Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the most recent suggested crime committed by President Donald Trump or his family. This allegation focuses on a greeting sent through President Trump’s attorney, John Dowd, to Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It appears that Trump is obstructing if he voices criticism or appreciation of Mueller. Dowd was in the news again yesterday in taking it upon himself to object to pre-dawn raid on the home of Paul Manafort.
Here is the column:
The election of President Trump appears to have created a type of professorial parlor game of how many crimes one can ascribe to him or his family on a daily basis. It seems like Trump cannot jump into someone else’s golf cart without an expert claiming a possible charge of peonage or grand theft auto.
The latest addition came from Notre Dame professor Jimmy Gurulé, who said that the recent report of Trump extending his “appreciation and greetings” to Special Counsel Robert Mueller may constitute intimidation of a prosecutor or obstruction of an investigation. Call it intimidation by salutation. Trump and his family have already been accused of litany of crimes that would make mobster Lucky Luciano jealous.
Just to keep score, experts have thus far identified the following possible crimes: obstruction of justice, witness tampering, criminal election violation, Logan Act violations, Foreign Agents Registration Act crimes, criminal false statements, perjury, racketeering, extortion, treason, and a variety of loosely defined conspiracy crimes. With the exception of an endangered species violation (and the day is still young), Trump appears to have run through most of the criminal code like a type of presidential hurricane that spins off criminal tornados in his wake.
The most recent crime concerns a USA Today story in which Trump counsel John Dowd acknowledged communications with the special counsel and noted that he conveyed how much Trump “appreciates what Bob Mueller is doing.” Dowd said that the president asked him to convey his “appreciation and greetings.”
Gurulé, a former U.S. assistant attorney general under President George H.W. Bush, told LawNewz.com that the message from Dowd could construed as intimidation or an effort to influence the investigation. Gurulé appears to view such a friendly expression as equivalent to the bacio della morte, or “kiss of death.” Of course, the use of Dowd really ruins the moment. Here is how a true bacio della morte for Mueller should go.
Mueller and Trump are at a New Year’s Eve party in Havana and Trump goes up to Mueller and says, “I wanted to send you my appreciation and greetings.” With that, he kisses Mueller on the lips and says, “I know it was you, Bobby. You broke my heart.”
Mueller then flees the island only to be later bumped off in Lake Tahoe by Dowd while reciting a Hail Mary. Now that is intimidation. Having your lawyer convey your greeting and appreciation falls a bit short of a Mario Puzo moment.
There is a section of the criminal code that deals with threats against federal officials, but it is generally limited to threats to assault, kidnap or murder such officials. It seems difficult to construe “appreciation and greetings” as a threat to murder Mueller. Even some of the most notorious greetings would be hard to convert into a Section 115 charge like Hannibal Lecter’s chilling “hello, Clarice” in Silence of the Lambs. It is even less so if conveyed to Agent Starling through the warden.
There is also the possible extension of the obstruction crime to include the new crime of intimidation through salutation. The problem is that past cases of threats against prosecutors have been quite clear and stark. For example, in United States v. Fernandez, the Eleventh Circuit in 1988 found obstruction when the brother of a defendant intentionally followed prosecutor, forcibly ran into him, and told him that he had better get some protection. That is a bit different from a potential target conveying through a lawyer that he appreciates the work of a prosecutor.
Once again, there seems little concern of what the country would be like if such crimes were so easily satisfied that expressing appreciation for a prosecutor could be deemed a form of obstruction. If extending “appreciation and greeting” makes Trump a criminal intimidator, Hallmark executives would be virtual serial killers.
There is another possibility. Trump could be trying to clean up a mess of his own making in previously discussing the firing of Mueller. If so, this is a clumsy act of overcompensation. It seems highly unlikely that an experienced criminal defense lawyer like Dowd would be a party to an express or implied threat of any kind. Likewise, I expect Mueller needs little reinforcement to feel appreciated but he is also one of the least likely to feel intimidated by it.
All experts are in agreement on one thing: It would be far better if Trump could try to detach himself (and his tweets) from the investigation. Getting notes of appreciation as a special counsel is just a tad awkward and even a little creepy. Moreover, despite my reservations about Mueller being appointed, given his past history with James Comey, I supported the appointment of a special counsel after Trump fired the FBI director.
I have previously stated that Mueller’s termination would be a serious mistake and that he needs to complete this investigation without interference. The good news is that Trump may have finally reached the same conclusion. The bad news is that he is still struggling with the concept of professional boundaries.
Sigmund Freud once said that “sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” Well, sometimes a greeting is just a greeting. That appears the case here. Of course, context can be everything. I saw an old Valentine once where a boy was shown firing three rounds into a heart while proclaiming “I am aiming straight at your heart.” If Trump sends that belated Valentine card to Mueller in August, we can talk.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
When is the Secret Service going to get around to arresting & prosecuting all of those people threating to kill
Prez Trump? It’s past time!!!!
Well, here’s another one that needs arrested Today!
“CNN counterterrorism analyst and former CIA agent Philip Mudd, ( head of Torture & Murder at the CIA,)said on air “the government’s gonna kill” Donald Trump because he disrespected the deep state.
Mudd subsequently clarified that he meant the phrase metaphorically, but the comments have caused alarm amongst Trump supporters.
“Let me give you one bottom line – as a former government official, the government’s gonna kill this guy,” said Mudd.
“He defends Vladimir Putin, there are State Department and CIA officers coming home and at Langley and in Foggy Bottom CIA are saying, this is how you defend us?’” Mudd added. ”
https://www.prisonplanet.com/cnn-analyst-on-trump-the-governments-gonna-kill-this-guy.html
Is this whole situation with Mueller is a farce? I believe, yes. Russian involvement in the elections is the case, not an expanded case to find out if Trump at one time didn’t wash his hands when he left the bathroom.
A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system By Patrick LawrenceTwitter August 9, 2017
Some tid bits with http at the end.
… A great edifice has been erected during this time. President Trump, members of his family, and numerous people around him stand accused of various corruptions and extensive collusion with Russians. …
We are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception. …
• There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or…
“The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” In essence, Binney and others at VIPS say this logic turns upside down in the DNC case: Based on the knowledge of former officials such as Binney, the group knew that (1) if there was a hack and (2) if Russia was responsible for it, ****the NSA would have to have evidence of both.**** …
Time stamps in the metadata indicate the download occurred somewhere on the East Coast of the United States—not Russia, Romania, or anywhere else outside the EDT zone….
“It’s clear,” another forensics investigator wrote, “that metadata was deliberately altered and documents were deliberately pasted into a Russianified [W]ord document with Russian language settings and style headings.” …
Time stamps in the metadata provide further evidence of what happened on July 5. The stamps recording the download indicate that it occurred in the Eastern Daylight Time Zone at approximately 6:45 pm. …
Behind the ICA lie other indefensible realities. The FBI has never examined the DNC’s computer servers—an omission that is beyond preposterous. It has instead relied on the reports produced by Crowdstrike, a firm … in the DNC’s employ.
https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/
Everything Trump touches dies. [R. Wilson]
“The Nation” published an article which admits, after exhaustive investigation, that there is NO evidence of Russian collusion by President Trump. Period. “The Nation’s” investigators concluded that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was undermined by disloyal internal democrat party operatives who leaked e-mails and DNC data, according to Rush Limbaugh.
Seth Rich sold e-mail/data from the DNC to Wikileaks according to Seymour Hirsch. Seth Rich worked for Debbie Wasserman Schultz who, incredibly, is being investigated by her brother, US Attorney Steve Wasserman.
Secret Police Director Robert Mueller, on orders from Chief Comrade Political Officer Pro Tem Rod Rosenstein, is is investigating “NOTHING” as the first phase of a coup d’etat in America by the “deep state” Obama “holdovers” at the behest of the redistributionist, globalist, ruling class shadow government (i.e. Bill Clinton, Queen Hillary, Big Donors, Lobbyists).
This “INVESTIGATION-OF-NOTHING” against President Trump, being perpetrated by Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller, must be shut down as fraudulent and criminal.
Rosenstien and Mueller must be prosecuted for abuse of power, violation of public trust, corruption of public integrity and subversion.
_______________________________________________
“When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”
— Thomas Jefferson
The Nation is run by two people who are extreme Putin/Russia apologists.
Thank you.
I rest my case.
No. The magazine was basically pro-Soviet during the inter-war period and just after (when Frieda Kirchwey was the editor) and pro-Soviet-with-deniability during the late Cold War, when Victor Navasky was the editor. The publication has long been run by the sort who fancy Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Andrew Kopkind, and Alexander Cockburn are perspicacious students of the American political scene. Its bird-cage liner, but has no interest in Putin per se. The editorial line has for decades been “The United States is responsible for this” or “Israel is responsible for this”. They actually wrote an editorial defending Gen. Galtieri in Argentina once. They have no investment in Putin.
Carolyn, It doesn’t matter who prints something, only whether or not the facts contained are true. In this case if the article is read in full it appears that the Nation, whatever its reputation, is producing a good deal of information that appears logical and true.
Instead of a knee jerk reaction that indicates a lack of intellect why don’t you point out the items that you believe are phony? This is quite important because if what the Nation says is only partly true then this witch hunt was entirely unecessary and demonstrates the refusal of some on the left to accept the Democratic process and instead install totalitarian methods to place another in power.
I’m waiting for your reply containing substance or will accept your non reply to be an admission that your comment was ill thought out.
The Nation is a red-haze opinion magazine which runs on patronage from nutty old patricians. They don’t employ investigators. What it reveals is that the whole scenario violates the sense of plausibility maintained by gauchistes not on the Hillary campaign payroll.
What a gossip column this is.
First of all, does anyone really believe that Chump actually appreciates the work that Mueller is doing? Come on now, you Trumpsters: does he really appreciate it? Hell to the no! So then, why was this message sent? Maybe it isn’t a crime, but the message is a lie, and the situation isn’t amusing. Throwing more red meat, JT claims that critics of the orange blob are digging for reasons to find him guilty of criminal behavior and attempts to make light of this latest scandal. If you want immediate examples of why people hate this man so much and want him gone, take a look just at yesterday’s headlines, setting aside the saber rattling with S. Korea, which is another reason in and of itself.
YOUR President criticized the majority leader of his own party because he couldn’t immediately deliver a bill that would take health care away from millions of Americans [the only differences between various proposals was how many million would be losing health care; fatso can’t understand how some Republicans can priortize the welfare of their constituents over his ego and the need to appear to be “winning”; after all, aren’t they supposed to be loyal to him?]; YET on the same day he praised Vladimir Putin for expelling several hundred diplomatic personnel in retaliation for the sanctions Congress just passed, because it would save on the payroll. He apparently doesn’t understand that US diplomatic personnel don’t work for Putin and they aren’t going to lose their jobs because he expelled them. What about the retaliation aspect? Is that OK? Apparently it is to YOUR President. Some commentators assume he was joking. I don’t think so. I don’t think he knows any better. What he clearly doesn’t see is the big picture. He also said they wouldn’t be replaced, because, apparently, they weren’t doing anything worthwhile anyway. He has no idea what they do, but he always wants to look tough, EXCEPT when it comes to Putin. Why? One other point: if impeachment proceedings do happen, Chump might wish he hadn’t criticized McConnell or implied that he could get rid of him as majority leader. Not something a smart person does, but then, who ever accused Chump of being smart? Short-sighted and egotistical as usual, he needs to appear to be delivering on his campaign promise of immediate repeal and replacement, and it doesn’t occur to him that McConnell might not support him if the crap hits the fan.
What is the net take on just these 3 matters? He inappropriately contacted a Special Prosecutor investigating matters related to his campaign on the false premise that he wanted to express his alleged appreciation for the work he was doing, which is a lie, he severely criticized the majority leader of his own party because he couldn’t snap his fingers and deliver on fatso’s promise to immediately repeal Obamacare, all while fatso hangs out on a golf course, waiting to sign away people’s health coverage, and he praises the Russian President for kicking out US diplomatic personnel to retaliate for sanctions. What is there about this man that is admirable?
Natacha – I have always found smiling at my enemies has a tendency to unnerve them, because they don’t know what you are up to. Maybe that is what Trump is doing.
Paul,
Do you think issac and natacha could be issac/natacha? LIke Inga/Annie but even less rational?
No substantive response to the substantive points raised. Talk about irrational raging. I asked what was there about this person that qualifies him for admiration, based just on yesterday’s conduct: i.e., praising Putin for expelling US personnel, and criticizing McConnell for not being able to deprive Americans of their health coverage because other members of his party valued the input of their constituents over contributing to his ego. No substantive answer.
No substantive response to the substantive points raised.
First of all, the comment was to Paul. Secondly, you’ve proven unable recognize a substantive response from anyone not conforming to your worldview. And lastly, your inability to post an argument absent a vitriolic tone is why comments from you and issac are routinely dismissed. Your passion is commendable, but without reason and civility, it’s nothing more than white noise.
Unnerve?? LOL. If you think that Bob Mueller doesn’t know exactly what Trump is up to, you’re nuts. His team has dealt with some of the world’s scummiest criminals so they know every trick. Trump tactics are so transparent that a savvy teenager could see through them.
Mueller knows nothing. He likely has an idea of the menu of process crimes he’s going to pin on his targets to justify his investigation.
Carolyn, with proof can you produce anything that Trump did that was illegal?
I’ll assume the answer is no and that tells us that your comments are vacuous.
No, you misunderstood. I was referring to Mueller knowing what Trump is up to with the phony flattery and appreciation. Mueller team knows Trump is sucking up to them and they are too smart to fall for it.
As far as criminality, we’ll find out about it, or not, in due time.
Natacha Rant, your comment “setting aside the saber rattling with S. Korea, which is another reason in and of itself.”
It’s the wrong country. Use a GPS & find North Korea. Death threats are coming from Kim in NK. The number 13 is an unlucky number. Here’s why:
Examine the polices of former Secretaries of State:
1.Henry A. (Heinz Alfred) Kissinger (1973-1977)
2. Cyrus Roberts Vance (1977-1980)
3. Edmund Sixtus Muskie (1980-1981)
4. Alexander Meigs Haig (1981-1982)
5. George Pratt Shultz (1982-1989)
6. James Addison Baker (1989-1992)
7. Lawrence Sidney Eagleburger (1992-1993)
8. Warren Minor Christopher (1993-1997)
9. Madeleine Korbel Albright (1997-2001)
10. Colin Luther Powell (2001-2005)
11. Condoleezza Rice (2005-2009)
12. Hillary Rodham Clinton (2009-2013)
13. John Kerry (2013-2017)
You need to stop watching Fox. That was the distant past. We are talking about the immediate present. Pivoting won’t deflect blame away from Tangerine Man.
Natacha, I don’t watch Fox. Kim’s brother had some VX nerve agent smeared in his face. Two months ago is that distant past? And death threats from Kim in NK is distant past, in real time, hour by hour?
Typical Natacha Nonesense.
“YOUR President”. No understanding of the Constitution or the law.
The fate of our nation, to a significant extent, is in his hands whether you like it or not. The actions of the Democrats are distractions that are causing everyone to take their eye off the ball, the result of which could mean war because stupid people prevented reasonable quiet discussions to occur with the major powers involved. You have successfully closed off discussions with Russia that could help deal with N. Korea and the Middle East.
Enough incoherence and hysteria.
Strike down “Affirmative Action Privilege.”
Repeal the 19th Amendment.
“Affirmative Action Privilege” is unconstitutional as subjective bias which illicitly denies the right to private property and freedoms of other Americans.
The 19th Amendment unconstitutionally denies the right of states to establish voters, while it has caused the American birthrate to enter a “death spiral.”
Women don’t need to vote. Women need to bear and nurture babies sufficient to end the need for America to import its population. Misogynistic women who hate the female body, which requires them to perpetuate the race/species, are the greatest enemy of America. Without babies there are no people. Without people there is no need to vote.
America is being diluted out of existence. What are the weapons and where is the army to fight against the incoherent and hysterical extinction of America?
Natacha……Trump praising Putin for expelling US personnel was sarcasm used as a tool, as a means of deflating or disempowering Putin’s retaliatory actions against the US. He didn’t make any big blustery deal about it. What do you suppose Putin’s reaction was on the other end? It’s kind of hard to gauge Trump and what his next move may be. It was actually quite brilliant if you understand why Trump said it.
The language Trump is using as he lays the groundwork for negotiations with NK is very deliberate. If you can’t see that, then again, you don’t understand Trump. You see everything Trump says and does through a filter of “he’s a moron.”
I doubt it will change your opinion, but….would you agree that it took more than dumb luck to knock out 16 primary challengers and then go on to beat the Clinton machine in the election?
Would you agree that Trump is literally ‘at war’ with nearly the entire DC political establishment? The Uni-party? All of the special interests? The bloated bureaucracy? The status quo in Washington?
Do you know the quote “All war is deception”?
Now think about what Trump is doing. From the words he chooses to his sometimes odd body language. Not much makes sense to you. And maybe it doesn’t make sense to his opponents either. He makes mistakes just like we all do, but he’s not stoopid. But you go on thinking that.
Oh, and the odds of Trump being impeached stand at about zero.
Oh come on you anti-Trumpers, lighten up! This was an article that sheds a humorous light on the extreme efforts to undermine this President. It doesn’t diminish any legitimate concerns, just the wackos that would find Trump’s habit of eating two scoops of ice cream worthy of headlines.
Diane reminds me of Olga/Annie; from a couple years back on this blog.
Olly, There is one major difference, Diane is sane. And, the crazy lady you mention would NEVER call the Scott Walker/John Doe investigation “abusive” as Diane did on this thread.
I said reminds not is.
Olly, why does Prof. Turley eschew the edit button?
“Diane reminds me of Olga/Annie; from a couple years back on this blog.”
So where is Annie now that we really need her?
And two scoops of ice cream in a 70 year old, apparently overweight, high stress male is just asking for trouble, as well as calcified plaques and, eventually, head lines of the worst sort.
I would hope somebody is commenting on this high risk behavior – do you think it would help if we tweet it?
So where is Annie now that we really need her?
I enjoyed our dialog. Rarely did we agree but it was substantive and civil.
I would hope somebody is commenting on this high risk behavior
The opportunity was missed to hire David Binkle, Michelle’s School Lunch chef/adviser. Probably a good thing as President Trump would likely be blamed for Binkle defrauding the school lunch program. He doesn’t need that on his plate. 🙂
Nice democracy ya got here. Too bad if something happened to it.
The Donald did!
Al O’Heem:
Don’t worry. It’ll be fine. We’re not some third world hellhole.We handle stuff like this before breakfast. Sort of like we handled ISIS. I hear Raqqa is encircled and has about 1000 soon-to-be martyrs holed in the central city.
Detective Joe Friday is at again. Joe’s going to get the answers sooner or later.
I get the general drift. This Russiagate cum kitchen sink investigation is getting thin. Got it. I would be more inclined to defend President Trump if he were not faster than his own shadow at capitulating to the powers that be, and tossing the public, or the office of President, under the buss in the process, whenever he gets a chance.
As it stands, I’m simply left with the same taste of lies, and that feeling that the public is considered beneath contempt by these people, from everyone involved as I was during the Obama administration. Disappointing also that some would call campaign lies for what they are in one administration and salesmanship in the next where the only difference is tribe. What a crock.
BB re: ” the public is considered beneath contempt by these people” – that’s so true – from both sides of the aisle.
T rump wants to nuke the aisles.
https://twitter.com/johncusack/status/895884703684632577
“Locked and loaded” and ready to rumble…
T rumpers are nukers.
Say more about that…
Okay, I will….
https://twitter.com/SophiaHelwani/status/895502648891195392
https://twitter.com/politico/status/896136732453683200
https://twitter.com/JoelFischerNYC/status/895518631789961216
https://twitter.com/mluckovichajc/status/895027507417812994
Indeed. Also, Trump has dealt the office of President a major blow by signing the sanctions bill against Russia imposed on him by Congress. These sanctions are harmful not only to Russia for crimes everyone on this site agrees that Russia didn’t commit in the first place, but also to our European partners (NATO) who the bill targets economically along with Russia (big time) if they don’t buy their gas from the US (liquified gas) at MUCH higher prices than they would have to pay Russia. This flagrantly obvious self serving aspect of the bill goes directly against all intents and stipulations in the NATO charter, but of course Trump (and the slime he is kowtowing to – Congress) couldn’t care less about such trivia. Creating deep seated animosity in Europe for mere profit and pique, is neither a responsible nor a sustainable policy and it sure as hell isn’t in the interests of the American people. But it gets Trump though another day, and that’s all that matters to him.
Worst of all, however, the bill (which TRUMP SIGNED) also puts significant restrictions on the President to undo those sanctions should the “next” POTUS, never mind Trump, deem them no longer beneficial to the US. (And they are no longer beneficial right out of the gate.) This is messing big time with the separation of powers, and it would have been far better for the Office of President had Trump vetoed the bill for that reason alone. This is one place he could have used the bully pulpit to good use – and at one and the same time made a strong statement about how Russiagate is being used against not only the President, but by extension against the people of the United States as well. Had Congress then passed it over his veto, at least he would not be guilty of aiding and abetting the weakening of his office against the national interest.
This is a very significant and troubling precedent Trump is establishing for his term in office. The proof it’s important is that no one is talking about what he signed away; rather, what little reporting is done is only the usual stenographic slop about how we are finally getting tough on Russia.
The question is does the President have the Constitutional right to ignore the bill as I believe he questions the Constitutionality of the bill.
The dangers being created by a stupid Congress are astounding.
He can and should have vetoed it. If you’re going to protect the office, then protect it, don’t put established rights at Congress’ pleasure. What you are suggesting is a form of, “I dare you, I dare you now, now I double dare you, and so on. Congress can play that game as well if so inclined, and they have the signed contract.
It It is not the President’s job to make the Supreme Court bail him out of trouble again and again while he tweets up a storm that makes his legal team cringe. He is supposed to do his part in defending the rights of the office and not overstepping the limits. Leave the place as neat as you found it or for heaven’s sake at least try.
We’ll see if President Trump ignores the bill or goes along with it happily while Congress looks for other places they can bitch slap him into what they consider conformity (or worse). But either way, and I suspect the latter, he has relinquished authority neither he nor those who follow will get back without a major fight – and I suspect he will be only too happy to leave that messy part to the next guy or gal. I’ll be quite happy on this one to be wrong.
Brooklyn, I didn’t know the Supreme Court bailed him out of trouble ever. Trump is who he is, very transparent while tweeting up a storm. He was duly elected by the people and will remain President for at least the first term. So far I think he has been doing a pretty good job.
The Dems and his own party along with the deep state will keep fighting him, but eventaully I believe he will prevail though that is far from a certainty.
A strange comment since Trump has hired the consummate deep stater,Gen.John Kelly, to be his chief of staff.
https://twitter.com/mluckovichajc/status/893562899414863873
Foolishness.
The President is choosing people to work for him. The deep state is not supposed to work against the administration.
While I know that as human bean bags, you guys/gals are fine people (like every one else – in spite of your little love peck quarrels with anything that so much as glances to the center of the far far far far far far right), I despair on the tribal stuff. The BushBabys, the Obmamabots and now the Trupistinahans. My guy can do no wrong, over and over and over again. And every damned time, we expect different results. Yiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiikes…!!!
Trumps ill advised and poorly executed executive order on immigration would have been chopped liver except for the Supreme Court who ruled on the merits of the (2nd) EO (and – I suspect – on partisan bias) and managed (mostly) by professionalism to ignore Trump’s tweets which proved beyond all doubt that he had nothing but utter contempt for anti discrimination laws. Hell, the EO itself made only the barest minimum pretense to legally skirt the issue. BTW, Lucky Luciano was also sincere. It’s a quality that depends on context, and it’s never a get out of jail free card.
Finally, I voted not Hillary – so I’m quite aware that short of concrete information to the contrary, Trump won fair and square. So did Bush and Obama, er…, um. I mean so did Obama. Where am I saying otherwise?
It’s our duty as citizens to be vigilant of all Presidents, even when the particular President in question is: the one, the only, the almighty, the LOWER YOUR GAZE, <Put desired Presidential name here>.
The Supreme Court did what they did because that is the law so your statement “Trumps ill advised and poorly executed executive order on immigration would have been chopped liver except for the Supreme Court ” is ludicrous and doesn’t make sense.
Trump’s duty as President is primarily to protect the nation and that was exactly what he was attempting to do with his executive order on immigration. It was rational, reasoned and something that was based upon the Obama administration’s assessments. That makes what he did almost bipartisan. The order was totally within the law and his powers.
His tweets and statements do not count. If you think otherwise try going to court to fight a legitimate contract stating that you were told something different than what was stated in the contract. The judge will inform you that the decision will be based upon what was written within the four corners of the contract and nothing more.
Can Trump do wrong? Of course. Obama, Bush and Clinton all did wrong. That is the hazard of their job and as long as they did what they did within the Constitution and the law we can differ with regard to opinion, but we have to live within the law.
Vigilance of our leaders is a necessity and a duty of all citizens, but non citizens do not have the right of citizens or even the right to enter the country. That is up to the laws of the United States which is determined by our leaders. Trump was well within his rights and had a duty to protect American citizens whether or not you liked his executive order.
I understand your feeling and I too was hopining he would veto it. However, I give him the benefit of the doubt in this situation since so many things are happening at the same time. Additionally the President has extraordinary powers when it comes to foreign affairs.
Is Dowd another mob lawyer?
Mo Dowd said T rump was a mob boss.
Dowd is a longtime DC attorney. Bart Giamatti hired Dowd to investigate the Pete Rose scandal.in 1989.
I can’t understand how this “thing” and that’s what this is, a “thing” has gotten this far. Prior to this special investigation everyone connected to the allegations say there’s no proof, even the accusers said no proof. Obama administration says the results of the election accurately reflect the will of the American people. No one can come forward and say the Russians called them and said vote for Trump. No American ever had a Russian in the voting booth with them. So now we have phoney leaks, investigators with connections to the Clintons, FBI Director purposely leaking, Americans purposely being unmasked, raids on Americans homes and a press steering this whole thing. Aren’t there any honest politicians from both sides going to gather and stand up to say “stop all of this now, let’s do the business of the people, we are letting our nation and Americans down”.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-08-10/why-some-u-s-ex-spies-don-t-buy-the-russia-story
Peach-interesting stuff, more should be out in the ms.
Lock them all in Bedlam.
David Benson – considering the current state of Bedlam, it is too good for them. 😉
Maybe they will improve.
Turley’ right. Gurule’s wrong. Don’t blame Mueller for Gurule. Blame Gurule for Gurule. The credibility of Mueller’s investigation is in no way dependent upon the credibility of anyone else other than Mueller and the investigators Mueller has hired.
There was absolutely no reason what so ever, for Dowd to do something like what he did.!!
Blatantly, currying favour……and ass licking.!! They fooled nobody.
I am amazed, Dowd did something this stupid. I know if I were Mueller, I would go harder at investigating the Trumps after a display as fake as this was.!!
My goodness, Guiness –
This is Clinton on the plane with Low Retta. He was just being friendly.
Point taken, still benign though!
The pre-dawn raid took care of the credibility factor for me. Mueller is an ass.
The only connection between Mueller’s investigation and the abusive John Doe investigations in Wisconsin is the phrase, “pre-dawn raid.” Your argument based on that connection is symptomatic of semiotic dementia.
BTW, Trump hired Sessions, who hired Rosenstein, who hired Mueller. Trump has not yet fired Sessions, who has not yet fired Rosenstein, who has not yet fired Mueller.
Diane – as a matter of clarification. Trump nominated Sessions, he didn’t hire him. You need to read your Constitution again. He needed the consent of the Senate.
t
Persnickety sticklerism.
Diane – this is exactly the attitude that keeps you from being a pedant.
Paul, is Mueller an ass or is he simply too full of himself to have done the right thing? Mueller enjoys this role so much that he forgo his ability to say no to the job when he should know that he is too close to the parties involved in the investigation. He has not maintained the atmosphere of a non-partisan investigation. He is supported by those who don’t understand the meaning behind the Constitution and the attempt of the founders to provide protection from government abuses for all citizens.
Allan,
There is so much attention being given to the accusations that Trump and/or someone within his orbit has connections, is connected, is colluding, is this , is that, whatever. What is not given enough or any attention is what would those accusations look like if true? The worst thing that could possibly be true (so far) is the Trump campaign was provided a treasure trove of emails and other communications regarding Clinton, her foundation and the DNC that no one has denied to be true. Who knows if that information could have been uncovered and reported by the MSM. Leaving that aside, the result of the release of that information is the American public went into this election more informed than they would have been had this information been withheld.
So what else would be evidence that Trump and Co. IS administering the Executive Branch against the citizens of this country, our national security and more importantly, his constitutional oath of office?
Olly, we seem to be on the same wave length on this issue. I don’t believe Trump is guilty of anything, but I do believe there has been an obstruction of governmental processes (some blatantly illegal) by those sympathetic to the Democratic Party both inside and outside of government. To date the claims based upon evidence against Trump seem non existent despite at least one year of investigation and illegal revalation of names and private discussions.
What is this doing the security of the Nation and the world. Right now North Korea is making threats and eventually those threats and actions will have to be answered or they will have to stop. China is a great influence on N. Korea. Our actions involving Russia moves Russia closer to China when we should be striving for the opposite. This makes out position more difficult and quiet negotiations less likely.
All of this helps to prevent a peaceful solution. Whether the Democrats and Republicans like it or not the President has the ability to use the military for 90 days and can order the airforce to bomb N. Korea at any time. I think the President actualy knows what he is doing, but for those of you that think otherwise recognize that all the shenanigans being played out are affecting the ability of our negotiators to settle the present problem peacefully.
This whole post seems designed to minimize the potential seriousness of the investigation by quoting some professor who appears to have no idea what he is talking about, particularly in light of the fact that he hasn’t seen the notes Trump sent to Mueller. In other words, Turley appears to setting up a straw man argument for the benefit of Trump.
The idea that written salutations could be an attempt to intimidate seems silly. But if the first letters of each word in the note just happened to spell out “you will die a painful death if you indict anyone”, there might be an argument for intimidation and obstruction of justice. I seriously doubt that anything like this happened, however.
Until we see the notes sent to Mueller, it is absurd to have any serious discussion of whether those notes are anything more than more of Trump’s foolish antics. And it is completely foolishness to be for Trump to send even innocuous notes of “appreciation ” to Mueller, lest the notes be misinterpreted by Mueller. Sending these notes to Mueller can only hurt, not help, Trump, in the criminal investigation. At best, they make no difference. I’ve never seen a potential target of an investigation send notes of “appreciation ” during the course of the investigation. It’s really weird and not very smart to but that is all you can say without seeing the notes.
Who else has received appreciation greetings from Trump since he began running for President? Orally, Trump appears to limit himself to negative comments about people, including those he appointed and those that one would describe as his team members (excluding family).
President Donald J. Trump is a nice man.
This investigation is losing credibility by the week.
@Darren Smith: You base on this what? Enlighten Us….
If anyone comments positively on Trump’s comments then the credibility of the investigation is automatically reduced.
However, if anyone comments negatively on Trump’s comments then clearly there is a conspiracy to undermine the Trump administration which proves the investigation is a witch hunt.
I hope that clears things up for you.
BFM
You brought much more clarity than I could have ever managed to do. Much appreciated. 🤔
If anyone thinks Trump’s express appreciation for Mueller’s investigation automatically reduces the credibility of Mueller’s investigation, then Trump’s express appreciation for Mueller lacks credibility [read: sincerity].
If, however, anyone thinks Trump’s express appreciation for Mueller’s investigation does not automatically reduce the credibility of Mueller’s investigation, then Trump’s express admiration for Mueller’s investigation still lacks credibility [read: sincerity] anyhow.
Either one thinks that Trump’s express admiration for Mueller’s investigation is credibly sincere, or one does not think Trump’s express admiration for Mueller’s investigation is credibly sincere.
Either Trump’s express admiration for Mueller’s investigation lacks credible sincerity, or Trump’s express admiration for Mueller’s investigation lacks credible sincerity.
BFM–that’s how constructive dilemmas are properly constructed. Your improperly constructed dilemma was just refuted by counter-dilemma.
Thank you for the clarification. It is always a pleasure to learn from a master – I think?
BFM, I am, as you correctly guessed, a pedant–not a master.
P.S. I failed to perceive the intent your sarcasm–my bad.
Diane – you are not a pedant. You are a mere amateur with a some knowledge and little logic.
Now you really are trying to read minds.
If we can’t have a little fun while we try to rip apart the favored positions of the political parties and the oligarchs they report to, then where are we, what is the point?
Diane, Thank you for the lesson in mind reading.
Reading and writing are not telepathy–but communication. Consequently, one must communicate one’s mind, here, in order for me to read it.
Diane – using your flawed logic, you created a redundancy, again. Plus, you failed to prove your point.
Paul, the logic you call flawed is a permissible use of tautology. Trump’s appreciation for Mueller lacks credible sincerity. The fact that incredible insincerity is redundant as well as tautologous remains utterly irrelevant to the credibility of Mueller’s investigation. Unless, of course, Trump sincerely appreciates the credibility of what Mueller is doing with the investigation. Do you see the point now, Paul?
Diane – you do realize that repeating exactly the same sentence does not make it a tautology? Or do you? This is the second time you have misidentified a tautology.
If we are uncertain as to the sincerity of Trump’s salutation, and we know that it is entirely unnecessary to understand, then we can conclude that ascertaining the sincerity of Trump’s salutation is an unnecessary uncertainty. 😉
And of course there are necessary uncertainties to understand such as the situation in North Korea. But this salutation matter is certainly an unnecessary uncertainty. 🙂
“Trump’s express appreciation for Mueller lacks credibility”
Diane, It makes no difference what Trump does or doesn’t do. If Trump said not another word then the press would be saying that Trump is in hiding. The press thrives off of selling all the news that isn’t fit to print so each action or lack of action by Trump will lead to a news story. Trump in a jestful way is saving jobs, especially those of CNN for without their ability to spin non-newsworthy events CNN might disappear into oblivion.
Wishful thinking
Straw men neither wish nor think, Don.
The only question I have is how far negative on the credibility scale can this investigation go.
Yet, there are those so enthralled with such fanciful theater that one wonders what a boring and intellectually dull life they must live.