Donald Trump

Supreme Court to take up landmark cases

by Dave

These are cases in which whatever the outcome, millions of Americans will be impacted. And millions of Americans will believe that the judges are total idiots, and/or highly partisan. To begin with, they are neither. The buck stops at the Supreme Court. All judges who have been accepted to the Supreme Court are really brilliant.

Unlike the legislature and executive branch, the judicial branch at every level, issues opinions that are available to the public and can be critically reviewed by constitutional scholars, who really understand the issues. 

Two landmark cases are the Trump disqualification case and the Trump presidential immunity case. Neither one has been accepted by the US Supreme Court, but almost everyone believes they will be soon. Lawyers on both sides will be burning the midnight oil, to explain, in a million words or less, to explain why their side is right.  

Trump Disqualification Case

By a 4 to 3 ruling, Colorado Supreme Court ruled on December 20, 2023 that the Secretary of State may not include Donald Trump from the primary ballot. The ruling would also eliminate him from the general election ballot. The Supreme Court will have the final say in these cases. 

State judges can take several “off-ramps” to dismiss disqualification challenges. I call these the “Don’t let this case land in my courtroom defenses” or “Stop them at the courthouse doors.” The judge does not need to hold an evidentiary hearing if the plaintiffs have not demonstrated real injury. Second, judges have ruled in many states that these cases are premature, or as they say, are not ripe for review, because Donald Trump’s name is not on the general election ballot.

Colorado’s case went forward based on both state and federal laws and the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution. State law giving the Secretary of State the right to disqualify candidates in the primary election, allowed the case to proceed. The case cleared several major hurdles in the District Court, in particular, that the violence on January 6, 2021, adequately fits the definition of an insurrection and that Trump’s actions constituted “engagement.” So, none of the normal off-ramps were taken.

However, Trump was the victor in this initial court case, because the judge concluded that the 14th Amendment did not specifically state that it applied to presidential elections. The Colorado Supreme Court reversed the judgment, arguing that the Fourteenth Amendment held for all elected offices of government, which they decided included the president. 

This case must be decided by the Supreme Court. They understand what is at stake. Suppose a similar judgment occurs in Florida, Texas, or Georgia. It has the potential to allow Biden to win, because Trump is not on the ballot. And remember, if one of the four judges disqualifying Trump had dissented, the ruling would have allowed Trump to run. It was summed up by one commentator, that voters not judges decide elections. Well, we shall see.

I particularly like a recent opinion posted on CNN. It is important to note that this opinion is not the views of CNN, and the author is not a lawyer. 

CNN Link: The Fourteenth Amendment gambit is breathtakingly foolish

Jan 6 Presidential immunity case

As part of the pre-trial motions of the January 6 case, with a scheduled start date of March 4, Donald Trump claimed presidential immunity for all actions while he was president. The trial court ruled against him, so he filed an appeal. The Special Counsel, Jack Smith, asked the Appellate Court to expedite the matter and they agreed.

Since the case will inevitably end up in the Supreme Court, Smith asked the Supreme Court to review the case, prior to the Appellate Court decision. As I was completing this post, the Supreme Court, rejected Smith’s petition without comment. This allows the Appellate Court to decide first, which will inevitably delay the start of the trial.

To leapfrog ahead of the Appeals Court or maintain the normal order. That was the question until last Thursday. Trump’s legal team wrote an excellent reply to Smith’s petition. Nothing is stronger than taking someone else’s words and using them against them. Smith argued that jumping ahead of the normal order was needed because this matter was of great public importance. Trump countered that if this is so important, it justified the Appellate Court’s review first to ensure the Supreme Court had all the facts before a landmark decision. It’s the old “haste makes waste” argument. 

The elephant in the room is the elections. Trump wants to push the January 6 criminal case to after the election. The decision by the Supreme Court and Trump’s very busy court date means it might be delayed past November.  If Trump loses again in the Appellate Court, he has 45 days to file an appeal to the full Appellate Court, and if he loses again, 90 days to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The January 6 Defendants Case

On Dec 13, 2023, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Fischer case, which if successful, will undermine the legal basis for 2 of the 4 counts against Trump in the January 6 case. The Fischer case is also referred to as the Jan 6 defendants case because it arose from a defendant found guilty of participating in the riot on January 6. 

The case is whether the law that formed the basis of guilty convictions of over 200 defendants for attempting to disrupt an official proceeding on January 6 was really applicable. It was enacted as an anti-corruption corporate statute after the Enron scandal to prevent the destruction of documents.

For a detailed examination of the applicable law 18 USC 1512, see Lawfare post: Trump Jan 6 Indictment: The Statutes.

So, the Supreme Court, through a very narrow interpretation of the applicable law, could effectively dismiss two of the charges against Trump and the conviction of over 200 defendants in the January 6 riots. The Department of Justice has been slowly working their way up to the leadership ranks of the extremist groups, and it would terrible to see the organizers of the January 6 riots go free, based on slight interpretation differences in the words, like “corruptly” or “otherwise.”

Abortion Pill Case

The Supreme Court will decide if states can limit access to the abortion pill, mifepristone. Since overturning Roe vs. Wade, the argument is availability is a state’s issue. However, the drug has been approved for general use by the FDA. This case will have the greatest impact on abortion rights since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. It is estimated that approximately half of all abortions in the US are medicated abortions. Plus, any ruling to limit use of a drug that has been deemed safe by the FDA, would allow states to challenge the use of any other drug on the market, making their judgment superior to the FDA.

NYT: Abortion Pill Rullings

The Supreme Court tends to leave the most controversial decisions to the end of its term, which could end in July 2024. My sense is they will act rapidly on the Colorado Disqualification Case, as it directly impacts Trump’s candidacy. A delay in the presidential immunity case would be a big gift to Trump as he would definitely get the case dismissed if he is elected president. The status quo right now on the abortion case, is the ruling on restrictions has been put on hold, so this is one that can be delayed without a major impact.

Stay tuned,

Dave

The Disqualification Lawsuits

by Dave

The efforts to disqualify Donald Trump from running for president, under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment are not succeeding. It has been in the news recently, as the Colorado Supreme Court heard oral arguments on December 5, 2023. The Court can either uphold the lower court ruling, and keep Trump on the ballot, or reverse the decision, and then Trump is off the ballot. Appeals to the Supreme Court for an emergency hearing would be immediately submitted if he is taken off the ballot. Otherwise, I believe this will end the challenge in Colorado and the dismissal will be permanent.

Colorado’s district court dismissed the lawsuit, stating Section 3 of the 14th Amendment did not apply to the president. But, the ruling likely pleased petitioners in part, as the judge opined that the violence on January 6, 2021 did qualify as an insurrection.

Other lower court dismissals (Minnesota, Michigan, Florida and New Hampshire) offered a chance for re-filing. Minnesota district court considered that Section 3 did not apply to primaries. Michigan district court considered disqualification a political question, not one to be decided by the courts.

The two other cases (Florida and New Hampshire) were rejected quickly on a demonstration of actual harm if Donald Trump ran for president. In New Hampshire, an attorney, John Anthony Castro, registered to run for president, and tried to convince the court, that allowing Donald Trump on the ballot, would cause his candidacy harm. The courts didn’t buy it.

The courts in other states will take notice of the many ways to dismiss legal challenges. Certainly ruling that a case has no standing, is the most efficient one, as the court does not need to get into the more nuanced arguments of whether Trump encouragement of the January 6 violence was “engaging in insurrection.”

The basis of democracy is we select our president at the ballot box by having all eligible voters being able to cast their ballot. Excluding a candidate from even one state, could be decisive in a close election. I have posted an opinion previously that these lawsuits run counter to our democratic processes. The courts should lean towards narrow interpretation of rules and laws and restrict their role in deciding whether to exclude both voters and candidates in the election process.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Quick updates on Trump’s Criminal Cases (Nov 13, 2023)

by Dave

Jan 6 election interference case: Trump’s legal team has asked the trial be televised. This is a non-starter as no federal criminal trial can be broadcast. Trial set to begin March 4. Gag order put on hold by Appeals court. The 3 judge panel will hear oral arguments Nov 20 on the gag order. March 4 is also super Tuesday Republican primary, where roughly 1/3 of all delegates are chosen.

Trump has filed for a dismissal of all charges. On Nov 5, the Special Prosecutors responded forcefully, as follows (from first sentence of arguments):

“Rather than challenging the indictment on its merits, the defendant’s motions (ECF Nos. 113 and 114) attack the indictment by mischaracterizing its allegations, raising inapposite hypotheticals, and advancing arguments that are long on rhetoric but short on law. Stripped of those distractions, the defendant’s statutory and constitutional claims are entirely meritless.”

Classified documents case: Still scheduled to begin May 20, 2024 in Ft. Pierce, FL. Judge Aileen Cannon, has ruled against moving the trial date to beyond November 2024. A meeting is scheduled for March 1, 2024 to reconsider the deadlines and Trump’s side can again argue that the start date is too soon.

GA Election Fraud conspiracy case: Right now (Nov 12), four guilty pleas have been accepted, so there are now 15 defendants in the case. As requirements of the plea agreements, each defendant must be willing to testify honestly for the prosecution. Note that the prosecution has indicated that they would like a March 4 trial start date, which coincides with the Jan 6 federal case in Washington.

As of November 6, defendant Harrison Floyd, a former Black Voices for Trump director, is requesting government agencies turn over 145,000 Fulton absentee ballots. Judge Scott McAfee will rule on Floyd’s request “in the coming days” according to news reports. Court observers expect more defendants to opt for plea deals in the coming weeks. Harrison Floyd might be one of them.

Judge Scott McAfee expressed concerns that the courtroom for the trial of 15 defendants is not large enough. He wants the trial to be as open as possible, which includes allowing the media to televise the proceedings.

Hush money case, which is still scheduled to begin March 25. Judge Juan Merchan has said he is open to reschedule this case and will hold a conference with attorneys in February 2024 on start dates. This is a criminal case, and Donald Trump is required to be present.

Scheduling these four court cases isn’t easy. The Hush Money case might be the shortest, and ready for trial, but the judge might hold off until the other cases are done.

Other court cases:

Minnesota Supreme Court refused to consider denying Donald Trump from running in the primaries. The suit is based on the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3 which bars any candidate who has engaged in insurrection from holding office. The Court based their decision on the fact that primaries are a means of deciding the party’s candidate, not an election to a government position. I support this decision, because the outcome would be very undemocratic. Elections must be decided by the voters.

Those who wish to bar Donald Trump from the Minnesota, will have a second chance after he is on the ballot. A similar court case in proceeding in Colorado.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Trump’s fraud trial and coming court trials in 2024

by Dave

Ivanka Trump was the prosecution’s last witness. Legal experts are saying that her testimony allowed prosecutors to introduce important documents into evidence.

The defense is now able to present witnesses to show that the fraud was minor or excusable in some manner. It will be far less dramatic. Trump’s legal defense witnesses will likely show that the bank executives were pleased to make the loans and that they were repaid on time. Some of this may be immaterial. Since the judge has already ruled that fraud was committed, it no longer is a trial about guilt or innocence, but about the extent of the punishment.

It is estimated that the defense will rest on December 15 and closing arguments by Dec 22, 2023. It has been reported that there are Then there are closing arguments in the following week. Prosecutors have asked the judge to exclude some of the witnesses as not relevant to the case, which makes sense as the case is not about whether fraud was committed. The judge has already ruled on this.

I expect the judge to rule in January 2024. There will definitely be an appeal by Trump’s legal team. I guess the big issue is whether the ruling, including the control of assets in New York State, can be stayed (put aside) until the Appellate court rules.

— What’s coming up in 2024?

The team of reporters from the various networks will stick around as more court cases are coming down the road. The civil defamation case by E. Jean Carroll is scheduled to begin January 15, 2024, which is just about adding 10 million dollars to her award.

There are four criminal cases against Trump, all of which could start before election day. The first two cases are the January 6 election obstruction case, March 4, in Washington and the hush money case (also known as the Stormy Daniels case) scheduled to begin March 25 in NYC. The other two cases documents case in Ft. Pierce, FL and GA interference case likely start dates are after May, 2024. Right now, Trump’s lawyers are trying to push back the documents case to a date after the election.

Three other non- Trump trials are set for 2024. The really big court case will be Senator Bob Menendez and his wife Nadine trial on accepting bribes to influence foreign policy, which is scheduled to begin on May 6, 2024. Three other accomplices were charged. For everyone who thought the Justice Department was just targeting corrupt Republicans, this one will clearly show that there are corrupt politicians in both parties. It is certain that pictures of Bob’s stack of gold bars and his Mercedes will be offered into evidence.

On May 28, 2024, Steve Bannon will go on trial for stealing from the “We build the Wall” fund. Steve Bannon was pardon by Trump on federal charges which I found extremely hypocritical. Bannon was stealing from the most ardent Trump supporters, willing to support his “charitable organization” to privately fund the building of a wall between the US and Mexico. So, scamming Trump’s supporters is ok, right? I uploaded a couple posts on Steve Bannon, and his accomplices in this scam. I don’t expect the trial will last long.

Almost I almost forgot Rep. George Santos trial, which in scheduled for September 2024. Santos is accused of stealing people’s identities and making charges on his own donors’ credit cards without their authorization, lying to the FEC and, by extension, the public about the financial state of his campaign. Santos is accused of falsely inflating the campaign’s reported receipts with non-existent loans and contributions. He is so, so guilty, it is laughable to think he is a representative.

A familiar refrain is “I am completely innocent” which then turns into “We will win on appeal.” I know that every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. But I can express my opinion which is “The bigger they are, the harder they fall.” Well, I think 2024 should be game over for Donald, Steve, Bob, George and assorted accomplices. This is really how you drain the swamp! But things don’t always work out that way.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Part II: The legacy of Jair Bolsonaro and Donald Trump

by Dave

This post will be more meaningful if Part 1 is read first.

Ex-President Jair Bolsonaro greatly admired Donald Trump, and his form of right wing populist politics. It was a very passionate love of country and religion, an emotional attachment that voters could easily embrace. Bolsonaro attacked the socialist views of Lula da Silva, comparing him to Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro, who wrecked the economy of Venezuela and Cuba, respectively.

He continued his attack on the Federal Election court and the election in which he lost. While still in power, Bolsonaro met with foreign ambassadors in July 2022, in which he spread false information about Brazil’s electoral system. Thus he was laying the foundation to challenge the entire election process. The meeting was livestreamed by official television channels and on YouTube.

A lawsuit was filed by Brazil’s Demcratic Labor Party. On June 30, 2023, the federal election court barred Jair Bolsonaro from running for president until 2030. Bolsonaro plans to appeal the judgement. Per the CNN link:

Judge Alexandre de Moraes, who presided over the court, cast his vote last. “Let us reaffirm our faith in our democracy and the rule of law,” he said after voting in favor of the guilty verdict. Moraes added that with the vote Brazilian authorities would show they do not tolerate “criminal extremism attacking the powers of the state, fake news, disinformation to try to deceive voters.”

There are many other cases pending against Bolsonaro. Most recently has been the Saudi rolex watch scandal. The accusation is that Bolsonaro gave the watch to an aide to sell and then deposit the money back into his account. It is not a lot of money ($70,000) but the Superior Court has now permitted inspection of Jair Bolsonaro and Lt. Col. Mauro Cid bank accounts in the US on August 18, 2023.

This is a rapidly developing story, as on August 18, 2023, seven high-ranking military police officers were arrested in connection with the Jan. 8 attacks. I suspect more will follow, including possible connections between the violence on January 8, 2022 and ex-president Jair Bolsonaro. Also, there is considerable speculation in the media, that Bolsonaro and his son, Flavio were enriching themselves through government graft. It will be the court that have to decide whether guilt based on facts, not speculation in the media.

Link: ABC News: Brazil’s Bolsonaro accused by ex-aide’s lawyer of ordering sale of jewelry given as official gifts

What if Bolsonaro’s comments were not livestreamed and broadcast, and also captured on You Tube? Perhaps the Superior Court would have acted differently.

There is no equivalent in the US to the 7 member panel overseeing the election and corruption in Brazil. Some may consider it gives too much authority, as only a simple majority can deny a candidate from running for office. Our First Amendment rights are very broad, while a president is in office. However as Donald Trump has discovered, defamation lawsuits against an ex-president can be won as in the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit.

___

Trump at present has four criminal cases against him. The Federal January 6 case and Georgia case involve his direct involvement to interfere with the results of a fair election, before the election and afterwards, leading up to the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. The classified documents case relate to actions after he left office on January 20, 2021. Trump will be formally arrested in the Georgia election interference case on August 24, 2023.

A commonality of the US and Brazilian system is, no matter how high or low a person’s social status, there is equal justice and accountability for all. We have no privilege class. The prisons of our country and Brazil, were not created to house the poor or illiterate, but those found guilty of crimes by a jury in court of law where the rights of the defendant are enforced. A second principle is that the electorate decides who will govern the country in free and fair elections. Every four years, in the US and Brazil, only the electorate who can be their president.

Both Bolsonaro and Trump have legal rights and can petition a higher court to appeal their sentences. This is another example of

I feel no matter, what occurs, their legacy will be that they truly believed that truth did not matter. Everything depended on the dissemination of false information via social media and cable stations to maintain their base.

Trump in particular has portrayed his legal problems on a corrupt legal system, but this is another lie. He is the cause of the four criminal indictments.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Ex-Presidents Trump and Bolsonaro: Part 1

by Dave

“You shall reap what you have sown” old proverb, meaning you will suffer the consequences of your actions.

When Donald Trump in Nov 2020 and Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro in October 2022 lost their bids for re-election, they refused to accept their loss. Both of them concocted lies which attacked the integrity of election. It was all very planned out and in both cases, within a few months, violence broke out in the capitals of their country. US Capitol attack occurred on January 6, 2021 and the federal buildings in Brasilia were attacked on January 8, 2022, encouraged by unfounded claims from the ex-Presidents.

But both Trump and Bolsonaro maintained a lie that the elections were rigged, and they were the legitimate winners of the election. Both perpetuated these lies by fabricating “evidence” of fraud. It is exactly what many of their supporters wanted to hear. Many people in the US and Brazil are in prison for the violence. Five people are dead as a result of the violent attack on the capital, and many police officers were injured as a result of the violence.

Trump schemed with other White House officials to have Mike Pence dismiss the results of the election in states where he lost by a narrow margin and prepared a slates of false electors. This is, in part, why he is facing charges of conspiracy in Georgia. We have the freedom of assembly and speech in the US, but when the communications are at the foundation of plans to break the law, then this becomes part of the crime.

At the local, state and federal level of government, violations of election laws can be investigated. Volunteers also act as observers and can report any violation. The courts heard more than 50 challenges from Trump’s team of lawyers. None of them were successful in changing the results of the election. On December 23, 2020, the US Attorney General, William Barr, announced that no fraud had been found that would change the results of the election. Similar conclusions were reached by the Director of Cyber Security, Chris Krebs, who was then fired by Trump.

In Brazil, just days prior to the election, Bolsonaro reduced fuel prices to gain favor with Brazilian truckers. On election day, truckers formed blockades to prevent voters from going to the polls in the Northeast region of Brazil, where the worker’s party with Lula Da Silva as the presidential candidate, was favored to win. The police set up checkpoints, causing more difficulties for voters. The federal justices which oversee the election process, voted to end the blockade and police checkpoints on election day. As a result, voters were delayed but not denied the opportunity to vote.

Link: AP Press Brazilian truckers protest Bolsonaro loss, block hundreds of roads

In Brazil, political parties have recourse in the judicial system (federal election court, headed by Supreme Court judge Alexandre de Moraes) to hear their complaints of an unfair election and take appropriate actions. So Bolsonaro’s party presented to the court their arguments that the machines which tallied the votes were flawed and should be disregarded. The discrepancy was very minor, and did not affect the actual tally. The court quickly rejected the allegations of Bolsonaro’s party.

CNN Link: Brazilian court rejects election challenge from outgoing President Jair Bolsonaro

So, both Trump and Bolsonaro challenged the election results through the courts, but failed to show any convincing evidence of fraud. Trump should have conceded to Biden after the formal voting of electors on December 14, 2020. Bolsonaro should have conceded to Lula da Silva after the federal election court rejected the baseless claim of fraud on November 23, 2022.

Instead of recognizing the importance of election integrity and national unity, they continued their attack on the election which they clearly lost. The legal system has caught up with both leaders.

This will be discussed in Part 2 of this posting.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Good Bye El Chapo

by Dave

Joaquin Guzman(“El Chapo”) headed the Sinoloa Cartel in Mexico until 2016, and was responsible for smuggling marijuana, cocaine, heroin, meth, and other drugs into the US through Mexico.   His trial consisted of 56 witnesses testifying against him and lasted 11 weeks.  It is now in the hands of the jury. I am hoping he’s found guilty on all counts and sentenced to life imprisonment.  He deserves to be locked up.   I wish they could lock up all his associates too.

El Chapo was a master of prison escapes.  He was arrested in Guatemala in 1993, and extradited to Colombia.  He escaped a maximum security prison in 2001. He was recaptured in 2014, and placed in a maximum security prison.  He managed to escape in 2015 through a mile long tunnel.  After he was arrested the third time, in 2016, his luck had run out.   He was extradited to the US to stand trial.

To arrest him, and build a solid case against hin, there was international cooperation with law enforcement agencies in many countries, but certain information could not be shared with Mexican officials, because corruption existed at high levels.  According to the NY Times:

The case required the cooperation of several American law enforcement agencies, but it also required keeping some Mexican authorities out of most discussions. Among the cooperators were the F.B.I., the Drug Enforcement Administration, Homeland Security Investigations and the United States Coast Guard. Also involved were foreign law enforcement and military based in Ecuador, Colombia and the Dominican Republic, as well as local law enforcement in New York City, Chicago and Texas and federal prosecutors in New York, Chicago, El Paso, Miami, San Diego and Washington, D.C.

I suspect the heavy lifting was done by the Drug Enforcement Administration, whose agents  had the really dangerous job of working in Mexico, knowing that some local law enforcement officers might be working more to protect El Chapo instead of capturing  him.  What really did El Chapo in at the end was his paranoia,  as he had special encryption programs created for his cell phones.   The DEA located the IT expert responsible for the coding and could wiretap and decode his conversations.   The solution to one problem, really lead to a much bigger problem.

The Sinaloa Cartel  is still in the business of smuggling drugs into the US.   It operates in the same manner as a corporation, with a board of directors, and executives, with offices in cities worldwide including the US, Mexico, Colombia and Thailand.    According to Wikipedia,  “With the arrest of Joaquín Guzmán Loera, Ismael Zambada will most likely assume leadership of the Sinaloa Cartel.”

One take away from all this, is there was tremendous ingenuity and effort put into what I can only describe the most economical  “end to end” narcotics distribution.  According to the NYT:  “the Sinaloa Cartel globalized, stretching far beyond the Mexican-United States border to Colombia, Ecuador, Panama, Belize, Honduras, Canada, Thailand and China.” The cocaine or heroin might come from Colombia or Thailand, and the objective of the cartels is getting large quantities into the US under their control.

Secret compartments in trucks were routinely used, and entered through legal ports of entry.   Other times, they were hidden inside of legitimate products, such as plastic fruit.    It was pretty incredible operation. According to the NYT drugs were transported by “Trains, helicopters and planes, semi-submersible and tanker ships, shoe boxes and chili cans. Although many more drugs crossed over than were seized, a few notable successes for authorities included a 16-ton seizure from a merchant vessel in Panama and a 6-ton seizure out of Ecuador. Although it never happened, the cartel also discussed trying to move 100 tons of cocaine on an oil tanker ship.”

If the 11 week trial proved anything beyond Joaquin Guzman’s crimes,  it proved that Donald Trump’s wall will have no direct effect on the influx of drugs in the US.   The cartels are looking to move large quantities, so large trucks or tractor-trailer semi’s which routinely pass through the legal ports of entry proved to be the most economical way to more drugs.    The illegal border crossings were not part of the Sinaloa Cartel operation, with the exception of some tunnels near San Diego.   The 5 billion dollars for 100 miles of wall, that has become so contentious,  will have no effect on the Sinaloa smuggling operation.

Finally,  the trial did not show that El Chapo and his cartel were involved in the current Fentanyl  epidemic.  I’m not saying that they are not involved because they have huge control over the distribution of drugs in the US.  Fentanyl is very addicting and resulting in over 70,000 overdoses.  It is made in labs in the US, but the constituents and pre-cursors come from China, courtesy of the US Postal Service.   If we are able to crack down on China, then the source chemical suppliers will likely shift to India.  It’s been reported that the Mexican drug cartels, namely the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG) are involved, as they can cut their heroin with fentanyl.  The Jalisco Cartel is a very violent gang and at times, fight to enlarge their areas of distribution,  waging deadly battles with the Sinaloa Cartel.

The chance of a Fentanyl overdose can be reduced by taking naloxone, which apparently is widely available.  See Wikipedia link on Fentanyl.

I’m stopping here, as I’ve wandered a bit off the tracks.  I am very glad when El Chapo gets locked up for the rest of his life.  The DEA and FBI have done well.

Tomorrow, as part of the State of the Union Address Donald Trump will be telling us the drug problem can be solved by pouring concrete.   It can’t.   And going after the “bad actors” needs incredible international cooperation.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Links:

NYT: The El Chapo Trial

Wikipedia:  Fentanyl  (I learned a lot from this link)

Mexico cartels now fuel deadly Chicago opioid epidemic

Wikipedia: Joaquin Guzman (El Chapo)

Jalisco New Generation Cartel 

 

Trump’s statement on the murder of Jamal Khashoggi (Corrected)

by Dave

President Trump issued a statement on the murder of Jamal Khashoggi as provided at the end of this blog.   CNN had reported on the findings of the CIA as follows:

“The CIA has concluded that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman personally ordered the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, despite the Saudi government’s denials that the de facto ruler was involved, according to a senior US official and a source familiar with the matter.”

It was also stated that the CIA came to this conclusion after a review of tape recordings of conversations and phone calls within the Saudi Arabia’s consulate in Turkey.    It was also evident that the team Saudi Arabia sent after the crime, including a chemist, were there to remove evidence of the crime, rather than investigate it.

Truump’s statement is provided below.  The murder of Jamal Khashoggi is not addressed until the fourth paragraph.    I would suggest the first three paragraphs be skipped on first reading.   The fact that Khashoggi is a permanent resident of the US and a well respected journalist living in the US  is never noted.  Nor does it seem important to Donald Trump, the reason why Khashoggi went to the Saudi Arabian consulate in the first place.  He was about to be married for a second time, and needed documents showing he was divorced from his first wife.    The planned assassination included a Saudi dressed as Khashoggi leave the consulate, but this failed as his shoes did not match.

Gina Haspel is the Director of the CIA since May 21, 2018.    She should be congratulated for providing an assessment based on the evidence without a political bias.   I have included her biography in the links. She rose through the ranks of the CIA from 1985, and it really feels like she was very qualified for the position of CIA Director.

Now, let’s go back to the first 3 paragraphs,  all of which are totally off the subject of the planned assassination of Jamal  Khashoggi and mostly false as well.  Iranian Foreign Minister mocked the statement in a tweet:
Mr. Trump bizarrely devotes the FIRST paragraph of his shameful statement on Saudi atrocities to accuse IRAN of every sort of malfeasance he can think of,He also wrote:
Perhaps we’re also responsible for the California fires, because we didn’t help rake the forests,” 

Iran has openly  opposed terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda and the Taliban, as radical Sunni organizations.   Remember that Iran is a Shite country and  considers Hezbollah as a resistance group against aggressive  Israel military actions.  The US considers the entire Hezbollah organization as a terrorist organizations.  The European Union disagrees, and considers only the military wing of the organization to be involved in terrorist activities.    Hezbollah fought to defend the Hassad regime in Syria.

The civil war in Yemen is made worse by the involvement of all other countries, including Saudi Arabia and the US.   It is a huge humanitarian tragedy.   Iran denies involvement.  Certainly it is difficult to withdraw from Yemen, when they don’t have troops there.

Finally,  the 450 billion and 110 billion dollars of investment are a joke.  The 100 billion dollars are from memorandums of understanding or Intent, not actual orders.  Saudi Arabia has spent 4 billion dollars on US military equipment since 2017, and likely will continue to be a buyer, as their military needs to maintain their arsenal with US made parts.   These are not off the shelf items  they can quickly change vendors.  Their investment in US arms is very extensive.

This statement is rotten to the core.   Khashoggi was a journalist, reporting on the decline of basic freedoms throughout the Arab world. He could only do this outside of Saudi Arabia.   This is why he was an enemy of the Prince, but I think a hero to many within Saudi Arabia.  It also says that when critics of autocratic governments are murdered, we will look the other way, thinking more about financial benefits.

Bottom line:  It is not America First, but Trump’s political agenda.  It is Trump’s political agenda first and foremost, and American values are out the window.

Stay tuned,
David Lord

Donald Trump’s statement: 

The world is a very dangerous place!

The country of Iran, as an example, is responsible for a bloody proxy war against Saudi Arabia in Yemen, trying to destabilize Iraq’s fragile attempt at democracy, supporting the terror group Hezbollah in Lebanon, propping up dictator Bashar Assad in Syria (who has killed millions of his own citizens), and much more. Likewise, the Iranians have killed many Americans and other innocent people throughout the Middle East. Iran states openly, and with great force, “Death to America!” and “Death to Israel!” Iran is considered “the world’s leading sponsor of terror.”

On the other hand, Saudi Arabia would gladly withdraw from Yemen if the Iranians would agree to leave. They would immediately provide desperately needed humanitarian assistance. Additionally, Saudi Arabia has agreed to spend billions of dollars in leading the fight against Radical Islamic Terrorism.

After my heavily negotiated trip to Saudi Arabia last year, the Kingdom agreed to spend and invest $450 billion in the United States. This is a record amount of money. It will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, tremendous economic development, and much additional wealth for the United States. Of the $450 billion, $110 billion will be spent on the purchase of military equipment from Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and many other great U.S. defense contractors. If we foolishly cancel these contracts, Russia and China would be the enormous beneficiaries – and very happy to acquire all of this newfound business. It would be a wonderful gift to them directly from the United States!

Thee crime against Jamal Khashoggi was a terrible one, and one that our country does not condone. Indeed, we have taken strong action against those already known to have participated in the murder. After great independent research, we now know many details of this horrible crime. We have already sanctioned 17 Saudis known to have been involved in the murder of Mr. Khashoggi, and the disposal of his body.

Representatives of Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an “enemy of the state” and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, but my decision is in no way based on that — this is an unacceptable and horrible crime. King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman vigorously deny any knowledge of the planning or execution of the murder of Mr. Khashoggi. Our intelligence agencies continue to assess all information, but it could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event — maybe he did and maybe he didn’t!

That being said, we may never know all of the facts surrounding the murder of Mr. Jamal Khashoggi. In any case, our relationship is with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They have been a great ally in our very important fight against Iran. The United States intends to remain a steadfast partner of Saudi Arabia to ensure the interests of our country, Israel and all other partners in the region. It is our paramount goal to fully eliminate the threat of terrorism throughout the world!

I understand there are members of Congress who, for political or other reasons, would like to go in a different direction – and they are free to do so. I will consider whatever ideas are presented to me, but only if they are consistent with the absolute security and safety of America. After the United States, Saudi Arabia is the largest oil producing nation in the world. They have worked closely with us and have been very responsive to my requests to keeping oil prices at reasonable levels — so important for the world. As President of the United States I intend to ensure that, in a very dangerous world, America is pursuing its national interests and vigorously contesting countries that wish to do us harm. Very simply it is called America First!

Links:

Wikipedia  Gina Haspel,  CIA Director

Saudi Arabia top US weapons buyer – but does it buy that much?

CIA concludes Saudi crown prince ordered Jamal Khashoggi’s death, sources say

CNN:  Trump’s statement

85,000 children have starved to death during the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen, says new report

No collusion!

by Dave

This is purely a semantics problem.  The verb “to collude” is not a standard legal term.   The lawyers understand this,  and know what Mueller is looking at the criminal act of conspiring with foreign entities, obviously Russian agents. So, if one simply substitutes conspiracy for collusion, then yes, we are likely getting close to charges of  conspiracy with those close to Trump’s campaign.

I believe there are more criminal  indictments to come.  It is both ill advised, and premature to begin impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

There is more legal  hairsplitting between a “target” of an investigation and a “subject” of one.   Neither one is pretty as follows:

  • A “target” is a person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant.
  • A “subject” of an investigation is a person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury’s investigation.

Donald Trump is the subject of the investigation and not the target of one.  He may be getting closer every day to being a target.

The White House continues to slam the news media,  FBI agents and the Department of Justice.   Exactly how far President Trump is willing to go to defend himself, and close family members is still hard to say.   It has been well established that Donald Trump, Jr.,  Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort attended a meeting with Russian agents in the Trump tower on June 9, 2016.

I believe Attorney General Jeff Sessions made an outstanding decision to recuse himself from the Mueller investigation.   I believe Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein’s selection of Robert Mueller to head the Russian investigation was excellent.  I am very impressed with FBI Director,  Christopher Wray (Trump’s nominated director) and hope that he is able to rise above partisan attacks from Congress.

The investigation is getting complicated.   Mueller has assembled what many consider, the most experienced career  attorneys and FBI agents, to complete the investigation.   White collar crimes, take a long time to litigate because there are teams of attorneys available for those charged with crimes.

The news media is doing a good job of getting the facts as they evolve.  I continue to rely on Wikipedia’s summary, which has assembled one of the best summary of the investigation and its results.   One has to distinguish between the real news reporting,  which recently is the  Manafort trial,  and the commentary which surround it.

There is definitely more to come.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Links:

Normally,  criminal investigations do not list every lawyer and FBI agent assigned to the case.  However, congressional leaders,  particularly Republicans in the House, have relentlessly subpoenaed thousands of documents in their attack on the Mueller investigation, to help the president and related campaign officials.

Wikipedia link 

 

 

 

More Trump’s attacks on the FBI

by Dave

I’m calling them Trump lies.   As President, he can call up the Justice Department, and ask the Attorney General if this allegation is true.   Instead he prefers Fox News.

The New York Times calls this a “distortions of the truth.”    Here is Trump’s tweet on Friday:

“Reports are there was indeed at least one FBI representative implanted, for political purposes, into my campaign for president,” he tweeted Friday. “It took place very early on, and long before the phony Russia Hoax became a ‘hot’ Fake News story. If true — all time biggest political scandal!”

The big problem are “reports” and  “implanted”     Of course, Trump is saying, “I’m not making this up”  however these are not Justice Department nor FBI reports.  It is just something he heard,  on Fox News.   A commentator is not a news reporter, particularly true on Fox News.  Welcome to the echo chamber, from Hannity’s mouth, to  a flurry of tweets from Trump and then back to Fox News.  Ping pong garbage.

A marketing principle: “You can not turn a lie into the truth by telling it a thousand times.  But the lie will seem credible enough to the public, after they hear it a thousand times to be believed as the truth.”    A second rule is “Never concede you are wrong.”

The New York Times and the Washington Post has been very cautious in their reporting.   This is how the Washington Post presented the story:

In mid-July 2016, a retired American professor approached an adviser to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign at a symposium about the White House race held at a British university.

The professor took the opportunity to strike up a conversation with Carter Page, whom Trump had named a few months earlier as a foreign policy adviser.

But the professor was more than an academic interested in American politics — he was a longtime U.S. intelligence source. And, at some point in 2016, he began working as a secret informant for the FBI as it investigated Russia’s interference in the campaign, according to people familiar with his activities.

There is no evidence that there was a paid FBI spy within the Trump campaign.   This is a lie, and very regrettable that President Trump finds it necessary to attack the FBI in this manner.  When Russia agents are making contacts either abroad or  in the US, with the objective of interfering with the US elections, then this is likely a crime.  The duty of the FBI is to find out who the Russian agents are working for, and their US counterparts.  If this requires striking up a conversation with campaign advisers, this is just good law investigation  tactics.

However, as pointed out on CNN, this reporting was based on leaked information to the New York Times and Washington Post.  They know who this individual is but have refused to disclose it.  I hope it stays this way, at least until Mueller’s investigation is finished.  As reported today in the New York Times,  Trump’s congressional allies are demanding full disclosure of the informant, in an attempt to “investigate the investigation” and disrupt or discredit the investigation.   And as collateral damage, weaken the public’s general confidence in the FBI.

According to the New York Times:

“Law enforcement officials have refused (hand over documents on the informant),   saying it would imperil both the source’s anonymity and safety. “

It would also open the door to more  unprecedented congressional inquiries, and interference of the judicial process  in the name of “oversight.”  The only basis for wrongdoing is Trump’s tweets based on Fox News – that’s how screwy things have become.

Robert Mueller is conducting a serious criminal investigation with the help of the FBI.  He runs a tight ship, with the only information surfacing in the media is from Trump’s personal lawyers or through court filings.

The FBI investigation had its first big break in May 2016 when George Papadopoulos, who  like Carter Page, was a foreign policy adviser,  talked to Australia’s ambassador in London, about obtaining political dirt on Hillary Clinton including Clinton’s hacked emails, to help influence our elections in favor of Trump.    Papadopoulos has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI and is cooperating with Mueller’s investigation.

The adage “the best defense is an offense” seems to be Trump’s strategy.    Trump and Mike Hannity (Fox News)  are trying their best to create an alternative reality, where conspiracy theories and deep state nonsense can thrive.   This is shameful.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Iran Nuclear Deal

by Dave

It is likely that Donald Trump will pull out of the Iranian nuclear deal on May 12, just 5 days from today.  The deal was not perfect by any one’s standards, but the flaws were blown way out of proportions by Republicans in Congress.   Trump has used this, and almost everything else negotiated by Obama (and other presidents) as terrible.   The response from Iran is unknown to the US pullout.  Our allies, France, Germany and the UK, have all been trying to keep Trump in the agreement.

The deal is working and Iran is in compliance.    Only  Benjamin Netanyahu,  the president of Israel, is against the agreement.   It will impact our negotiations with North Korea, who will see the US as a country which can not be trusted.   One president makes deals and the next one breaks  the deal when the other side is in compliance.

I hope I’m wrong.  If not, I would list this as the worst decision of the Trump administration,  followed by the pull out of Paris Climate Accords.  The third on the list, is the very brazen efforts by  EPA Director, Scott Pruitt, and Interior Department Secretary, Ryan Zinke,  not to protect  the environment or the interior, but to let the fossil fuel companies to do what they want, in the guise of deregulation. I believe the EPA should be changed to EDA, or Environment Destruction Agency.   As long as I’m criticizing Trump’s appointees,  this last one, John Bolton, as National Security Adviser, would be best described as the person most capable of turning a small problem into a larger one, through inflammatory rhetoric.

I won’t go into any more details on the Iran Deal, as there is a lot of commentary on the Internet.  I’ve included a link from Wikipedia below.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Link:

Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action

 

 

 

Scooter Libby Pardon

by Dave

Scooter who?  I’m certain this is how many people reacted.   His full name is I. Lewis Libby,  but he goes by the name of Scooter Libby.

Now a bit of background on pardons.  The US Constitution gives the president the authority to pardon or commute the sentence of anyone he wants.  A person does not necessarily have to be convicted of a crime to be pardoned.  A list of each president and the number of people whose sentences were reduced or pardon, is given in the links below.  People can be guilty as hell, and still get pardon.  Even before someone is charged with a crime, they can be pardoned.     President Madison pardoned Pierre LaFitte because he helped Andrew Jackson, during the war of 1812.   Andrew Johnson who succeeded Lincoln,  granted a full and unconditional pardon and amnesty to all former Confederates of the rebellion on Christmas Day 1868.   Johnson also commuted the sentence of 3 convicted conspirators in Lincoln’s assassination.

More recently,  President Nixon commuted the sentence of  Jimmy Hoffa, the famous corrupt union boss, who subsequently vanished (likely murdered by others in the mob)  in 1962.  President Ford pardoned Richard Nixon in 1974.  I believe President Ford was right.  Nixon would have been charged with obstruction of justice.  It wasn’t the Watergate break in but the cover up,  backed up by Oval office audio recordings  that helped seal Nixon’s fate.   Nixon was the only president to be pardon.   Ford also provided a full restoration of citizenship to General Robert E. Lee,  who lead the confederate forces during the civil war about 110 years after the fact.   President Carter  granted amnesty to Vietnam war draft resisters, so he clearly is the record holder for pardons.    Carter also commuted the sentence of G. Gordon Libby, involved in the Watergate break in.

— * —

Then there was the billionaire Marc Rich pardon on Clinton’s last day in office.  The pardon raise criticism from many, including the New York Times,  that rich people can buy their way out of trouble, through charitable or  political contributions.  In 1983,  Rich and partner Pincus Green were indicted on 65 criminal counts, including income tax evasion, wire fraud, racketeering, and trading with Iran during the oil embargo (at a time when Iranian revolutionaries were still holding American citizens hostage).  However, Rich’s activities during the oil embargo  benefited Israel, as he was able to supply them with oil, with the help of Mossad, Israel  intelligence unit. The indictment was filed by then-U.S. Federal Prosecutor (and future mayor of New York City) Rudy Giuliani. At the time it was the biggest tax evasion case in U.S. history. Rich fled to Switzerland which refused to extradite Rich for what the they considered were tax crimes.  Rich died in 2013 in  Lucerne, Switzerland.

I bring up Marc Rich’s case, because it would be used, many times, to support the idea of corruption through the use of pardons.  An original “Pay to Play” scheme.  Rich was an oil commodities broker,  and made a fortune buying  crude oil from Iraq and Iran, during the 1973 to 1974 Arab Oil Embargo.   Rich’s ex-wife, Denise had donated over a million dollars to the Democratic Party.  Hillary Clinton didn’t get quite as much, with a donation from Denise on the order of  $70,00 to  $100,000 (See Wikipedia link).    I won’t go into the long controversial Rich saga,  but other tax experts claimed that Rich’s company was in fact, a Swiss company, so the RICO Act  (racketeering law) was improperly applied in Rich’s violation of the embargo rules.   According to Wikipedia:

In a February 18, 2001 op-ed essay in The New York Times, Clinton (by then out of office) explained why he had pardoned Rich, noting that U.S. tax professors Bernard Wolfman of the Harvard Law School and Martin Ginsburg of Georgetown University Law Center had concluded that no crime had been committed, and that Rich’s companies’ tax-reporting position had been reasonable. In the same essay, Clinton listed Lewis “Scooter” Libby as one of three “distinguished Republican lawyers” who supported a pardon for Rich.

Scooter Libby was one of Marc Rich’s lawyers.    It was Eric Holder as Clinton’s Deputy Attorney General who signed off on the pardon.  James Comey was US Attorney for the Southern District of New York in January 2002, and was critical of the pardon (page 159 of his new book).   Comey inherited an investigation into the pardon, as it had the appearance of a corrupt bargain.  There wasn’t enough evidence to bring charges.  Comey suggests it’s possible that Hillary Clinton as a junior senator, might have been reluctant to meet with him in 2002, due to his involvement in this  investigation.   He also suggests that it’s likely simply a scheduling problem.   He states this more as an aside, in discussing Clinton email investigation, which began on July 6, 2015.

— * —

I digress.  Now, back to the Trump pardon.   In the Bush administration,  Scooter Libby held three positions from 2001 to 2005:   Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs and Chief of Staff to the Vice President and Assistant to the President.   He  was Vice President  Dick Cheney’s right hand man, by all accounts, interacting with Departments of State, Justice and Defense.

The Trump  pardon changed nothing  for Scooter Libby.  It seemed directed at conservative Republicans, particularly those who felt Libby had been a victim of an overzealous special prosecutor, some 15 years ago.   Does this sound familiar?

A jury convicted Libby of obstruction of justice and perjury in his grand jury testimony and making false statements to federal investigators about when and how he learned that Plame was a CIA agent.The crime occurred in 2003, and the appeals were exhausted by 2007 at which point  he received a partial pardon from President Bush.   Bush stated:

“Mr. Libby was sentenced to thirty months of prison, two years of probation, and a $250,000 fine. In making the sentencing decision, the district court rejected the advice of the probation office, which recommended a lesser sentence and the consideration of factors that could have led to a sentence of home confinement or probation.I respect the jury’s verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby’s sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison. My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby. The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged. His wife and young children have also suffered immensely. He will remain on probation. The significant fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long-lasting.”

Many in government including Vice President Cheney, wanted a full pardon.  More over, I’m certain others wanted to lay blame for Libby’s problems to an over zealous Special Prosecutor, named Patrick Fitzpatrick and to blame the justice system.  Bush broke with Cheney on this one.

Fifteen years later, as it seemed everything was back to normal.  As consequence of his conviction, Libby’s license to practice law was suspended until being reinstated in 2016.   The judge had wide leeway in sentencing Libby, but he could have been given up to 25 years and fined one million dollars.  He was sentenced to 30 months in jail, but President Bush commuted Scooter Libby’s jail sentence, resulting in 2 years on probation and a $250,000 file.

All this occurred as a result of the “Valerie Plame affair”  in which a columnist, Robert Novak, revealed that she was a CIA agent.   I won’t go into the detail on the Scooter Libby’s case, however it is part of James Comey’s new book,  “A Higher Loyalty” as he was assigned to the case, as a US Attorney.  Comey’s book came out about 4 days after Trump’s pardon, so Comey had no clue that Libby would be pardoned.  This was a case of at least 3 leakers, within the Bush administration:  Karl Rove,  Richard Armitage and Scooter Libby.   However,  Libby compounded his problems by lying to the FBI.  Libby told investigators it was Tim Russert, the NBC Washington bureau chief which informed him that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent.   They knew Libby had committed a crime which the Justice Department could prove to a jury.

Comey explains that the case against Rove and Armitage was weak, as disclosure of a covert intelligence agent requires proof of specific and evil intent,  not just idle gossip.  To avoid an apparent conflict of interest, Comey appointed a special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.   Right now, Patrick Fitzgerald  is part of James Comey’s  legal advisers and saw Comey’s note on a White House meeting after he was fired.

— * —

Donald Trump pardoned Scooter Libby on April 13, 2018 based on a Department of Justice recommendation.  As I said at the outset,  it change little for Scooter Libby.  However, what I find particularly offensive,  was Trump’s call to Libby’s lawyer, where Trump told her that Libby had been “screwed by the courts.”   Libby’s victim, Valerie Plame,  got it right, as she responded:

“This is definitely not about me. It’s absolutely not about Scooter Libby. This is about Donald Trump and his future,” Plame said before the formal announcement hit. “It’s very clear that this is a message he’s sending that you can commit crimes against national security and you will be pardoned, so I think he’s got an audience of three right now. That would be Manafort, Flynn and Kushner, and perhaps others.”

“The message being sent is you can commit perjury and I will pardon you if it protects me and I deem that you are loyal to me,” she added.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Trump: Scooter Libby “got screwed”

Presidential Pardons

Carter’s pardon stopped further court cases against draft dodgers during the Vietnam war, but excluded anyone who had previously been convicted.  Exactly how many draft dodgers might have been caught and brought to justice, and what punishment would have been given,  is really anyone’s guess.

Wikipedia:  Marc Rich

Wikipedia:  United States  v. Libby 

Wikipedia: Scooter Libby

Politico:  Trump issues pardon for Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby

Patrick Fitzgerald – Special Counsel for Plame Affair

Scooter Libby – Marc Rich Connection

Trump’s fixer man, Michael Cohen, and his secret business dealings

by Dave

Michael Cohen is both a lawyer and a business man.    Search warrants  were served on Mr. Cohen because he is  being investigated for possible campaign finance violations, bank fraud and wire fraud.   It is part of a federal grand jury investigation which was empaneled months ago.  On Monday,  Mr. Cohen lost in his request to have all items seized in the raid returned to him.     It was established in court, that in the last year and a half,  Cohen provided legal advice to only three clients,  Donald Trump,  Elliott Broidy and Sean Hannity.   Sean Hannity denied he was Mr. Cohen’s client.

In their search, investigators also sought to obtain records relating to Cohen’s ownership of taxi medallions — high-value assets that are often used as collateral for loans, according to people familiar with the matter.  The value of the medallions was sharply dropping in value, as a result of Uber and Lyft.   Between April and June 2017, the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance filed seven tax warrants against Cohen and his wife for $37,434 in unpaid taxi taxes due to the MTA.[13]

Prosecutors are following the money on this one.   The  $130,000 payoff to Stormy Daniels, might be the most visible sign of shady business, but I suspect there are far bigger targets.   Elliott Broidy  needed Cohen’s help to hide the fact that his affair with Playboy model, Shera Bachard, who he made pregnant, and Cohen arranged a 1.3 million dollar payment to hush up the affair.    The child was aborted.

According to the New York Times, Mr. Broidy was a national deputy chairman of the R.N.C.’s finance committee, a title he shared with Mr. Cohen.  Mr. Broidy is the second member of that committee to resign this year amid questions involving their behavior with women and deals to silence them.

So,  how big is this swamp?   Here is more from the New York Times article:

During the wide-ranging October meeting, Mr. Broidy raised numerous topics high on the agenda of the United Arab Emirates, a country that has given his security company a contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars. He pitched the president on a paramilitary force his company was developing for the U.A.E. and urged Mr. Trump to fire Rex W. Tillerson, then the secretary of state, who the U.A.E. believed was insufficiently tough on its rival Qatar.

The documents show that Mr. Broidy has worked closely with George Nader, an adviser to the U.A.E. and a witness in the special counsel’s investigation, to help steer Trump administration policy on numerous issues in the Middle East. Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, is examining Mr. Nader’s possible role in funneling Emirati money to finance Mr. Trump’s political efforts. There is no indication that Mr. Mueller’s team is looking into Mr. Broidy.

In 2009, Mr. Broidy pleaded guilty to charges that he made nearly $1 million worth of illegal gifts to New York State officials in order to win an investment of $250 million from the state’s public pension fund. Among the gifts were trips to Israel and Italy, payouts to officials’ relatives and girlfriends and an investment in one relative’s production of a low-budget movie called “Chooch.”

It is also reported that there are no emails between Donald Trump and Michael Cohen.   Trump apparently doesn’t use email.

If true, can you imagine the gall of Broidy, wanting to get rid of the secretary of state,  because of his business dealings in the UAE.    Our environmental policies, have been sold out to the fossil fuel companies,  but was  Trump also trading in our relations with other Middle East countries to help support his donors?    Broidy was also on Trump’s inaugural ceremony committee, where millions  were unaccounted for according to MSNBC’s Rachel Madlow and others (see link).

I’m honestly not that interested in Stormy Daniel’s hush money contract, or  Elliot Broidy’s affair,  but the Middle East connections, by way of George Nader.  This might help Mueller’s team.

At this point, it is a legal battle between the president’s lawyers who want to do anything possible to impede the review by the “taint team”  verses the Department of Justice who want to know to get the team’s  review done as soon as possible.   Judge Kimba Woods has stated that case law on confidentiality, applies equally, be it the president of the United States, or the man on the street.   This has also been the opinion of the Supreme Court,  dating back to claims of Executive Privilege in the days of Nixon and Watergate.   Judge Woods  will likely decide soon whether a Special Master should be appointed.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Links:

Whatever happened to the money from Trump’s inaugural committee?

 

EPA in self destruct mode

by Dave

I’ve commented on this before.  Readers can click on “EPA” to read prior blogs.

Republicans and Democrats drink the same water and breath the same air.  Contaminants in air come from many sources, including car emissions and chemical plants.  Pollutants  discharged into water bodies or the air can travel long distances and  do not know geographic boundaries.  This is the physical reality, requiring  the  federal environmentalists to be involved in preserving the environment beyond our borders.    We are one planet, and environmentalists in Kansas recognize they are affected by decisions in Beijing.     The rising water temperature, aided by increased Chinese carbon emissions and deforestation in Brazil, is a factor in the extreme weather variations as occurring in the northeast of the US now, and the hurricanes in Puerto Rico,  Florida and Texas last year.

I read a recent letter from a former EPA scientist, who made me so sad.  He had lung disease, and needed to live where the air quality was excellent.  Yet, the high standards which he was involved in, were likely not being  enforced by the EPA.

I’ve commented on Scott Pruitt before as the worst EPA Administrator it was created in 1970.   Both Republicans and Democrats have contributed to building the EPA before Pruitt began to destroy it.   One of the best Administrators, was William Rucklehaus,  the first and fifth administrators of the EPA.   He was a Republican, and first nominated to the post by Richard Nixon, and later became the Deputy Attorney General. He was fired by Nixon, for refusing to  firing the Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox, but rehired by Reagan to head the EPA again.  Rucklehaus was able to transfer the approval of all regulations of pesticides to the EPA.   Doug Costle ran the EPA under President Carter, and followed a similar path as Rucklehaus.    President Reagan  campaigned against the EPA as an unnecessary government. He brought in Anne Gorsuch Buford to downsize the EPA.    Buford was  held in contempt of Congress when she refused to turn over documents on Superfund expenditures.

Environmental problems are big in the US because every industry has waste that they want to dispose of,  at the lowest cost, and still be within the law.  Only regulatory groups can evaluate the risk potential, using worse case scenarios.    Love Canal disaster should be taught in schools, as a modern lesson of how dumping of chemicals in the 1950’s underground,  can resurface decades later, and be contributing factors to leukemia.  The chemicals were dump in 1953, and Hooker Chemical thought by donating the land to a school, they could get rid of the mess.  Homes were built close to the school.  Parents noticed their children were betting burns  on their feet when playing barefoot. The impenetrable clay layer  seal was likely fractured by the filtration of water, which expanded as it froze in the winter.  Making American great again, is a fantasy,  because when it comes to environmental action, we are not great.  Not in the 1950’s,  not 1970’s and not today.

I’ll leave out most of this history, but you can check the links below, on Love Canal, and Superfund sites.

The number one threat to our environment is at present is  climate change.   The US should be the leader in curbing carbon emissions, but this was before Trump and Pruitt.  Pulling out of the Paris Accords on Climate Change Mitigation was a giant step backwards.   Transportation accounts for 27% of the greenhouse gases emitted (EPA estimate, 2015)  of which 90% are petroleum based.    We emit around 6,800 million metric tons (mtn) of CO2 equivalent of greenhouse gases, down from a peak of 7,300 mtn in 2007.    According to the EPA (current website, not the Obama archived one)

This decrease was largely driven by a decrease in emissions from fossil fuel combustion, which was a result of multiple factors including substitution from coal to natural gas consumption in the electric power sector; warmer winter conditions that reduced demand for heating fuel in the residential and commercial sectors; and a slight decrease in electricity demand.

The progress, however slight, is an unmistakable downward trend in greenhouse gases, which perhaps will not last much longer.   The lead story in the New York Times on March 30, 2018, reads:

The Trump administration is expected to kick off an effort in coming days to weaken greenhouse gases and fuel economy standards for automobiles, handing a victory to car manufacturers and giving them ammunition potentially to rollback industry standards worldwide.

Car manufacturers and oil companies will be pleased.  It is putting American first only in terms of corporate profits, not its citizens.  California is likely to fight these changes,  with 12 other states expected to follow.  It might end up with 2 sets of standards, one for most of the country, and the second for the California and the allied states.

Regulatory freedom, the right of Americans to choose the gas-guzzlers of their choice, unimpeded by big government will be EPA’s selling points.   Pruitt is expected to make the announcement at a Virginia dealership on Tuesday.   Obama had made auto emissions as strict as California, so auto manufacturers did not have to have two sets of standards for car emissions.

The states allied with California include New York, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, and together account for a third of all car sales, according to the New York Times.  California can legally require high fuel efficiency and lower emission standards based on a waiver granted by the federal government.   Trump can take California to court, to attempt to void the waiver.   He will likely let the car industry know there will be no renewal for the waivers in 2015.

To some extent,  fuel efficiency is likely to improve as gas prices go up because of consumer demand.   Despite all the talk from Washington,  finding new oil is still increasingly more expensive and the rig count has been increasing.   However,  the consumer is not likely to care about tailpipe emissions, well until they have respiratory problems.   Then they are very interested in everyone’s emission.  So,  a newly converted Democrat, is one with breathing problems.

Thus,  a very chaotic situation is about to unfold.    California may win, at least in the short term, as auto manufacturers are not about to produce two sets of cars.   A court battle is inevitable.

It is all about the Trump administration being weak, and caving in to the big auto manufacturers.

“Environmental preservation is our test.  If we pass it, we get to save the planet.”  (ok, I’ve taken a line from Marjory Stoneman Douglas on preserving the Everglades) We can’t expect China, India and the EU to regulate their emissions when we can’t.   It will take a long time to repair Trump’s damage to our standing in the world.

I wanted write more on Pruitt’s new rules on scientific evidence, which rely solely on public information as a way of further weakening the agency.   I’ll leave this for a separate blog.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Links:

NYT:  US Readies a Plan to Blunt Fuel and Emission Rules for Automakers

EPA:  The Love Canal Tragedy

Wikipedia: Love Canal

EPA: Sources of Greenhouse Emissions

Wikipedia:  US Withdraws from the Paris Agreement