Saturday, December 1, 2018

Called on the carpet



President Trump had an “informal” conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Group of 20 (G-20) summit in Buenos Aires on Friday night, the White House announced.

“As is typical at multilateral events, President Trump and the First Lady had a number of informal conversations with world leaders at the dinner last night, including President Putin,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement Saturday.

It is unclear exactly what topics the leaders discussed.

  The Hill
Because, like all his other "informal" conversations with Putin at these international meetings, no American official was present to record it.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Michigan & Wisconsin: GOP gives zero shits

Because the Michigan people voted in Democrats last month:



Also,





Meanwhile, in Wisconsin:



Oh, and for good measure, the WI GOP wants to block Governor Evers from being able to ban guns from the Capitol.

I can't stop thinking about the WI GOP attempt to block the governor from seeking *any* flexibility on any federal program. It's initially targeting the terrible Medicaid rules that wanted to revisit. But it goes way beyond that. As or or, uh, anyone who has worked on federal or state policy can tell you, there's a constant process of seeking tweaks and adjustments for state implementations of federal laws. It's how the US makes federalism work. The WI GOP wants to take it hostage.

The same principle applies vis-a-vis ripping powers away from the Attorney General and arrogating them to the GOP legislature. Every issue becomes an opportunity for the GOP to take hostages. It's a recipe to break governance. Intentionally. It's a punch in the gut to voters.

And the way these things work in combination is chillingly cold-blooded. They gerrymander the legislature to end majority rule. They move powers from democratically elected offices to the undem legislature. They entrench by suppressing votes & protecting partisan Sup Ct justices.

Warning to our friends across the country: what happens in Wisconsin doesn't stay in Wisconsin. Last-minute power-grab rule changes to override the will of voters after losing governorships is fast becoming the new normal for the GOP. It’s not just Wisconsin and North Carolina—now it’s happening in Michigan too.

Cohen's plea has spurred Senate Intel referrals

The Senate Intelligence Committee has referred cases to the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election after witnesses questioned in the panel’s own Russia probe were suspected of lying, the committee chairman said Friday.

“We have made referrals from our committee to the special counsel for prosecution,” Chairman Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said at a national security conference in Austin. “In a lot of those cases, those might be tied to lying to us.”

  WaPo
"In a lot of those cases," could imply that a lot of people called before the Committee lied to them. Unfortunately, we don't get to know who those people are at this time. It's damned sure Junior lied to them, but not entirely certain he was referred for prosecution.
[T]he Senate committee, which has interviewed more than 200 people since its investigation began in January 2017, has referred some cases for prosecution that involve suspected lying, said [Chairman Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)], speaking at the University of Texas.

[...]

“We’re certainly not scared to refer something that we believe is criminal, and lying to Congress is right at the top of that,” he said. “My message . . . was if you lie to us, we’re going to catch you and we’re going to prosecute you, period, end of sentence.”

[...]

Most of those interviewed appeared willingly, but “a handful” of those interviews were conducted under subpoena, Burr said, and he suggested that he may have to issue subpoenas again to bring people before the committee.

Burr also said that, by the end of the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation, Republicans and Democrats might not be able to reach unanimous agreement on all matters.

[...]

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the House Intelligence Committee’s ranking Democrat, said his panel believes “other witnesses were untruthful before our committee.” He would like Mueller to have those transcripts, he said. In particular, Schiff cited Trump adviser Roger Stone as someone whose answers were “far from truthful.”
Which reminds me, we haven't heard much out of Devin Nunes lately.

And also reminds me:




Maybe Trump can top that.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Is this the public breakup?

Front and center in many reports the last couple of days have been reports of Putin and MbS' chumminess at the G20.  Eg:

Source: Google search


Source: New York Post



The change of pictures from their French encounter to the Argentina encounter tell a sad story between Trump and Putin:


Source: Time
Senior Russian officials publicly chided U.S. President Donald Trump following his announcement on Thursday that he would no longer meet with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin during the G-20 summit of world leaders in Argentina.

Trump announced the cancellation via Twitter, citing Russia's seizure of two Ukrainian gunboats and a tugboat in the Kerch Strait, a shared zone which sits between Ukraine and Russia. He said his decision "would be best for all parties concerned."

[...]

Russian officials questioned Trump's justification for scrapping the meeting at the last minute and dismissed the notion that the diplomatic development would be a setback for Russia.

A spokesperson for the Kremlin on Thursday said the cancellation would free up time "for useful meetings."

  CNBC
Ouch!
A top Russian lawmaker said the forgone meeting was a lost opportunity "not for Putin, but for Trump."

[...]

The president had told reporters just before he boarded a plane to Argentina that he believed it was "a good time to have the meeting."

That morning, however, the president's former lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about the president's business dealings with Russia, a possibly embarrassing development just ahead of a bilateral meeting with that country's leader.

[...]

"I think that likely President Trump and his advisors realized that meeting with Putin would create increased liabilities for President Trump, considering his performance in Helsinki," said Mark Simakovsky, a former Russia country director in the Department of Defense. "Clearly they felt vulnerable because of this domestic situation going on."

[...]

"We have heard the official explanation and taken note of it," Kremlin foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said during a Friday briefing. "But is it true? I think the true reason is rooted in the domestic political situation in the United States."

[...]

The Kremlin said Friday that it expects an informal meeting to take place. The White House seemed to leave open that possibility, saying only that no meeting had been scheduled.

Asked if he would exchange pleasantries with Putin, Trump told reporters Friday, "not particularly. I don't know."

[...]

[Russian senator Konstantin] Kosachev also suggested that Trump may have delivered Russia a foreign policy victory. He cited the language the president used in his post on Twitter.

"Based on the fact that the ships and sailors have not been returned to Ukraine from Russia, I have decided it would be best for all parties concerned to cancel my previously scheduled meeting," the president wrote.

Kosachev wrote that, because the ships are in Russia-occupied Ukraine, Trump's statement that the ships are in Russia "is nothing but a long-awaited recognition."

"This is already an alarming signal for Kiev, and not for Moscow," he wrote.

[...]

Kosachev's point illustrates why presidents need to be careful what they say, said Simakovsky.

"Russians are looking at every little slip to try to play it to their advantage," he said. But while the tweet was a "complete gaffe" by the president, Simakovsky said it was not a signal of a broader policy shift.
Source: Reddit (edited w/arrow)


Daggers.

Trump is under domestic and international pressure to cut ties with MbS, so I can imagine this latest trip and its reports has Trump super paranoid and extremely jealous.

And here's the best use of this meme I've seen yet:



A well-established pattern

Cohen's sentencing memorandum

From Renato Mariotti, attorney and former federal prosecutor:



Late on Friday night, Michael Cohen's attorneys filed his sentencing submission.

A sentencing memorandum is a document that defense attorneys write and submit to a court before a client is sentenced so that the judge can consider all of the facts and circumstances surrounding their client and his conduct when he is sentenced.

In many cases, there are disputes between the prosecutors and defense about what the defendant did, what sentencing guidelines apply to the defendant, or what the sentence should be. In the case of a cooperator like Cohen, I expect the only disagreement to be the sentence.

It's important to note that if a cooperator like Cohen made a false factual assertion about his cooperation or his criminal activity, the prosecutors would make that known to the judge. You can be confident that this document is consistent with Mueller's knowledge.

The most interesting thing in the document, by far, is Cohen's discussion of his false statements to Congress. His attorneys carefully discuss the false statements, his motivation to make the false statement, and the involvement of Trump's staff and attorneys.

Because the precision of their words is important, I'm going to type out their exact words here. They refer to Trump as "Client-1" throughout but I've changed that to "Trump" here for clarity:

"Michael's false statements to Congress likewise sprung regrettably from Michael's effort, as a loyal ally and then champion of Trump, to support and advance Trump's political messaging. At the time that he was requested to appear before the [House and Senate Intel Committees], Michael was serving as personal attorney to the President, and followed daily the political messages that both Trump and his staff and supporters repeatedly and forcefully broadcast. Furthermore, in the weeks during which his then-counsel prepared his written response to the Congressional Committees, Michael remained in close and regular contact with White House based-staff and legal counsel to Trump."

That last sentence is extremely important and interesting. It is also very carefully worded. The sentence strongly implies that White House staff and Trump's attorneys knew in advance that Cohen would lie to Congress and were involved in crafting his statements. But it does *not* come out and say that. It is important to note that Cohen's attorney does not allege that Cohen was *directed* to lie to Congress. Yet Cohen's lawyer has not been shy about having him say that Trump directed him to commit the campaign finance violations. If he could truthfully say that Cohen was *directed* to lie, I believe he would be obligated to do so because it would be a mitigating fact that the judge should consider. But Cohen's attorney suggests that Cohen felt pressure to lie and that Trump's staff and attorneys knew.

Essentially what Cohen's attorney is saying is that Cohen read Trump's anti-Mueller messaging (discussed at length in the memorandum), knew that he was supposed to be consistent with Trump's lies, and did so.

He was also in "close and regular contact" with White House staff and Trump's lawyers about what he would say. The implication is that they knew the testimony he was going to provide to Congress was false and let him go forward and lie, or at least didn't correct the record.

So do Trump's staff members and attorneys have any liability? Possibly, although it appears that they tried to be careful to mislead Congress and the public in a manner that would not create personal liability.

Depending on what Trump’s staff and attorneys knew, this could very well be a conspiracy to lie to Congress, which is a crime. (A conspiracy is just an agreement to commit a crime.) But it may be extremely difficult to prove based on what Cohen’s attorney said.

What it would take to prove a conspiracy of that nature is testimony from another co-conspirator (a Trump attorney or staffer) that their conversations with Cohen were a way for him to run his lies past them for approval, and they approved the lies. Emails or other documentation proving that point would also potentially prove a conspiracy along those lines. I suspect that Mueller and House Democrats will try to find out what evidence exists of knowledge, approval, or coordination of Cohen’s lies. [...] Their defense would be that Cohen testified about many matters and that they weren’t focused on these specific portions of his testimony, and/or that they didn’t even know those portions of his testimony were false at the time. Prosecutors would have to prove otherwise.

So what does the rest of the sentencing memorandum say? Quite a bit.

First, the sentencing memorandum repeats the statement Cohen made under oath that Trump directed Cohen to commit the campaign finance violations, and provides important context to help the judge understand those violations and Trump's involvement in them. Specifically, Cohen "kept his client [Trump] contemporaneously informed and acted on his client's instructions. This is not an excuse, and Michael accepts that he acted wrongfully [...] Nevertheless, we respectfully request that the Court consider that as personal counsel to Trump, Michael felt obligated to assist Trump, on Trump's instruction, to attempt to prevent Woman-1 and Woman-2 from disseminating narratives that would adversely affect the Campaign *and* cause personal embarrassment to Trump and his family."

That last line is an attempt by Cohen's attorney to suggest that the offense is less serious than if the payments were just meant to influence the election. That is *not* a legal defense. It's a crime nonetheless, and Cohen acknowledges that. His attorney minimizes the conduct because his job is to provide context that would reduce Cohen's sentence. He's doing his job. That's also why he is pointing to the extent to which Cohen kept Trump informed of his actions at the time--more detail on that is given in the memorandum--and acted on his orders. It's not an excuse but it helps provide context that explains why he committed the crimes.

The next interesting part of his memorandum is its description of Trump's legal and PR strategy. This is quite a statement to make on behalf of the president's former personal lawyer: Cohen was "personally aware of Trump's repeated disavowals of commercial and political ties between himself and Russia, as well as the strongly voiced mantra of Trump that investigations of such ties were politically motivated and without evidentiary support."

What Cohen's lawyer carefully does not say is whether those statements are true or false. But he immediately follows that statement by focusing on the specific falsehood at issue here and noting that it was also part of Trump's false messaging.

Part of what is going on here is that Cohen's attorney is explaining that Trump's extreme strategy of casting the entire investigation of him as false is a mitigating circumstance the judge should consider when taking into account his own crime of lying to Congress. But the description itself is quite an acknowledgement on his part.

The last part of Cohen's sentencing memorandum that is worth discussing here is his description of his cooperation. Cohen described in detail his cooperation with Mueller and other prosecutors.

Cohen said that he participated in seven separate interviews with Mueller and that he met with representatives of the New York Attorney General concerning their civil lawsuit against the Trump Foundation and provided documents to them.

Cohen also said that he met with the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance and has complied with numerous requests for information from them. Also, Cohen claims that the decision to push forward without a traditional cooperation deal was his own decision.

He claims he is eager not to delay his sentencing, and wants to be sentenced now before his cooperation is completed, even though he intends to cooperate further. This is a very unusual and risky strategy by Cohen. The judge can't be sure that he will continue cooperating.

And that brings me to the last point. After disputing how the sentencing guidelines are calculated--Cohen believes the guidelines range should be 46 to 57 months--he asks for time served. I don't believe he will receive a sentence of time served.

That said, based on my experience prosecuting and defending federal criminal tax and fraud violations, I expect Cohen to receive a sentence well below the guidelines range. He will get some prison time but it may be less than some uninformed or disingenuous observers predict.


Official document: Sentencing Memorandum on Behalf of Michael Cohen

Elliott Broidy in the news again

Recall that GOP megadonor Elliott Broidy is the man known as one of Michael Cohen's three clients (the other two being Trump and Sean Hannity), who, for a while, was finance chairman of the RNC.  Also recall that he supposedly paid $1.6 million to a woman said to have had an abortion from a pregnancy by Broidy, which some people speculate was actually on behalf of Trump.

Broidy is also under indictment for money laundering.
[I]n a scheme to launder millions of dollars into the country to help a flamboyant Malaysian financier [...] Elliott Broidy, a Los Angeles-based businessman who was a finance vice chairman of Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign and inauguration committees, was paid to lobby the Trump administration to try to end an investigation related to the embezzlement of billions of dollars from a Malaysian state-owned fund, according to court filings made public on Friday.

[...]

The filings were released in connection with a guilty plea entered by George Higginbotham, a former Justice Department employee. Mr. Higginbotham admitted to conspiring to lie to banks about the source of tens of millions of dollars he funneled into the United States from the Malaysian financier Jho Low, who federal authorities say masterminded a scheme to loot the 1 Malaysia Development Berhad fund, also known as 1MDB.

[...]

In his guilty plea, Mr. Higginbotham admitted that he and the entertainer and businessman Pras Michel, a former member of the Fugees, a defunct hip-hop group, arranged for millions of dollars of Mr. Low’s money to be transferred to a law firm owned by Mr. Broidy’s wife to pay them to try to end the 1MDB investigation.

[...]

The filings identify Mr. Broidy as “Person 1” or “Individual 1.”

[...]

In a brief interview on Friday, Mr. Broidy did not deny that the filings refer to him. But he referred specific questions to his lawyer, who did not respond to a request for comment.

[...]

Mr. Broidy, who pleaded guilty in 2009 in an unrelated pension fund bribery case, is one of several Trump associates whose business with foreign governments and figures has attracted scrutiny, including from investigators for the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.

A veteran Republican fund-raiser who also owns a defense contracting firm, Mr. Broidy had seemed positioned to become a highly influential figure in a political hierarchy that was upended by Mr. Trump’s victory. Mr. Broidy had started raising money for Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign at a time when most elite Republican donors were staying away. After Mr. Trump’s election, Mr. Broidy marketed his connection to the new administration to politicians, businessmen and governments around the world, including some with unsavory records, and won big contracts for his defense firm.

[...]

[Federal prosecutors] extract[ed] a guilty plea from a former Goldman Sachs banker who was involved in bribes and kickbacks related to 1MDB bond work. Mr. Broidy’s involvement, which predates Mr. Low’s indictment, underscores both Mr. Low’s efforts to navigate the United States judicial system, and the far-flung nature of Mr. Broidy’s business pursuits in the early days of the Trump administration.

In March 2017, Mr. Low’s associates were looking to retain “someone with political influence,” according to a Friday filing. Their goal was to help him deflect efforts by American authorities to seize assets bought with money he was accused of siphoning from 1MDB, and to end the Justice Department investigation into his activities, according to the filings. They indicate that, after Mr. Low expressed interest in hiring Mr. Broidy and Ms. Rosenzweig’s law firm, Mr. Michel met with Mr. Broidy and an associate “and explained Jho Low’s situation in the 1MDB matters.”

Mr. Broidy “indicated to Michel that although he was willing to assist Jho Low, he would not take any compensation directly from Jho Low in exchange for his services,” according to the filings. They indicate that Mr. Broidy “wanted $15 million in compensation, but Michel negotiated the price down to approximately $8 million.”

At least $6 million was transferred to Ms. Rosenzweig’s law firm through various accounts set up to “disguise the true source, origin and purpose of the funds, and, specifically, to conceal from U.S. financial institutions Jho Low’s ownership, control and affiliation with these funds and transactions,” according to the filings.

[...]

Mr. Michel indicated that Mr. Broidy “agreed to try to influence a potential nominee for a federal position that would have authority over the 1MDB forfeiture matters,” according to the filings, which note that the potential office holder was not nominated.

  NYT
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

A sad day for government legal claims

A new court document filed late on Friday by the U.S. Department of Justice says that when Donald Trump tweets, no one should presume that the statements he posts on Twitter are accurate, or that Trump has any “personal knowledge” of the topic he tweets about. The filing came in response to a Freedom of Information lawsuit by USA Today and other organizations, seeking to obtain an unredacted version of the FISA court FBI application to place former Trump presidential campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page under electronic surveillance.

[...]

In the lawsuit, USA Today and the other plaintiffs pointed to a Twitter post by Trump on July 23, 2018, in which he appeared to criticize the fact that the Page FBI surveillance application remained a classified document, saying that Trump’s claim that the application was classified wrongly should be considered a basis for declassifying the document.

“It was classified to cover up misconduct by the FBI and the Justice Department in misleading the Court by using this Dossier in a dishonest way to gain a warrant to target the Trump Team. This is a Clinton Campaign document. It was a fraud and a hoax designed to target Trump,” Trump wrote in the Twitter post.

Trump appear to be quoting a Fox News interview guest in the tweet, namely Tom Fitton, of the right-wing group, Judicial Watch. The DOJ noted that Trump’s tweet should be disregarded because there was “no evidence establishing that (Trump) was vouching for the wholesale accuracy of the statement he was quoting, or that he was commenting based on personal knowledge of the documents or based on personal knowledge of agency conduct. There is no evidence that he was formally overruling agency determinations via tweeted quotation of Fox & Friends.”

  Inquisitr


“DOJ’s argument that the president shouldn’t be presumed to know what he’s talking about is a pretty remarkable one, and it’s not one I’d seen the government make before 2017,” Heath wrote on Twitter.
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Happy Mike Flynn Day

Today is the first anniversary of Mike Flynn's guilty plea and flip to cooperate in the Mueller investigation.  And we haven't heard anything from or about him since.  I wonder, in the final cut, what will Flynn have given Mueller on Trump?

"Our dear dad has died"

Poppy Bush is dead, finally leaving us a "kinder, gentler nation."
"Jeb, Neil, Marvin, Doro and I are saddened to announce that after 94 remarkable years, our dear Dad has died," his son, former president George W Bush, said in a statement.

"George H.W. Bush was a man of the highest character and the best dad a son or daughter could ask for."

  alJazeera
So much for the good die young. Read my lips:  George H.W. Bush was an evil bastard, and a handsy one, too, mentored by the truly evil Richard Nixon, and once head of the very evil CIA. But the fawning praise and lies will be showering from 1,000 points of lightweight politicos and journalists today.
Jim McGrath, spokesman for the former president, said the elder Bush died at 10:10pm Central Time (04:10 GMT), adding that funeral arrangements had yet to be scheduled.
Do you think Trump will attend?

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE 12/2:











Which may be why Trump has been strangely solicitous of the Bush family since Poppy's death.



The Middle East is as it is today because of the Bushes. The first Iraq invasion has been enshrined as a model of foreign policy — but only because the second one was so much worse. In fact, doubts attended 41’s invasion, too.

[...]

Only the wellborn or well connected can truly say they bypassed the lucrative private life, which they can still have whenever they wish. To the rest of us, choosing to run for high office might seem the pathway to power, no less a lure than easeful riches. But to the patrician, it means sullying oneself. That is why they keep around thugs and heavies — Lee Atwater, Karl Rove — to do the nasty political work.

  NY Magazine
With his Gulf War and his illegal attack on Panama which killed an estimated 300 to 2,000 innocents, Bush I made war cool again for a nation that, for a minute after Vietnam, started to think that maybe the answer to international conflict might not lie in killing on an industrial scale.

[...]

88,500 tons of bombs were dropped in Bush I’s brief war on Iraq — and 70% missed their targets. But even of the 30% that struck true, contrary to popular perception at the time the targets were not exclusively military but included civilian electrical and transportation infrastructure, destroyed to make Iraq more amenable to US demands.

Destroying the electrical infrastructure shut down water and sewage systems, and wrecking roads and rail meant food could not be transported. Tens of thousands of civilians died of starvation and epidemics of cholera and typhoid.

[...]

As CIA head, Bush resumed the covert intelligence community’s tradition of aiding right-wing dictators, covering up a terrorist attack by Pinochet’s secret police.

[...]

And he was fully involved in the crimes of the Iran-Contra affair, including chairing a “Special Situation Group” which recommended covert operations including the mining of Nicaraguan waterways.

[...]

As President, Bush pardoned several of his Iran-Contra co-conspirators.

[...]

Bush became president by stoking the fires of racism with the famous Wille Horton ads. And once he got in he revived Nixon’s racist War on Drugs.

[...]

The federal prison population went up 39% in just four years under Bush, with 16,946 news prisoners — more new prisoners in four years than under eight years of Reagan. Bush was truly a pioneer of the carceral state.

[...]

In 1987, Bush told atheist journalist Robert Sherman “I don’t know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.”

Because the remark was made directly to Sherman and not recorded, and because Americans distrust atheists, many pundits have doubted whether Bush actually said that. But in a 2004 interview with Don Imus, Bush was publicly documented expressing much the same sentiment, saying “Lincoln said you cannot be President without spending some item on your knees. I have repeated that and a bunch of Atheists got all over me. Wait a minute. Does that mean that you cannot be President if you are an Atheist? I say yea that does mean that….One Nation Under God.”

[...]

It’s time to stop hagiographying evil.

  Patheos
Indeed. And Charlie Pierce has an article that does just that. Here's an excerpt:
[ I]t sums up a great deal of George H.W. Bush’s political career—the pragmatic insincerity, the subcontracting of the hatchet job to a hired hand, the willingness to play a role, no matter how clumsily, in order to keep and maintain power. Oh, and as it happens, while he was play-acting the bad-ass, Bush also was lying his hindquarters off about Iran-Contra.

  Charles P Pierce
Read the entire article here.