value either.

And now, according to various news sources, Lutsenko has retracted his statement that there was a list.

It’s like Watergate, only this time, concocted by idiots. A student winter dance organizing committee at a junior high school run by clowns would have left fewer tracks.

Bad combover. Check. Too long red tie. Check. Orange spray tan. Check. Tiny hands. Check. Cluelessness. Check…

Exquisite timing

22 Friday Nov 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bribery, corruption, Donald Trump, extortion, Fiona Hill, John Bolton, quid pro quo, Russia, social media, Twitter, Ukraine

John Bolton (r) [2010 file photo].

This morning, at 7:00 a.m.:

John Bolton @AmbJohnBolton
Glad to be back on Twitter after more than two months. For the backstory, stay tuned……..
7:00 AM · Nov 22, 2019

There was much disdain in the comments:

Okay, lightweight.

Testify

If only John Bolton had the courage of Fiona Hill

“Few Republicans are going to want to read a Bolton book showing Trump in a bad light. And Democrats are not about to put money into the pockets of a man who effectively blocked us from hearing damning testimony.”

It’ll be enough.

Testify to Congress under oath. That’s really the only thing we want to hear from you.

While you were away from Twitter, sir, a lot of people found it cowardly that you chose to discuss the Trump administration before a “gathering of Morgan Stanley’s largest hedge fund clients” but not before Congress.

There’s that.

In it for the glory, but mostly the profit.

There’s that, too.

Trump is burning this country to the ground. DO SOMETHING.

Testify in public and under oath, or you are just wasting air and space.

Hey John Bolton why don’t you do your patriotic duty and come forward – if it’s a matter of money we can start a Go Fund Me page for your testimony
It wouldn’t be a “quid pro quo” cause the GOP doesn’t think anything is so we are good!

We see what they did there.

To sell a book? Or do justice now? You watched Trump up close and know what he’s capable of if he’s allowed to continue.

It will be on you.

You sent those under your charge to the NSC lawyers and they agreed to testify to Congress. Are you too cowardly to do the same? Is the power of your party affiliation more important than your duty to country?

Testify under oath or leave us all alone.

Public servants with everything to lose stepped forward.

Come forward for the right reason.

We’re full up on schemes and bribes.

Just testify, dude. Fiona Hill did.

The only way I want to hear from you is under oath, before the American people. It’s your duty.

You need to testify.

#BoltonUnderOath

Do your duty; testify.
You’ll always be able to sell your book. But you’ll never be able to get this moment in history back.

How about testifying in the Impeachment hearings and tell the FRONT story? That madman you’re protecting in the White House is destroying our country, and you stand silent? You are better than this, sir.

I think we’re very close to finding out whether John Bolton really is better than this.

Quit fan-dancing for tips and testify.

Testify first. Tweet later.

We’re waiting…..

Your timing is curious sir. It’s either to promote your book (which is more likely the case) or to antagonize the monster in the WH. Either way I care less about what you tweet and more about you stepping forward and telling the Impeachment committees what you know. #BeBest

Sir, US Capitol Building, First Street SE, Washington, D.C. Wear a jacket and tie.

And on and on.

“This is a transnational crime syndicate masquerading as a government.”

22 Friday Nov 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Resist, social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bribery, corruption, Donald Trump, extortion, Fiona Hill, impeachment, quid pro quo, Russia, Sarah Kendzior, social media, Twitter, Ukraine

Yes, we are.

Last night:

Sarah Kendzior @sarahkendzior
I’m glad people listened to Fiona Hill. I wish you’d listen when she says we’re running out of time. We *never* had time. A central tactic of autocrats is to simply run out the clock. That’s what Trump’s been doing while people take their sweet time catching up to the obvious.
8:31 PM · Nov 21, 2019

“Make America Great Again” – in Russian.

#ImpeachTheMF

#resist

Previously:

The resistance (December 18, 2016)

Keep a civil tongue…

21 Thursday Nov 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bribery, corruption, Donald Trump, extortion, impeachment, Putin's Puppet, quid pro quo, Russia, social media, Twitter, Ukraine, useful idiot

“Россия” (Russia) – a variant of the Russian presidential flag.

It’s not a possibility.

This morning:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Corrupt politician Adam Schiff’s lies are growing by the day. Keep fighting tough, Republicans, you are dealing with human scum who have taken Due Process and all of the Republican Party’s rights away from us during the most unfair hearings in American History……
7:15 AM · Nov 21, 2019

Consciousness of guilt.

“Make America Great Again” – in Russian.

Bad combover. Check. Too long red tie. Check. Orange spray tan. Check. Tiny hands. Check. Cluelessness. Check…

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): Did you ask Donald Trump (r) and Mick Mulvaney (r) about that “vital” aid?

19 Saturday Oct 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

4th Congressional District, corruption, Donald Trump, impeachment, junket, Mick Mulvaney, missouri, quid pro quo, shakedown, Ukraine, Vicky Hartzler

Just asking.

“…U.S. programs have contributed Javelins, night vision devices, communications equipment, Humvees, and more, all of which are vital to Ukraine defending its sovereignty and deterring further Russian aggression…”

Bad combover. Check. Too long red tie. Check. Orange spray tan. Check. Tiny hands. Check. Cluelessness. Check…

Press Briefing by Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney
Issued on: October 17, 2019

MR. MULVANEY: …Did he also mention to me in pass the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about that. But that’s it. And that’s why we held up the money…

Q So the demand for an investigation into the Democrats was part of the reason that he ordered to withhold funding to Ukraine?
MR. MULVANEY: The look back to what happened in 2016 —
Q The investigation into Democrats.
MR. MULVANEY: — certainly was part of the thing that he was worried about in corruption with that nation. And that is absolutely appropriate.
Q And withholding the funding…?

Q But to be clear, what you just described is a quid pro quo. It is: Funding will not flow unless the investigation into the Democratic server happens as well.
MR. MULVANEY: We do that all the time with foreign policy….

Q Or was the call just perfect, as the President has said?
MR. MULVANEY: Again, no one here had any difficulty with the call. We do think the call is perfect. We don’t think there’s any difficulty with the call at all. I read it several times. By the way, I was not on the call; someone from my office was on the call. No one raised any difficulty with me on the call at all. I understand that, in fact, no one on the call in here thought there was any difficulty with it…

Q Did the President direct you or anyone else to work with Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine?
MR. MULVANEY: Um, yeah. The — when was it? It was the May meeting, and I think this has been widely reported. In fact, I think Sondland mentioned it in his testimony, and I’m pretty sure that Rick Perry mentioned it in his interview yesterday with the Wall Street Journal, that in the May meeting in the Oval Office that I was in — I think Senator Johnson was there, as well as Mr. Volker was there — the President asked Rick Perry to work with Mr. Giuliani…

Q You were comfortable with Rudy Giuliani’s role?
MR. MULVANEY: I’m 100 percent comfortable with that….

Q Mr. Mulvaney, is it appropriate for any President or this President to pressure a foreign country to investigate a political opponent?
MR. MULVANEY: You know, every time I get that question, that’s one of those things about —
Q It’s a simple question.
MR. MULVANEY: It is, but so is, “When did you stop beating your wife?”
Q So what’s the answer?
MR. MULVANEY: It assumes that the President has done that.
Q Well, what’s the answer? I said “any President.”
MR. MULVANEY: We haven’t done that.
Q I said Mr. Trump or any President.
MR. MULVANEY: I’m not — I’m going to talk about what this President did…

Quid pro quo. Shakedown. Same thing.

A good question: Is it appropriate for any President or this President to pressure a foreign country to investigate a political opponent?

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r) [2016 file photo].

Is it appropriate for any President or this President to pressure a foreign country to investigate a political opponent?

Hartzler Statement on Congressional Delegation Trip to Eastern Europe
October 7, 2019 Press Release
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler (MO-4) released the following statement about her bipartisan congressional delegation trip to Poland and Ukraine:

“Both Poland and Ukraine are important allies to the United States. There is broad and bipartisan support for strengthening the relationship between the United States and our two eastern European allies and I appreciate the opportunity to learn more about their roads to freedom, sovereignty, and their unwavering commitment to democracy,” Hartzler said.

The delegation, which included John Garamendi (CA-3), , Ton O’Halleran (AZ-1), John Shimkus (IL-15), Dave Loebsack (IA-2), and Jenniffer González-Colón (PR-AL) released the following statement about their visit to Ukraine:

“We came to Ukraine to show our strong bipartisan support and to hear how we can help advance the country’s Euro-Atlantic integration. We are encouraged by the new government’s energy and commitment to democracy, defeating corruption, and adopting reforms, even while battling Russian aggression. Ukrainian officials explained to us how freedom and sovereignty were ingrained in Ukraine’s history, and we have no doubt it will be part of the country’s future.

“We saw how the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative is supporting Ukrainian troops and bolstering Ukrainian security and defense. U.S. programs have contributed Javelins, night vision devices, communications equipment, Humvees, and more, all of which are vital to Ukraine defending its sovereignty and deterring further Russian aggression. During our visit to Yavoriv, we observed training and cooperation that promotes NATO interoperability. We will continue our close security cooperation.

“Ukraine is a country rich in resources and technology. We see significant potential for energy and commercial cooperation and will encourage U.S. businesses to explore these opportunities with Ukrainian partners when we return home.

“Ukraine’s efforts to counter Russian aggression and achieve peace are impressive, even with approximately 14,000 deaths and hundreds of prisoners held. We assured our Ukrainian counterparts that sanctions against Russia will remain in place until Russia reverses the steps that prompted the sanctions initially.
“This includes removing the Russia-led troops and illegal armed formations from the Donbas and creating the security conditions necessary for free and fair elections. Crimea is Ukraine. The Donbas is Ukraine. All of Ukraine’s sovereignty must be restored and it must regain control of its international border.

“We are committed to returning to the United States and continuing to champion the cause of unwavering support for Ukraine. We commend President Zelensky for numerous positive steps since taking office, and look forward to our next visit to Ukraine.”

Is it appropriate for any President or this President to pressure a foreign country to investigate a political opponent?

Does Hastert’s money really have cooties?

13 Saturday Jun 2015

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

campaign finance, corruption, Dennis Hastert, missouri, quid pro quo, Roy Blunt, Zephyr Teachout

Republican Senator Roy Blunt was in the news recently because he made it known that he had no intention of returning money donated to his campaign coffers by former House Speaker Dennis Hastert who, although now retired, is mired in an emergent scandal:

“Returning donations gives some sense that you are going to look at the behavior of everybody who gives money to a campaign,” Blunt, R-Mo, told reporters during his weekly press call. “I don’t know if I have time to do that, and I would expect not to be returning donations to anybody.”

Hastert allegedly resorted to illegal means to pay off a blackmailer who had the goods on him for the sexual abuse of a student back when he was a highschool wrestling coach. Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill, while withholding judgement, described the money as tainted, while the Democratic Party immediately claimed that keeping it was in some way corrupt.

I have to say that for the first time in just about ever, I’m with Blunt. Money is money, and as long as it isn’t taken in return for political favors – which is clearly not the case with Hastert’s donation – it doesn’t represent corruption. Like Blunt, I see no reason for politicians to be held accountable for the personal lives of their donors.

But, I have heard folks object, in 2006 Blunt not only got rid of $8,500 from lobbyist Jack Abramoff by donating it to charity, but was emphatic that other politicians should either return the money or similarly donate it. But, I respond to those folks, the situations are very different. Abramoff was a lobbyist who was convicted of buying favors from politicians. Keeping money he donated left the donee, by implication, very suspect. Especially a donee like Blunt, who, as one of the GOP moneymen in the House at that time, essentially a “liason” to K-street lobbyists, was already somewhat tainted by association with Abramoff. So, see – not the same thing at all.

But what boggles my mind is that anyone would be debating whether or not Roy Blunt should return paedophile Dennis Hastert’s piddling little gift, but nobody would think to demand that he return the massive amounts that he collects from representatives of the communications, energy, tobacco, etc. industries, industries to the welfare of which he devotedly ministers. In a sane world, soliciting and accepting money and returning favors to the donors is corruption pure and simple.  And there’s no doubt that Blunt is really good at getting those corporate dollars. Similarly, there’s no doubt that he’s one of the most reliable go-to boys when it comes corporate favors.

Everybody knows that Senator Blunt, selected in 2010 by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) as one of Wasington’s most corrupt politicians, might have a difficult time passing the smell test. It’s difficult to even keep count of the questionable favors Blunt has done for his corporate cronies. The industries noted above reward his hard work very reliably, though he isn’t averse to taking on any entity willing to pay. Most of us remember his attempt to slip an unrelated rider meant solely to benefit Montsanto into some sundry piece of legislation – which is why Mother Jones dubbed him Montsanto’s man in Washington. Or, to take a more recent example,  consider his work on behalf of the for-profit education sector. Just a couple of months ago he managed to make an ass of himself by blaming students of predatory institutions like Corinthian Colleges and Vatterot College – both big campaign contributors – for borrowing to finance their educations.

But enough about ol’ Roy’s dirty deeds. Nobody cares. Unless you can get secret surveillance video of Roy hammering out the quid pro quo in person, it doesn’t seem to count as corruption. At least not in the same  way that taking money from a sex abuser who told the FBI some fibs in order to hide the fact he was paying off a blackmailer inspires the indignant pointing of fingers.

In a 2014 Politico article, Zephyr Teachout, author of the excellent Corruption in America, notes the flaws in such a restrictive definition of corrupton as regards quid pro quo:

In McCutcheon v. FEC, the landmark case that threw out aggregate limits on campaign spending last week, Chief Justice John Roberts made clear that for the majority of this current Supreme Court, corruption means quid pro quo corruption. In other words, if it’s not punishable by a bribery statute, it’s not corruption.

This is a reasonable mistake to make at a dinner party. But it’s a disastrous mistake to make for democracy, when the stakes are so high. Essentially, Roberts used a criminal law term-of recent vintage and unclear meaning-to describe a constitutional-level concept. It is as if he used a modern New York statute describing what “speech” means to determine the scope of the First Amendment.

It is misunderstandings of this sort, and the promulgation of same by a frequently ideologically befuddled conservative Supreme Court majority that is responsible for the success of money grubbers like Blunt. To be clear, it has also forced politicians who would prefer not to grovel for dollars to do so in order to compete, since only patsies advocate unilateral disarmament. But no matter who the offender is, we all pay the price. As Teachout concludes in her book’s introduction:

What America now faces, if we do not change the fundamental structures of the relationship of money to legislative power, is neither mob rule nor democracy, but oligarchy.

So let Blunt keep Hasterts offerings. But, please, let’s do something about the money he takes in from AT&T, Goldman Sachs, Montsanto, Murray Energy, et al.

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007

Categories

  • campaign finance
  • Claire McCaskill
  • Democratic Party News
  • Healthcare
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Interview
  • Josh Hawley
  • media criticism
  • meta
  • Missouri General Assembly
  • Missouri Governor
  • Missouri House
  • Missouri Senate
  • Resist
  • Roy Blunt
  • social media
  • Standing Rock
  • Town Hall
  • Uncategorized
  • US Senate

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in

Blogroll

  • Balloon Juice
  • Crooks and Liars
  • Digby
  • I Spy With My Little Eye
  • Lawyers, Guns, and Money
  • No More Mister Nice Blog
  • The Great Orange Satan
  • Washington Monthly
  • Yael Abouhalkah

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

Your modest support helps keep the lights on. Click on the button:

Blog Stats

  • 285,610 hits

Blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel