Sunday, May 31, 2020

Regrets

[T]he pandemic forced Donald trump to postpone the G7 summit in Washington.

  Guardian
How will he spin that? "Look how responsible I am," perhaps.

There'll be a video conference in lieu of meeting in person. It was ridiculous of Trump to keep people on the hook, planning, etc. for a June conference in the first place. It's been obvious for some time that schedule would not be able to be met.
According to the latest data from the Johns Hopkins University tracking site, there have now been more than 6,059,000 cases of the disease around the world, with 369,126 deaths.
And we account for more than 100,000 of those deaths!
Trump wanted world leaders to have a face-to-face meeting with him at Camp David near Washington next month but he said on Saturday that it would not go ahead. It follows a decision by Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, not to attend unless the spread of the pandemic showed signs of abating.

Trump said he hoped the meeting could take place in September instead and hinted that he wanted to invite more countries to attend, such as Australia, Russia and India.
That wouldn't be the G7 then, would it?

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

Way back, nothing changes

1978

It's Sunday


It's the singing in an enclosed place.

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

It's Sunday

A divided supreme court on Friday rejected an emergency appeal by a California church that challenged state limits on attendance at services that have been imposed to contain the spread of the coronavirus.

Over the dissent of the four more conservative justices, Chief Justice John Roberts joined the four liberals in turning away a request from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, California, in the San Diego area.

The church argued that limits on how many people can attend their services violate constitutional guarantees of religious freedom.

[...]

Roberts wrote in a brief opinion that the restriction allowing churches to reopen at 25% of their capacity, with no more than 100 worshipers at a time, “appears consistent” with the first amendment.

Roberts said similar or more severe limits apply to concerts, movies and sporting events “where large groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time”.

  
Roberts will be taking a tweet-lashing.
Lower courts in California had previously turned down the churches’ requests.

[...]

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in dissent that the restriction “discriminates against places of worship and in favor of comparable secular businesses. Such discrimination violates the first amendment”.
Which is bullshit, as Roberts pointed out.
Kavanaugh pointed to supermarkets, restaurants, hair salons, cannabis dispensaries and other businesses that are not subject to the same restrictions.
Because hair salons typically have hundreds of people in them at the same time? And, restaurants and supermarkets do have similar restrictions to churches. Kavanaugh, and the other four "conservative" justices are mere GOP lackeys.
The court also rejected an appeal from two churches in the Chicago area that objected to Governor Jay Pritzker’s limit of 10 worshipers at religious services. Before the court acted, Pritzker modified the restrictions to allow for up to 100 people at a time. There were no recorded dissents.
Why did Kavanaugh dissent on the California case and not the Chicago one?  Hmmm?

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

Saturday, May 30, 2020

The purge continues

After a 38-year career with the Justice Department, the FBI's top lawyer Dana Boente was asked to resign on Friday. Two sources familiar with the decision to dismiss Boente said it came from high levels of the Justice Department rather than directly from FBI Director Christopher Wray.

His departure comes on the heels of recent criticism by Fox News for his role in the investigation of former Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

[...]

Fox News has recently criticized Boente's role in the investigation of Flynn, whose criminal charge for lying to the FBI was recently dropped by the Justice Department based in part on the argument that his lies were not material to an underlying investigation.

Boente also said in a recently leaked memo that material put into the public record about Flynn was not exculpatory for the former national security advisor. The memo undermines the Justice Department's latest position that material about Flynn was mishandled by prosecutors.

Fox Business host Lou Dobbs said on April 27 that, "Shocking new reports suggest F.B.I. General Counsel Dana Boente day was acting in coordination with F.B.I. Director Christopher Wray to block the release of that evidence that would have cleared General Flynn."

  NBC
Sure it had to be Dobbs or one of the other Trumpistas that got Boente canned. Will Wray be next?

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

UPDATE:


Wanted: New or used mirror



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

MAGA loves the black people



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

UPDATE:


The thrill of power




P.S.  Note that it was all about HIM.  And apparently, he thought the protestors were coming for him.

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

UPDATE:


UPDATE:


Total control in the State Department

State Department officials are increasingly uneasy with their new acting inspector general, fearing he has conflicts of interest that could lead him to derail ongoing investigations — including ones into Secretary of State Mike Pompeo — while endangering cooperating witnesses.

  Politico
You think?
The concerns about Stephen Akard, shared by Democrats in Congress, extend further. Some State Department staffers fear Akard will try to rescind, or otherwise undermine, past investigations conducted by his ousted predecessor, Steve Linick.

[...]

Inside the State Department – even within the inspector general’s own office – concerns over Akard have only grown since he showed up in his new role a few days after Linick’s May 15 firing.

One major reason for the worry: Akard is still keeping his position as the head of the Office of Foreign Missions, a unit whose responsibilities including dealing with the activities of foreign embassies based in the United States. That means that, in theory, he should recuse himself from any inspector general investigation into that office.

[...]

As the head of the Office of Foreign Missions, Akard reports to Bulatao. As the undersecretary of State for management, Bulatao also oversees several other major divisions within the State Department, such as the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the Bureau of Consular Affairs.

[...]

If any of those other units falls under investigation by the inspector general’s office, some State Department officials argue, Akard can’t reasonably expect to play a role in the probe because he also reports to Bulatao. Bulatao is a longtime personal friend and former business partner of Pompeo’s.

Others worry that the presence of Akard, who also has ties to Vice President Mike Pence, will scare off employees who wish to report waste, fraud and abuse. And there are some signs that Akard will face pressure to conform to what Pompeo and his top aides want instead of serving as a traditionally independent watchdog. The secretary, for one, has implied in recent remarks that he wants a subservient inspector general.
A cozy and incestuous administration indeed.
Akard previously worked under Pence when the vice president was governor of Indiana, including advising him on foreign affairs, adding to fears by State Department employees and Democrats that he will try to scuttle investigations that paint the Trump administration in a bad light.

[...]

Akard has offered a “head-scratching” take, a person familiar with the situation told POLITICO. Akard has said that, in reality, [Brian Bulatao [to whom Akard reports], undersecretary of State for management and defender of Linick’s ouster] is not his supervisor, but that his actual boss is Trump, because it’s the president who technically nominated him to serve as the head of OFM.
What? That makes it even worse.
Akard may be prevented by government rules from rescinding past reports. But he could, like Barr, initiate reviews of past investigations in a bid to question their soundness, undermining the public’s faith, not to mention his staff’s morale.

“Everyone’s on alert,” one State Department official said about the overall mood.

Technically, Linick’s firing doesn’t take effect until 30 days have passed. But Linick is reported to have been barred from his office, and Akard has started his new duties.

[...]

The Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, the group that coordinates among agency watchdogs, has dispatched staff to help Akard understand his new role and responsibilities, according to the person familiar with the situation. Akard has not yet begun asking substantive questions about ongoing probes or taken any other major steps.
His job depends upon him NOT understanding it.
His new staff have asked him what he will do if instructed by Pompeo or others not to investigate something. His response was that unless there was a very good reason, he would say that such an instruction was inappropriate.

[...]

State Department staffers point out that Akard doesn’t have to end ongoing probes outright to effectively kill them.

[...]

[H]e could reassign the staff looking into them, or simply sit on the findings and not release them.

[...]

A handful of ongoing investigations are of special concern because they relate to Pompeo and in some cases his wife, Susan. One is a probe into whether the Pompeos used State Department aides to run personal errands for them. Another is a look at Pompeo’s effort to ram through arms sales to Saudi Arabia, bypassing lawmakers. A third involves questionable activity in the Office of the Chief of Protocol at the State Department, a section with which Susan Pompeo was frequently in touch.

[...]

Meanwhile, State Department employees who were interviewed for ongoing and past investigations – often under conditions of anonymity – are worried that Akard will track down their identities and share them with Pompeo and others. They fear they will be targeted for professional retribution as a result.
They are right to fear that.
Another State Department staffer predicted that colleagues will shy away from reporting future cases of wrongdoing at the department because of Akard.

“Things will go unnoticed and things will go unchallenged,” the staffer said. “People are going to be fearful because they don’t want their name to show up in the president’s Twitter feed.”
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

So much respect

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has rebuffed Donald Trump’s invitation to attend a G-7 summit, which the president is keen to portray as a symbol of a return to normality from the upheaval of the coronavirus crisis.

[...]

In a call this week, [Merkel and Trump] had heated disagreements on topics including NATO, the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline between Russia and Germany, and relations with China, according to a senior U.S. official, who declined to be named.

[...]

One official said the lack of preparation had heightened concerns among EU leaders about the potential political drawbacks of traveling to the U.S. — especially if they had not yet had a chance to meet in person in Brussels to discuss their own affairs.

[...]

In a readout of a call between [UK PM Boris] Johnson and Trump on Friday, No. 10 Downing Street said: “On the upcoming G-7 Summit, the Prime Minister and President discussed the importance of leaders meeting in the U.S. in person if possible."

[French president Emmanuel] Macron has said he would be willing to attend the summit.

  Politico
He can say that if he knows there won't be one.
But a ban on nonessential travel from outside the EU remains in effect, and a decision on when to lift it is expected by mid-June.

Abe has expressed similar openness, though Japanese media have noted that under current guidelines, the prime minister and his entourage would be required to quarantine for 14 days upon returning to Tokyo.
So, highly unlikely.
Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte has also voiced a willingness to travel to Washington, as has Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. European Council President Charles Michel has said that he, too, would be up for the trip — if health conditions permit it.

Privately, however, one official familiar with the situation said that other EU leaders would support Merkel and would not attend Trump's summit if Merkel thought it was a bad idea.
He'll be rage-tweeting them.
Trump canceled the summit in March because of the crisis and said he would host a videoconference instead. But in a tweet on May 20, he said he might reschedule the summit, proclaiming, "It would be a great sign to all — normalization!"

[...]

Merkel's refusal to attend the summit in person risks scuppering Trump's attempts to present the gathering as a landmark moment drawing a line under the lockdowns and travel bans imposed to fight the coronavirus pandemic.
Good for her. The line being drawn by Trump will be summarily rubbed out by covid-19.
The White House said this week it plans to hold the summit in late June in Washington, rather than the original venue of Camp David, the presidential retreat, where Trump moved the event after facing an outcry over plans to hold it at one of his own golf resorts in Miami.
He doesn't like Camp David. Too primitive.
"Camp David is very rustic. It's nice, you'd like it," [Trump] quipped. "You know how long you'd like it? For about 30 minutes."

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