Government Ethics and the Russian Investigation: How Trump Officials, Investigators, and Critics Have Created An Ethical Quagmire In Washington

donald_trump_president-elect_portrait_croppedBelow is column in USA Today on the widening number of ethical issues generated during the Trump Administration. I have been critical of some of the practices of the Trump Administration from nepotism to retroactive waivers to failures to divest.  However, there should be equal concern and attention over some of the actions of Trump critics.  It seems that the rising political passions are blinded both sides to core ethical principles and considerations.

Here is the column.

The Trump administration may prove for government ethics what the Kennedy administration proved for space exploration: We are rapidly going where no president has gone before — eclipsing even Richard Nixon.

This week, Trump triggered another controversy in saying that he would never have appointed Attorney General Jeff Sessions if he knew that the former senator was going to recuse himself from the Russian investigation. In fairness to Trump, some of these ethical problems were not of his making, and his critics have shown a similar disregard for ethical values.

Since his inauguration, the Trump administration has been at odds with ethics officials. The conflict reached its zenith recently with the resignation of Walter Shaub as director of the Office of Government Ethics. Shaub left little doubt that he was resigning in light of the serious conflicts with the Trump White House over breaches.

What is most striking about this record is that Trump’s critics are faring little better in their own ethical challenges. Indeed, this is a class where even the most generous curve would produce few passing grades.

Sally Yates: Fail

sally_q-_yatesThe ethical pileup was foreshadowed within days of the Trump inauguration by the actions of former acting attorney general Sally Yates, who ordered the entire Justice Department not to assist Trump in his immigration executive order restricting travelers from seven Muslim majority countries. As evidenced by conflicting opinions in the courts (and the most recent Supreme Court decision allowing the implementation of the immigration ban), there were good faith legal arguments supporting the order. Yet Yates dismissed the review of the Office of Legal Counsel without actually saying that the order was unconstitutional. Even Trump critics and former high-ranking Justice Department officials questioned Yates’ actions as unprecedented and unfounded.

Jeff Sessions: Pass

jeff_sessions_official_portraitThe next major government ethics challenge was faced by Sessions — the decision that led to Trump’s statement that he would not have appointed Sessions had he known that he would recuse himself. Ironically, this was the only passing grade of any figure in Washington in one of the recent scandals. Sessions yielded to the obvious ethical concerns over heading an investigation into alleged campaign wrongdoing, given his critical role in that campaign. Ethical rules require not simply the avoidance of conflicts but even the appearance of conflicts. Sessions did that and, in this group, he proved the curve breaker by taking the difficult but ethical course.

James Comey: Fail

440px-Comey-FBI-PortraitFormer FBI director James Comey has been lionized for leaking memos damaging to Trump and his obvious violation of professional and ethical standards. Comey insisted that he had the right to give the memos to a friend to leak to the news media because the memos were his personal property. The memos were clearly government documents and presumably classified at the confidential or higher levels. Media experts rushed to his side and claimed that the memos were like his personal diary, and one CNN legal analyst (and former FBI agent) Asha Rangappa insisted that the memos constitute merely “personal recollections.” The FBI has since confirmed the obvious that the memos are indeed FBI material, and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein this week stated that the memos were confidential and should not have been released. Other reports have confirmed that at least some of the memos were classified. In removing these FBI documents, Comey (who was tasked by Trump to find leakers in his administration) became a leaker himself when it served his interests.

Robert Mueller: Incomplete

440px-Director_Robert_S._Mueller-_III-1One would think that the man who was appointed special counsel to investigate this mess would be clear of even the slightest ethical or professional concerns. From the outset, Robert Mueller was a curious choice. Mueller has a long and deep history with Comey and, according to CNN, interviewed for Comey’s job after Comey was fired by Trump. It seems highly unlikely that Trump did not discuss the termination of Comey with Mueller, as well as what he expected from a replacement during that interview. This makes him a potential witness. At the very least, Mueller should have addressed this conflict publicly and stated how he has taken steps to address it. Trump claimed this week that Mueller has “many other conflicts” that he may reveal later. In any case, the public remains in the dark because neither he nor Mueller have fully disclosed their past dealings. Since Mueller could still make such a record, he can at best eke out an incomplete.

Rod Rosenstein: Incomplete

Rod_Rosenstein_Official_DAG_PortraitDeputy Attorney General Rosenstein himself has even more pressing ethical concerns over his role in the investigation. He is an obvious and important witness to both the events leading up to Comey’s firing and its aftermath. Rosenstein was cited by the White House initially as the basis for Comey’s firing — a claim that was reportedly pulled back after vehement objections from Rosenstein. What is clear is that he was consulted by both Sessions and Trump on the firing and supported that decision. It is hard to imagine any investigation into the firing that would not make Rosenstein a central witness. Yet he continues to serve as Mueller’s superior on an investigation that could examine his own decisions and role. He should have recused himself weeks ago, but since he can redeem himself with a belated recusal, he also receives an incomplete.Ethics

In this age of rage, ethics can often seem quaint and precious. However, each of these individuals has shown how ethical lapses can ultimately undermine their credibility and their cause. Key players are now well beyond the navigational beacons of ethics. That course is unlikely to take any of them (or us) to a better place.

Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, is a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley

183 thoughts on “Government Ethics and the Russian Investigation: How Trump Officials, Investigators, and Critics Have Created An Ethical Quagmire In Washington”

  1. I think DSS makes the an important point earlier in the replies “We aren’t the people we used to be”. When Nixon became involved in some criminal activity the people expected higher ethical standards and so did the media. Even though the media showed bias towards the left, both sides of the story were heard. We saw how a discreetly indiscreet Kennedy didn’t face the ethical challenges he would today. His job was governing the nation and the people were able to seperate personal interests from national interests. That started to disappear with the indiscreet and trashy Clintons though Bill being the most charismatic person I ever met was able to make most people like him. He even made the Bush’s like him.

    The Obama scandals were huge, from the IRS, the Iran deal, fast and furious etc., but in general most people liked Obama and forgot that it wasn’t his personal life that was important to the nation. The public permitted these ethical deviations though each one of them would have toppled a Nixon government.

    Yes, “We aren’t the people we used to be”. We no longer act as one nation and the intent of the left and the media is to destroy this Presidency despite the fact there is no evidence the President did anything wrong. That is why so many have difficulty in listing the crimes he was supposed to have committed. Anyone of the crimes of Obama would have had this present President out of office already. The left has been very loud and very violent while the right for the most part has been busy working and providing for their families.

    The people get the nation they deserve so when someone ends up not able to get adequate healthcare blame the distemper of the nation and its focus on personalities rather than the business of government.

  2. Nobody is DC understands the concept of ethics. Comey should be disbarred.

    1. PC, and Hillary should be in prison for corruption, destruction of evidence, mishandling classified material, etc. and Obama should be in the cell next to her for abuse of the power of government against the People with multiple charges including the “executive overreach” which no less than Prof. Turley himself litigated.

  3. The CCCP “Corporate Controlled Conservative Press” Has told me for years that Obama was born in Kenya, they have told me that Obama would have us all living under the hammer and sickle, they told me that health care would kill me and the country, They told me that giving more tax breaks to the very richest would trickle down to working people, they told me Obama was the most lawless president in history, they told me HRC would or should be spending the rest of her life in prison, they told me to believe in alternate facts. Oh well, they got some things wrong, but I’ll never never be a Trump supporter until he gives me back all the guns that Obama took from me and our fellow Americans.

  4. Here comes Patriot with another set of off topic posts on the Jews, brought to you from the dayroom of the Bronx Psychiatric Center.

  5. Which of the dorks mentioned and shown in the photos above were hired in the Obama administration or before? So is Trump getting the blame for some of those lame brains?
    Trump should wear a tee shirt which says: How was I To Know, She Was With The Russians Too?

  6. Writing in 1978, Ron Nessen recalled that during the period running from 1974 to 1977, Gerald Ford’s view of Richard Nixon was characterized by irritation and asperity. Nixon had violated the code of conduct that Washington politicians held to among each other. Other observers of Ford noted some of his aphorisms: “Politics stops at five o’clock”. Ford had congenial personal dealings with pols across the spectrum even as they were cutting each other up in the newspapers every day. Recall that Ford’s formal dealings with Congress were as substantively confrontational as any President’s (he cast dozens of vetoes in 29 months in office; George W. Bush cast 3 in 8 years in office).

    What happened in 1974 was that six members of the House Judiciary and three of the four senior members of the House Republican leadership made a public declaration that they would vote to impeach the President or a public declaration that the President should resign. Barry Goldwater and two other members of the Senate Republican caucus visited the President and told him that he had 15 votes in the Senate. Antecedent to that the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s office in the District of Columbia had smoked out much of the administration’s wrongdoing. The Criminal Division was run by Henry Petersen, a registered Democrat who had been employed there since 1951. The contrast between Petersen’s crew and the three working prosecutors in DC and the Lynch-Holder “Justice” department could not be more stark. Interestingly enough, in the atmosphere of the time, they were considered insufficient and a special prosecutor was appointed. He was John Kennedy’s solicitor-general, an appointment to which Richard Nixon offered no public objection.

    Our professional-managerial class lacks men of character. The Democratic Party has decayed into a criminal racket. You people wage lawfare and now you object when someone whose scruples are no worse than yours turns your tools on you. Tough.

    1. “a criminal racket” is what it is. I say that being a registered Democrat for almost my entire life. That ended. I consider myself an independent who is forced to choose between a criminal enterprise and candidates who all too frequently are too self serving.

      Trump was not my candidate, but seeing what is happening makes me recognize that for the nation to survive as a Contitutional Republic with a rich economy the survival of Trump is an absolute necessity. If he survives and actually cleans the swamp we will all be better off.

  7. Musician, Frank Zappa says people in politics have a mental health problem. And that’s the problem.

  8. What do you think are the actions of Trump critics that are so destructive? Trump critics don’t have the power to ruin the country as Trump has. All they can do is express their opposition through words. Trump can do, and is doing, untold damage while his critics are powerless to stop it. The odds are enormously stacked against the critics.

    1. Ruin the country? Seriously Lousie!! Dubya/Cheney Obama/Biden have already contributed to our internal demise…

        1. What about him? The Reagan years had good points and bad points. Reagan had a number of good initiatives that bore fruit. What’s characteristic of good initiatives that bear fruit is that our godawful national legislature has no hand in them.

          1. Reagan gave us the biggest recession since the Great Depression, set the US auto industry back a generation, but made us feel good. Then Bush topped that with an even greater recession and pretty much made a mess of the world. Obama simply did not fix it fast enough and stepped on a few toes. Now we have the third in a line of big mouth ‘feel good’ jingoists. Six months in and Trump has already designed new lows for America.

            1. Reagan gave us the biggest recession since the Great Depression,

              He didn’t. The 1945-47 contraction was larger. That during the recessions of 1953-54, 1957-58, and 1973-75 was certainly sharper, although less elongated. Comparing a 2.25% decline in the rate of production over 18 months to a 30% decline over a period of 42 months is grossly misleading, by the way.

              set the US auto industry back a generation, but made us feel good.

              He had nothing to do with the problems of the U.S. auto industry, which were manifest 15 years before he took office and were notable 20 years after he left office. The auto industry’s problems were derived from natural changes in the international division of labor and from the errors of the people actually working in that industry. The federal government made two contributions to these problems: a labor law regime which promoted bureaucratic sclerosis in American industry generally and the CAFE standards which unduly restricted the options available to automotive engineers. Neither was a Reagan-era initiative. The Wagner act passed in 1935 and the CAFE standards were Nixon and Carter initiatives.

      1. We’re not in a state of ‘internal demise’. We are in a state of cultural decay, but politicians are not primary contributors to that.

        The left has no therapeutic program at all, and is unfit to govern.

        1. DSS, you are very much on target, “cultural decay”. That is the objective of the left.

  9. ” We are rapidly going where no president has gone before — eclipsing even Richard Nixon.”
    ~+~
    I have to disagree with our host on the comparison between the shenanigans as of late and the administration of President Nixon.

    President Nixon involved himself directly and indirectly in indisputably criminal acts and several arrests and convictions followed and it was probable the president could have faced charges as well, hence his resignation.

    I haven’t so far seen any evidence presented from a credible source that there were prosecutable criminal acts or omissions alleged against administration officials or President Trump.

    There were valid points made in the article otherwise.

    1. President Nixon involved himself directly and indirectly in indisputably criminal acts

      The fish rots from the head down and Nixon was responsible for the office culture of the White House and the Committee to Re-elect the President. However, I do not think there’s much evidence that Nixon was all that cognizant of what the White House Plumbers or Gordon Liddy’s crew at the CRP were doing in 1971 and 1972. What Nixon was guilty of was what’s called in New York law ‘hindering prosecution’, i.e. scheming in various ways to keep people from turning state’s evidence and scheming to impede the FBI’s investigatory work. What really caused public disgust was the blatant lying he engaged in for two years.

      Obama’s gotten away with things Nixon could not accomplish because the permanent government was non-compliant (siccing the IRS on the opposition, for one, turning the Justice Department into a partisan lawfare operation for another). That’s aside from the casual mendacity, the constant fundraising, and the self-indulgence. We aren’t the people we used to be.

  10. Anyone with common sense can see that Trump is fighting all alone against the Democrats, Establishment GOP, Elites in the academia and show biz, and the fake news media to help and protect the legal citizens of this country. He did not have to put everything online and run for the presidency, but he did for the love of this country, and I admire him for that. Trump 2020!

      1. Zionist Trump Ordered this 8 Year Old Girl & 8 other Children Murdered
        Targeted Drone Attack on Yemen
        Trump murders nine young children, wounds five: the full details of botched US raid in Yemen

        https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/02/trump-approved-yemen-raid-five-days-after-inauguration

        This is eight year old American ‘ Nora ‘ who was murdered 1/29/17 by the U.S. military under Trump’s orders
        She is the Poster Child of the hundreds of thousands of Child Murders committed by Trump, Bush, Obama, Netanyahu & Co-conspirators.

        http://buenavistamall.com/murderedgirl2.jpg

        1. Did Trump order her killed or was she killed as collateral damage in a fire fight? If you want a clear example of a crime, go back to the killing of her brother.
          He was a U.S. citizen and was specifically the target of a drone strike. His crime? Being the son of a radical cleric who was killed two weeks prior. As well as being in an act of open rebellion by eating dinner at a sidewalk cafe with friends.
          I suppose the premise is that war is a war crime. If you can find record of a war in which civilians were not impacted, I may be able to conjure up some sympathy for your position.

    1. His “Love of Country” remarkably coincides with his love of self. Out of curiosity, in the 68 years before he ran for President (this time), how did he demonstrate his love for country? Military service? Large donations to charity (please research before answering that)? Any form of public service? Paying his fair share of taxes (the verdict is still out on that one for one reason only)?

        1. Enigma, can you provide proof for that contention? Try providing proof before making a claim. That way you can stop yourself.

          1. Allan, You can start by considering that he doubled the membership fee at Mar-Lago then held court there for every weekend at the beginning of his term. He goes to his own hotels where the SS and various staff members have rooms, at government expense. His hotels and patents in various countries amazingly get the green light. Even during the campaign his campaign headquarters had to pay a premium on the Trump Towers offices, paid for by donors to his campaign. There’s more but you need to do your own research to justify your claim that it didn’t happen.

            1. I see, his high crime and misdemeanor is he raised the fees at Mar-a-lago. In other words if he gave up that increased fee you would be satisfied with his ethics?

              Let us say that the costs of running Mar-a-lago increased, which they did. Who should pay for the increase? If he did then you would complain that he was giving bribes to his friends at Mar-a-lago. When celebrities start to move into certain condiminiums the prices of the condiminums increase and the celebrities condo value increases as well. What should we do about that? When does this type of stupidity ever stop?

          2. I really could document this but you’d believe nothing I said nor any source. He wasn’t really running for President, he was on a book tour. Look it up for yourself.

        2. Newt Gingrich got rich running for President,

          You’ve confused Gingrich with Dennis Kucinich.

      1. His “Love of Country” remarkably coincides with his love of self. Out of curiosity, in the 68 years before he ran for President (this time), how did he demonstrate his love for country? Military service? Large donations to charity (please research before answering that)? Any form of public service? Paying his fair share of taxes (the verdict is still out on that one for one reason only)?

        1. Your ‘fair share’ of taxes is what the law requires you pay. If you think the tax law is unfair, that’s a problem with the law, not the people subject to the law.

        2. No clue why you fancy it’s ‘patriotic’ to be on the public payroll. It can be if you’re in the military or have other options which are more lucrative or less disagreeable. Compensation for public sector employees is a tad better than it is for private sector employees, so that’s not likely the case in any systematic way. As is, he’s offering his services right now.

        3. Philanthropic donations (of which charitable donations are a subset) are irrelevant to patriotism. They can be relevant to community care, but that’s a different sentiment.

        4. He hasn’t had military service, and that’s a mark against him given his personal circumstances in 1968. That having been said, > 85% of the men born after 1953 and > 98% of the women born after that date have no history of military service. We haven’t had many actual draft dodgers in presidential politics, but we have had two – Bill Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Partisan Democrats have no issue with the bobbing and weaving these two undertook to avoid induction into the military, but then try to make hay out of straigntforward deferments-granted-according-to-rules received by Richard Cheney and Donald Trump (deferments received by hundreds-of-thousands of others in their cohort) and make hay out of Dan Quayle and George W. Bush enlisting in the National Guard (something a six-digit population in every cohort did at that time, including Richard Gephardt, whose Guard service bothered no one).

        1. Will Enigma listen to some wise words or will he follow the simple path created for him by those on the left?

          1. Enigma, again you failed to document what you said.

            Before that you linked Mexico/ California and the formation of the Electoral College together. That would mean our Constitution would have been written in the 19th century, 1821 at best.

            Now you tell us things about Trump and Gingrich where you have no proof.

            You aren’t offering suggestions just repeating statements that weren’t very bright ones when they were first stated.

            I’ve responded to you several times about what Trump has done and I provided a partial list twice.

            He could do a lot more if permitted, but dumb accusations and a lot of dumb Congressmen from both sides have held the nation hostage.

            Here is a further addition to the list:

            RESTORING LAW AND ORDER TO IMMIGRATION: President Trump has prioritized enforcing immigration laws in his first six months to protect all Americans, ensuring that our immigration system treats everyone fairly.

            President Trump instituted tough immigration policies that have reduced illegal border crossings by 53 percent compared to the same time last year.
            The President ordered the hiring of 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, including 5,000 additional border patrol agents.
            Within the first 100 days of President Trump signing his executive orders on immigration enforcement, ICE conducted nearly 40 percent more Enforcement and Removal Operations compared to the same time last year.
            Arrests of convicted criminal aliens climbed by nearly 20 percent in this time compared to the same time last year.
            In fiscal year 2017, ICE has removed over 2,700 criminal gang members, compared to 2,057 criminal gang members in all of fiscal year 2016.
            ICE has specifically targeted MS-13 criminal gang members for removal on immigration violations.
            To jumpstart construction on the border wall, the President ordered the Department of Homeland Security to use $100 million of unspent appropriations in its account for border security, fencing and infrastructure.
            President Trump directed executive agencies to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws of the United States, including clamping down on sanctuary cities.
            Attorney General Jeff Sessions implemented new charging guidelines to end catch-and-release policies.
            President Trump ordered the creation of the Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement (VOICE) office at DHS, ensuring that our Government can no longer ignore the victims of criminal acts by illegal aliens.
            PROVIDING FOR OUR NATION’S VETERANS: President Trump is making sure our veterans get the care they deserve after they have sacrificed for our country.

            Under President Trump, Department of Veterans Affairs fired over 500 employees, suspended 200, and demoted 33, as part of President Trump’s efforts to restore integrity and accountability to a department charged with supporting our Nation’s heroes.
            22 senior leaders were disciplined.
            President Trump signed the Veterans Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act, enabling senior Veterans Affairs officials to fire failing employees while establishing important safeguards to protect whistleblowers.
            The Veterans Affairs administration is shifting veterans’ electronic medical records to the same system used by the Defense Department, ending a decades-old rift in sharing information between the two agencies.
            President Trump signed legislation allowing our veterans to receive care outside of the Veterans Affairs medical system.
            The Department of Veterans Affairs has acted to increase transparency and accountability by launching an online “Access and Quality Tool” to provide veterans a way to access wait time and quality of care data.

            1. You are mistaken in saying I linked California to the Electoral College, Someone else said it was created to keep large states like New York and California from dictating elections and I said California was still part of Mexico at the time.

              I have no intention of wasting time I’ll never get back trying to prove something to someone that will never accept it. I could take 30 seconds and find documentation but you could do the same.

              1. Enigma, Your comment was made and the linkage was clear. You can quote your comment to prove yourself right, but you won’t. I wasn’t the only one to notice your blunder. You have spent a lot of time trying to ressurect yourself. All you have to do is start being accurate.

              1. Not sure what you are trying to prove here, but in that 15 seconds did you bother reading the article? Apparently not.

                  1. Enigma, I guess that means you are a very fast reader so with another few seconds you could have copied those parts that were actual facts. I didn’t see any, but I am sure you will be able to show me with quotes.

                    On a different issue I thought you might be interested in this short video that explains Why Did the Democratic South Become Republican?(Carol Swain) Let me know what you think.

                    1. First let me say I did watch the entire video, agreed with some portions of it, disagreed with others. It’s a narrative, I could come up with another.

                      Living in the South the past 35 years, I’m surprised to learn that what I experience, not on a daily basis but regularly is a myth. Lee Atwater would be disappointed to learn how ineffective the strategy he developed was. George HG Bush and “Willie Horton” must have only been a bad dream. BTW, I don’t consider Republicans racist per se. Their party is a haven for them. Your President, his sons, the Former NSA Director and his son, Steve Bannon, Stephen Miller and others were quite proficient in Tweeting and Retweeting racist memes and making racist statements. I suspect and Google of any of those names and “racist meme” would turn them up.
                      So I think you can find a few black people that will say anything, possibly even believe it. That wouldn’t make it true.

                    2. “agreed with some portions of it, disagreed with others. ”

                      That is good enough. I am not pushing the Republican brand. It doesn’t match my beliefs at least in practice and I am not disparaging the Democratic brand though today I find many of those representing the Democratic brand reprehensible.

                      From what I know about Trump, he isn’t a racist unless you define racisim as a preference at which point we would all be considered racists. It makes sense that being like another has some affinity as does opposites attract. The problem with race is when some people accuse a person with a preference as being a racist. Racists should simply be ignored unless, of course, they break the law. Why would anyone wish to associate with a racist?

                    3. “From what I know about Trump, he isn’t a racist unless you define racisim as a preference at which point we would all be considered racists. It makes sense that being like another has some affinity as does opposites attract. The problem with race is when some people accuse a person with a preference as being a racist. Racists should simply be ignored unless, of course, they break the law. Why would anyone wish to associate with a racist?”

                      From what I know about Trump he’s a lifelong racist (likely learned at home from his father Fred who was arrested at a confrontation between the Klan and police in NY in 1927. Donald says it “never happened” although not being born yet his statement is at best hearsay. He engaged in a pattern of discriminating against black people attempting to rent from him by having the applications marked “C” for colored and then turning him down. He was sued twice for discrimination (because once was insufficient to make change) by the Justice Department. He claims total vindication because he settled the suits without admitting guilt. He persecuted the Central Park Five in the press and called for their deaths (that;s not the worst part). When they were cleared by DNA evidence he refused to accept their innocence because after all the teenagers confessed after torture from the police. He also railed against the settlement from the City for their years of false imprisonment. He never changed his opinion about wishing them dead. The floor would be cleared of black employees at his casinos when he and his wife were around. He said he “didn’t want black people counting his money.” There’s so much more but as this isn’t my main point I’ll stop there.

                      You said, “Racists should be ignored unless, of course, they break the law.” I submit that’s a much easier position to take when you’re not the one affected by the racism. It also suggests that if you make it legal, it’s no longer racism. The redistricting in Texas, North Carolina and several other states to minimize the impact of minority votes was done with “surgical precision” according to Federal Courts yet there’s still a fight as to whether it’s legal. While redlining, job discrimination, segregated schools are now technically illegal. They’ve been replaced by milder substitutes as has always been the case. I submit ignoring racism is a tacit approval and that to be eradicated it must be challenged. I submit when you see racist statements on this board for example where there are many. That when they go either ignored or sometimes applauded. It’s not enough to shake your head silently but one should from time to time call them out. (Calling them all out would be too much for anyone to ask because that would be too much time you’d never get back. One problem with racism in this age is that it’s being defined away to the point where no one qualifies as a racist. Donald Trump -“I’m the least racist person ever!”

                    4. Really? Aren’t each of these specific enough that you could find them in the time you took to respond to me. Pick one and I’ll be happy to document it for you.

                    5. I cited a number of easily found provable incidents. Don’t charge me to prove to me what you are unwilling to find. Pick one and I’ll be happy to. Otherwise continue to stroll through life ignorance.

                    6. enigma – how about the blacks counting money? Get a reputable source. One I will accept, not some flaming liberal. 🙂

                    7. enigma buddy – you make the same claim on your blog, but do not back it up. I like you, but I just am not going to take your word for it. 🙂

                    8. enigma – even the articles about the riot admit Fred Trump’s connection to the KKK is tenuous at best. Now you have a better shot at the consent decree, however that is Trump’s dad, not Trump.

                    9. Donald Trump was the President of the company twice sued for Housing Discrimination. I’ll concede he may have known as little about policy when he was a President then as he does when President now.

                    10. enigma – I have seen a two hour tape of him being deposed for a law suit and he is a very hands off person. People discuss broad strokes with him, but he is not a detail person. However, he does demand loyalty. 🙂 He likes to put people in charge and let them have their head. Yes, he signs the contracts. However, he has a team of lawyers who read and approve them.

                      Elon Musk is very hands on. Maybe too hands on. There is a fascinating biography out on Musk that I recommend. He is really an interesting guy. Personally, I would probably kill him in the first week I work for him, but I am older now and don’t put up with that cr*p.

                    11. “Hands off” is an interesting way to describe him. I’d be more likely to say unknowledgeable or ignorant but use what works for you. I’ve seen him in a deposition regarding a loss of a Casino bid to Native American’s where racist again comes to mind. A command of detail has never even crossed it.

                    12. enigma – WaPo is second only to CNN for fake news. They are what we call in literature ‘an unreliable narrator’. They are not to be believed. You will need a real source, one with gravitas.

                    13. enigma – I saw WaPo and dismissed the link. Cut the video out and I will watch it.

                    14. enigma – a long playing full deposition would be neutral, the WaPo is not. It is the media that is important.

                    15. I don’t require neutral sources. I don’t mind a point of view as long as they don’t lie. I have no problem with Chris Wallace, Charles Krauthammer, several of the Fox Broadcasters I can listen to even though they have a point of view differing from mine. Then there’s Hannity for example whose sole function seems to be distorting the truth. I don’t den the existence of facts that don’t come in raw data. Most of them don’t.

                    16. Out of curiosity… what media do you readily accept? InfoWars? Breitbart? The Washington Times? Perhaps Hannity or Rush Limbaugh? What other media do you refuse to acknowledge?

                    17. In NYC it was not uncommon for racism claims to be made for no other reason than to extract money.

                      I await your responses to the two other replies to your non factual claims where your veracity turns the table on your racist claims.

                    18. Enigma writes: “So the Donald Trump quotes and video were made up? The strategy seems clear. Demand proof rather than check for yourself. Dismiss proof. Claim victory.”

                      No, your strategy is to call people racists without proof and when the proof is demonstrated with a copy from the 1927 incident in the Washington Post that doesn’t show what you wish you continue to call people racists. For all the paper knew Fred Trump was a bystander or even protesting what the KKK. was doing. You don’t care as long as you feel free to libel someone by calling him a racist without any proof.

                      You have been told more than once that even the police records that have records of the incident report that some were asked for bail, but Fred Trump was released without any complaint. That generally means he was picked up as an innocent bystander.

                      Keep throwing the race card Enigma so you can make sure that you have a ready complaint while doing nothing for those minorities in desperate need. That is hatefull.

                    19. “So the media was conspiring against a relatively unknown real estate developer in 1927?”

                      Enigma, this is known as race baiting. The media in 1927 reported the events correctly. You have intentionally distorted them even with the knowledge that your claim is false. That is libel and worse yet race baiting.

                      Fred Trump unlike the others was released because he was picked up as a bystander. The reasons for the arrests of the others was a brawl occurred which meant two different sides were fighting. There was no mention of which side anyone was on so even those arrested could have been fighting against the KKK or otherwise got involved in the fight for other reasons.

                      Fred Trump’s release means he was a bystander and not involved in the violence.

                      Keep up the race baiting Enigma. You look good with that flag.

                  2. Enigma, I responded to your Trump racism charge (july 25, 2017 at 831 AM) elsewhere because we reached the end of replies in this segment. That will make it easier for you to respond.

                    1. It’s really very simple Enigma to find the post. You were provided a date and a time july 25, 2017 at 8:31 AM

                      Therefore you could go to the newer posts and search for that exact time which I listed so one could go back and forth. I’m used to doing research and you apparently are not based upon your responses.

                      Alternatively just go to the newest posts and right now I think my 2 posts to you are right on top.

                      You can also search for my name allan and that will bring you to the post as well though a few others will be included.

                      Read Thomas Sowell and you will also learn how to research a problem.

                    2. I should have added that I didn’t change threads, but that should be considered obvious.

                    3. Enigma, apparently you have trouble navigating the site https://jonathanturley.org/2017/07/24/ethics-in-the-age-of-rage/#comments

                      You have to look for older comments and the two parts are at the top. I will repeat them here, but if you choose to reply, which you should, it would be easiest to reply at the top of the responses right below Turley’s editorial rather than here.

                      I think you should rethink your positions because some of the accusations you make could be considered racist. Let me add more to what was said in those two comments both way above and below.

                      Trump thought the 5 kids given $40Million dollars were guity and for that you call him a racist. Many blacks said the same thing that those kids were guilty. Are those blacks also racists for drawing that conclusion or are only white people racists? you have a problem.

                    4. This reply to Enigma is based upon his accusations of Trump racism july 25, 2017 at 8:31 AM Part 2

                      As far as my statement that one should ignore racists: It clearly meant on an individual not political basis (“Why would anyone wish to associate with a racist?”) You are trying to prove racism where there is none. That is exactly what contributes to a lot of racism today so my suggestion is that instead of looking under the mattress for racism you intelligently stay away from private individual racism and fight it legally where it really exits. If you overshoot the mark you create more racism and that is what you have been doing here. Not only that but you are creating a reverse type of racism where blacks become racist against caucasians. That is not a good idea for it perpetuates itself and creates race wars. I don’t want to take sides. My friends are my friends because we enjoy each other. Their color, race and religion have nothing to do with their acceptability.

                      Overshooting the racist claim has created significant problems and have hurt the black population. Take a look at the problems between the different racial communities in minority neighborhoods and start examining the racism that exists between all of them.

                      I was taught by my mom that before I made a statement about others I should close my eyes and think how I would feel if that statement was made by me. Maybe you should do the same.

                    5. This reply to Enigma is based upon his accusations of Trump racism july 25, 2017 at 8:31 AM

                      I don’t think it is fair to convict the son based upon sins of the father. I don’t believe Trump’s father was racist either even though you wish to paint the racism claim with the broadest of brushes. If we use your logic then in Germany almost all people above a certain age would be considered Nazi’s and responsible for the murder of millions of people including gypsies, Jehovah Witnesses. Jews and other groups. Are you going to call that entire group racist? Do we wish to indict all the children of murders and racists. If not, tell me you retract this portion of your argument.

                      “From what I know about Trump he’s a lifelong racist”

                      Then it should be easy for you to list the things you know about Trump that make him a life long racist. You have listed a few circumstances which if extended to the general population would make all people black or white or others, racist. Look at the black communities and how they react to other minorities in their midst.

                      We have already discussed landlords and a small part of their problems. I am sure some of the people working for Trump might have been racist and some of the black people working for Trump might have been anti-Semitic and racist as well. We also know that black landlords tried to prevent black people from renting. Were those black landlords racist against blacks? In the days of slavery there were blacks that also owned slaves which makes things a little less clear. (Thomas Sowell wrote a book which explained the financial aspect of claimed racism which wasn’t true. It includes red lining, loans and some other housing issues. You sound like you have a chip on your shoulder so you should read it and then decide. The raw facts demonstrate something completely different than rampant racism. (not saying racism doesn’t exist). You would do well reading Thomas Sowell.)

                      The 5 kids let go by D’Blasio for rape probably were guilty though some of the 5 more so than others. There is a lot more to that case. Your conclusion in this case means that every white person in a jury that finds a black person guilty is a racist should the jury vote find the black person innocent. That is not racism. A $40 Million payoff by the city was not appropriate.

                      “didn’t want black people counting his money.”

                      This sounds more like heresy. Provide the source of the quote with the quote and why this should be considered an accurate statement. People’s memories are short and this sounds like a long term memory.

                      If we use your evidence to brand Trump a racist then everyone is a racist. Trump said it right, he is among the least racist persons. I believe him because I ***don’t have sufficient evidence*** to prove otherwise. In my mind people are innocent until proven guilty. You haven’t proven your case, but you have proven that people will make accusations of racism that are unfounded.

                  3. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/28/in-1927-donald-trumps-father-was-arrested-after-a-klan-riot-in-queens/?utm_term=.fda3ddae9482

                    “It’s not clear from the context what role Fred Trump played in the brawl. The news article simply notes that seven men were arrested in the “near-riot of the parade,” all of whom were represented by the same lawyers.”

                    In the original article from the WP they said what each of the men were charged with. Fred Trump wasn’t charged. He was simply discharged which seems to mean he was caught up in something that he was not involved with.

                    The Snopes article was intentionally misleading and everyone should look at the placement of the red box around Fred Trump’s name. The bail was for the former two, but Snopes intentionally attempted to implicate Fred Trump by highlighting bail and including his name rather than showing the bail was for two other people.

                    Suddenly you decide that you wish to promote racisim so you ascribe racism to one where it wasn’t clear what Fred Trump was doing at that event where people were arrested. For all you know he was prostesting the KKK. In your zeal to call other people racists you totally disregarded the truth. You should be ashamed of yourself. You are losing my respect for you.

                    I wait for your apology to Fred Trump.

                    1. The “original” article wasn’t in the Washington Post it was in the New York Times. Go to the source material before you condemn me. I’m not promoting racism, simply identifying it. As far as your respect for me, I suspect I never had it as many names as you’ve called me. And the apology to Fred Trump (who was included in the two Federal lawsuits for housing discrimination). Keep waiting.

                    2. I saw the original article from the Washington Post along with a police report. That report was in part duplicated from the NYTimes by Snopes, but Snopes altered it so that one would think Fred Trump was let out with a $500 bail. That bail referred to two others. Fred Trump was simply released.

                      When you attempt to label people you don’t like as racists you become the racist.

                      Go ahead and give me the http for the NYTimes news article that copies the original article. I’ll look at it, but the reproduced police report of those involved will be the same.

                      Take note how you don’t deny what I say, but you bring in two federal lawsuits. When caught playing the racism game that is what people do. They change the conversation.

                      I thought you were naive, but I respected you for believing what you wrote and persisting in what appeared to be an open mind. Now it appears the naivate at the very least borders on racism.

                  4. Paul, compare the unadulterated police list from the Washington Post to the adulterated one from Snopes. Look at the first picture next to a report of who was arrested. The red highlighting makes it seem as if Trump paid $500 bail. They know many people don’t read further nor do they read carefully.

                    This is the type of work Enigma is doing… deceitful.

                    He owes Fred Trump an apology.

    1. David, this is the first time I have heard you utter something meaningful. Congratualtions. I hope to see more of the same.

    1. There always has to be at least one individual that believes in terrorism and the subjugation of women. Was this another weekend of stoning women to death?

  11. NO PLACE FOR ETHICS IN WASHINGTON, DC

    WASHINGTON, DC A CITY OF ZIONIST WAR CRIMINALS

    THE BIG PROBLEM REMAINS !

    Helen Thomas’s courageous legacy: “Zionists go home!”

    ‘Helen Thomas paid a heavy price for speaking the truth. The Zionist-dominated mainstream media launched a witch hunt. Thomas was viciously slandered, dropped by her agency, rebuked by the journalists’ associations, and forced to resign from Hearst Newspapers. Yet nobody has ever managed to explain why her remarks were wrong.’

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/23/helen-thomass-courageous-legacy-zionists-go-home/

    http://buenavistamall.com/helenthomas.jpg

      1. Patriot wakes up every morning and goes to sleep every night with a loud SIEG HEIL!!

      2. The first, last, and ultimate debate-stopping, silence ensuing epithet tossed by Israel firsters in response to any criticism of Israel and/or a Judaics: “anti-semite.”

        The best definition, by the late James Sobran: “Not someone who hates Jews, but rather someone hated by certain Jews.”

        It’s interesting, that per Israel-firsters, anti-semitism is ubiquitous, while they simultaneously deny the existence of anti-gentile-ism.

        What did Paul of Tarsus the most prolific author of the NT say about this? “…in Christ…is neither Ioudaios* nor gentile…” Galatians 3:26, 28…..* “Ioudaios” almost exclusively wrongly translated “Jew,” which word Jew never appeared in written form till 1775 AD, per Oxford Dictionary of the English Language. Argue with Oxford, not me. Strangely, I suspect Oxford’s library and team of English PhD’s are more convincing on the subject of the etymology of the English word “Jew” than (fill in the blank).

        The only “post-parousia” Biblical context for “Judaic” or “gentile” is outside Christ. IOW, the only post-parousia Biblical context for Israel of the Bible, a Judaic, or a gentile, is outside Christ.

  12. What a load of donkey sheis this article is. JT talks about “ethics” like he actually knows something about it, when he doesn’t know his rear-end from a hole in the ground. This are absolutely no ethical issues in the Trump administration to anyone with common sense, an ounce of intelligence, and who has been thoroughly detoxed of Leftism.

    Meanwhile, in reality, the REAL nonstop. one-after-the-other ethical problems that occurred during the Obama administration have been swept under the rug, never to be seen or discussed again by the Leftist presstitutes. When a Leftist not only crosses ethical lines, but engages outright corruption and criminal activity, why then, everything is copacetic.

        1. If you come to America, you are an “American”

          (with all the attendant entitlements and “free stuff”).

          If I go to China, will I be Chinese?

Comments are closed.