Showing posts with label John Bolton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Bolton. Show all posts

Saturday, June 11, 2022

March 23, 2018: Trump Will Sign the Budget Bill...No, Veto It...No...Sign It...Trump Has No Idea What He's Doing

 

3/23/18: The president wakes early. He clicks on Fox News. All the Fox babes and Fox pundits are calling the new $1.3 trillion spending bill to fund the government for Fiscal Year 2019 terrible. Trump considers taking decisive action, which he never thought of the night before. White House officials had announced the president was going to sign. 

____________________ 

“A mercurial and unstable president.” 

Retired Adm. James Stavridis

____________________ 

 

Time to tweet! 

I am considering a VETO of the Omnibus Spending Bill based on the fact that the 800,000 plus DACA recipients have been totally abandoned by the Democrats (not even mentioned in Bill) and the BORDER WALL, which is desperately needed for our National Defense, is not fully funded.

 

GOP leaders in Congress are left scrambling to deal with an impending government shutdown. At 11:38 the president announces, again via tweet: “News conference at the White House concerning the Omnibus Spending Bill. 1:00 P.M.”  

Get that veto pen ready! 

No one inside the White House has any idea what the Orange Buffoon is going to do, including the Buffoon. 

Just after 1:00 p.m., the president appears at the podium for a rambling discourse on why he is going to sign the bill after all, even though the bill is “ridiculous” and “terrible” and, well, what can he do? He needs the money to fund the military – which you figure he should have known all along. Well, don’t blame him for what will soon turn into a huge deficit for the coming fiscal year. 

What Congress should do, he explains to a listening nation, is give up the “power of the purse,” and allow him to line-item veto any elements of funding legislation he doesn’t like. Alas, someone needs to explain to him that this matter has already been decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. 

In Clinton v. City of New York (1998), the court considered a law passed with GOP backing in Congress and approval from President Bill Clinton, to allow presidents to do just that. In a 6-3 ruling, the high court declared the law unconstitutional.

 

* 

ON FRIDAY Trump also selects John Bolton to be his third National Security Advisor. Bolton is the latest individual, almost tromping on the heels of Joseph diGenova, to be plucked from the ranks of televised bombast to join this dysfunctional administration. You have, for example, Larry Kudlow, new chief White House economic advisor, and former Fox Business host. Kudlow was famously incorrect in insisting the housing bubble in 2007 was not about to burst. He said people who said it was hadn’t “done their homework.” Whereas he had! 

How much does Trump love Fox News? He considered Judge Jeanine Pirro, a Fox host, for Attorney General. Three Fox hosts were approached about becoming the next White House Communications Director, including Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, and Kimberly Guilfoyle. He plucked diGenova off a Fox show, and made him his lawyer, but diGenova lasted two days.



Need another suck up in the Trump administration?

Why not this guy?

 

* 

RETIRED ADMIRAL and former Supreme Allied Commander in Europe James Stavridis, writing in Time, explains his sorrow at seeing H. R. McMaster step down as Trump’s second National Security Advisor. 

McMaster, he notes, never wanted the job to begin. 

As Stavridis puts it, McMaster is “a good judge of character” and had doubts about working with a man so lacking in principles as Donald J. Trump. 

Like a good soldier, when the job-offer came, McMaster saw it as if he had received orders. He would do his best. He would try to ensure the nation remained safe. “He shouldered the pack and stepped into the White House to do what he could to create at least part of a guardrail system around this mercurial and unstable President.” 

Stavridis goes on to lambast Trump’s national security approach: 

This is a President who loves and revels in chaos. For a national security team, that gives birth to the worst quality of all from an international and especially an allied perspective: inconsistency. Trump has famously said he doesn’t want our enemies to know what we are thinking [emphasis added]; the problem is, neither do our friends nor even, it seems at times, do we ourselves.

Thursday, June 9, 2022

March 28, 2018: Can Trump Close the Deal with North Korea?

 

3/28/18: The president starts off Hump Day in a chipper mood, even if Melania is hiding out at Mar-a-Lago and avoiding him like he’s a leper. 

 

An Iran-like nuclear deal? 

Trump believes he’s making progress on the question of North Korea. Even this Trump-phobic blogger is willing to say this may be true. 

China cannot relish the idea of war erupting on its doorstep. For that reason, the Chinese may lean hard on North Korea. 

Normally, a fair-minded person might credit the B.O.B. in this matter, and not refer to Trump as the “Big Orange Buffoon.” 

The problem is this blogger has enough brain cells left to recall Trump’s comments regarding the foreign policy of his predecessors. Mr. Blogger thinks that the Iraq War was a disaster and voted against George W. Bush in 2004, partly on that basis. He also remembers when Sean Hannity was cheerleading for that war and said that those of us who didn’t cheer with him were un-American. Now Trump says the war was a horrible mistake, and Hannity cheers for Trump. Mr. Blogger also understands that our current president has chosen John Bolton, one of the loudest, cartwheeling cheerleaders for the 2003 invasion, as his third National Security Advisor. 

As for North Korea, let’s say Trump does manage to get a deal. Imagine that Kim Jong-un agrees to “denuclearize.” What will that mean? Who will enforce the pact? How will inspections be handled, to ensure the North Koreans honor the deal? Will they give up their stockpiles of nuclear material? Will they destroy the medium and long-range missiles they possess, tear up their launch facilities, and fill in all their underground research and testing facilities? 

Even if Kim Jong-un agrees to denuclearize, what will Trump end up with? An Iran-like nuclear deal.



The hosts at Fox News were all for the War in Iraq in 2003.


POSTSCRIPT: If you’d care for a heaping dose of hypocrisy, click on this link and compare what people like Hannity said about the War in Iraq in 2003, compared to how he and others fawn over Trump now – when he calls the war a stupid, costly mistake.


Saturday, May 14, 2022

April 26, 2019: Imaginary Friend Calls President Trump "the Greatest Hostage Negotiator" in U.S. History

 

4/26/19: We learn, because the free press is still doing its job, that when North Korea released hostage Otto Warmbier in 2017, they handed U.S. negotiators a bill for $2 million to cover his “medical care.” According to the Washington Post the Americans agreed to pay after consultations with President Trump. Warmbier died a few days after he was returned to U.S. custody. 

This story makes Trump mad because it makes him look weak. He says he never paid the bill. His National Security Advisor, John Bolton, later admits we agreed to pay. Now, perhaps because the agreement is out in the open, we’re going to renege. North Korea gets zero dollars, despite our promise to pay; and after 28 months of Trump in office, his pal Kim Jong-un has surrendered exactly zero nuclear weapons.

 

Since Trump hates to look weak and stupid, and the Warmbier story makes him look both, he has no choice but to tweet-brag about his greatness. That means we are treated to this gem: “‘President Donald J. Trump is the greatest hostage negotiator that I know of in the history of the United States. 20 hostages, many in impossible circumstances, have been released in last two years. No money was paid.’ Cheif Hostage Negotiator, USA!” 

This tweet is interesting because: 

A)    The president misspells “chief.” 

B)     The U.S. has no “Cheif Hostage Negotiator.” 

C)    No one comes forward to claim they said what Trump says was said.



By the time Warmbier was released he had been tortured
and suffered a massive brain injury. 


This is by no means the first time Trump has manufactured quotes to make himself sound good. My favorite may be the imaginary Boy Scout leader who told Trump he had given the greatest speech ever at a Boy Scout Jamboree. 

What we know now is that lying is as natural to this president as respiration. The Washington Post reports that as of today, Trump has made 10,000 “false or misleading statements” since taking office. 

By the end of his term, 20,000 could be in reach.


BLOGGER’S NOTE: For more on Trump and North Korea, see his “humorous” quoting of Kim Jong-un in order to attack Vice President Biden (5/25/19), and his tone-deaf praise for the dictator (6/30/19).

May 16, 2019: Trump May "Lead" Us into War with Iran

 

5/16/19: Now that the president has dispatched an extra aircraft carrier group and other important military assets to the Middle East, to counter some amorphous “threat” from Iran, even GOP lawmakers are nervous. The fear is that the U.S. may stumble into war. 

“I’m always leery to get us more heavily involved anywhere,” Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) tells reporters. “If we’re going to go to war somewhere, Congress ought to approve it.” 

Sen. Rand Paul is even more direct in his warning to the president and his top aides: 

I think it’s important that the administration know that they do not have the permission of Congress to go with Iran. The Constitution is very clear. Congress must declare war…We want to be very clear to them they don’t have the prerogative to go to war without our authority.

 

As for the influence of National Security Advisor John Bolton, Sen. Paul is blunt. Asked about Bolton’s role in dispatching all the extra war-fighting capabilities to a volatile region, Paul replies, “I fear that he’s a malignancy, a malignant influence on the administration.” Bolton, of course, was one of the preeminent cheerleaders behind the invasion of Iraq, which was going to be a cakewalk according to people like Bolton – and Cheney – and Rumsfeld – but did not turn out quite that way. 

Liberals who questioned the decision to go to war with Iraq at the time were dismissed in right-wing circles as “unpatriotic.”


Thursday, May 12, 2022

June 20, 2019: President Trump Decides to Attack Iran - Then Changes His Mind

 

6/20/19: The threat of war with Iran grows after Iran shoots down a $130 million U.S. drone. 

President Trump loves to bluster. Now he must puzzle out what to do. He talks to National Security Adviser John Bolton, a man who has never seen a Middle Eastern country he didn’t want to bomb. Bolton urges Trump to rain down destruction. 

Administration officials tell The New York Times that the president’s national security team is unanimous in favoring a limited strike against Iranian radar facilities and missile batteries. 

Gen. Joseph F. Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warns that escalation may have unforeseen and dangerous results. 

Trump decides to attack!

 

Planes are on the wing. Ships move into strike position. Then, with ten minutes to spare, Trump decides he should really, really think about what “General” Tucker Carlson has said. The Fox News general warns that if Trump goes to war with Iran, he will never be re-elected. 

That clinches it. Trump aborts the mission and wastes millions of dollars of taxpayer money just for fun.



Bombers were on the way to Iran when Trump called them back.


 

* 

A BIPARTISAN BILL in the U.S. House of Representatives has been introduced. (You thought Congress could never get anything done!) The bill would require cellphone carriers to offer screening and call-blocking technology to customers, free of charge, within 18 months of the bill’s enactment. 

In May, alone, Americans received an estimated five billion robocalls from scammers and telemarketers. 

If the House and Senate can get a bill worked out and passed into law, it may boost the average approval rating of Congress at last. 

That average currently stands at 19.4%. The last time it was as high as 30% was August 29, 2009.

 

 

POSTSCRIPT: Trump later defends his change of mind, regarding the attack on Iran, saying he was not told till the last minute that the attack might kill 150 Iranians. He said the toll would be too high. He didn’t want to kill 150 people. 

(Several military experts say there’s no way the president wasn’t told about the toll up front in any planning session.) 

Then again, this president loves to talk loudly and wave his Big Stick. First, he tweets to all his fans, assuring them the U.S. was “cocked and loaded” and could have attacked if he really wanted. 

Trump was trying to have it two ways. First, he wanted to take credit for caring about Iranian lives. 

Still, he was one tough hombre, ready to kick Iranian ass.

 

General Carlson, however, was perfectly clear about what had swayed Trump. On his Friday night show, Carlson explained: “Bombing Iran would have ended his political career in a minute [emphasis added]. There would be no chance of reelection after that.” In other words, Trump would happily have killed plenty of Iranians if he thought it would make him look good. 

It was poll numbers, not numbers of dead, that convinced him to abort the attack. (See: 6/23/19.)

Friday, April 29, 2022

September 30, 2019: Trump Blasts the Whistleblower - IG Defends Him or Her

 

9/30/19: Monday proved to be another grim day for Team Trump, as September drew to a humiliating close. 

True. Home sales were up. Unemployment figures were great. The stock market was strong. In several respects, the economy was thriving.

 

____________________ 

“Including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct.” 

Inspector General Michael Atkinson

____________________

 

 

Yet, the president remained stymied on the international front. (Plus, he was about to get his dumb ass impeached!) First, nobody had seen Jared Kushner’s “peace plan” for Israel and Palestine, not even Ivanka. Second, Trump had torn up an existing nuclear deal with Iran. Now, as any fool could have predicted, Iran was pushing back in the Persian Gulf. As for a Nobel Prize, which the president said he’d win, “for a lot of things, if they gave it out fairly,” North Korea remained a nuclear threat fifteen months after he proclaimed North Korea wasn’t. 

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton lambasted the president’s policy toward North Korea to wrap up the month. Whereas, Orange Leader had insisted that Dear Leader was a fine fellow and loved his people and Kim Jong-un was his friend, Bolton told an audience that Kim was the same homicidal maniac he had always been. “It seems to me clear that [North Korea] has not made a strategic decision to give up its nuclear weapons. In fact,” Bolton warned on Monday, “I think the contrary is true…[The] strategic decision that Kim Jong Un is operating through is that he will do whatever he can to keep a deliverable nuclear weapons capability and to develop and enhance it further.”

 

Other voices were speaking out, too. And, as we shall see, Inspector General Michael Atkinson had already shot down a major Trump/Jim Jordan/Lindsey Graham right-wing BS talking point Sunday night. But no one got the message to the president by the time he woke Monday and started tweeting like mad. 

We were soon treated to some of the president’s favorite lines, refurbished for the latest scandal. 

At 6:39 a.m. we had: “The Greatest Witch Hunt in the history of our Country!” 

At 7:03 a.m., Trump assured fans, 

The Fake Whistleblower complaint is not holding up. It is mostly about the call to the Ukrainian President which, in the name of transparency, I immediately released to Congress & the public. The Whistleblower knew almost nothing, its 2ND HAND description of the call is a fraud! 

 


Inspector General Atkinson.


That wasn’t even close to the truth, since the White House initially insisted that the call could not be released. And the Inspector General was about to blow that line of defense to atoms, tidbits, and splinters. Anyone who could read a newspaper, assuming they could still find one, would know that only the dire threat of impeachment pried the complaint from Trump’s paranoid grip. 

 

“Arrest for treason?” 

Still, the unhinged tweets kept coming. Even before most Americans had time to pour milk over their corn flakes, Trump was in full dictator-wannabe mode. At 7:12 a.m., he tweeted this threat: 

Rep. Adam Schiff illegally made up a FAKE & terrible statement, pretended it to be mine as the most important part of my call to the Ukrainian President, and read it aloud to Congress and the American people. It bore NO relationship to what I said on the call. Arrest for Treason?

 

(Again, see 9/25/19 and 9/29/30 for context regarding this tweet.)

 

As always, Trump busied himself all morning, bingeing on right-wing news. At 7:43 a.m. he floated an all-caps tweet, based on a story he had just watched, hinting at a nefarious “Deep State” plot supposedly afoot.  

“WHO CHANGED THE LONG STANDING WHISTLEBLOWER RULES JUST BEFORE SUBMITTAL OF THE FAKE WHISTLEBLOWER REPORT?” Trump demanded to be told. 

Then: “DRAIN THE SWAMP.” 

As the Inspector General had made clear the night before, there was no “Deep State” at work and no swamp to drain. The president and his allies had dinned it in supporters’ ears that they should ignore the whistleblower complaint. It was nothing more than “hearsay” and “secondhand” info.

 

“Fake News” CNN, however, took the trouble to quote from a statement by IG Atkinson. Was the entire complaint composed of “hearsay” and “secondhand” information and maybe brownie recipes?  

Atkinson’s statement read: 

As part of his determination that the urgent concern appeared credible, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that the Complainant had official and authorized access to the information and sources referenced in the Complainant’s Letter and Classified Appendix, including direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct and that the Complainant has subject matter expertise related to much of the material information provided.

 

It continues: 

Although the Complainant’s Letter acknowledged that the Complainant was not a direct witness to the President’s July 25, 2019, telephone call with the Ukrainian President, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that other information obtained during the ICIG’s preliminary review supported the Complainant’s allegations [emphasis added].

 

Contrary to the president’s claim that rules had been changed, the IG stated that no rules had been changed. A whistleblower had never needed first-hand information before filing a complaint. It would only be necessary for the IG to uncover, within fourteen days, firsthand information to support allegations made. In this case that step was unnecessary. “The whistleblower stated on the form that he or she had both first-hand and other information,” Atkinson explained. 

Trump’s intemperate threats fueled increasing unease. Andrew Bakaj, a lawyer for the whistleblower, reminded the American people that retaliation against any whistleblower was “a violation of federal law.” 

Trump, of course, admitted he had people hard at work in an attempt to uncover the whistleblower’s identity. 

And the identities of anyone who spoke to him or her. 

“We’re trying to find out about a whistleblower,” he told reporters at the end of an Oval Office meeting. He said he wasn’t worried. His call to President Zelensky “was perfect, it was perfect. But the whistleblower reported a totally different statement.” 

“I made a call,” Trump reiterated. “The call was perfect…but the whistleblower made it sound terrible.” His call was “so good,” the president continued, “it was perfect…[and] this whole thing is a disgrace, and there’s corruption, and we’re seeking it. It’s called drain the swamp.”

 

He couldn’t stop babbling. “There’s been corruption on the other side. There’s been corruption on the other [Democrats’] side like you’ve never seen.” Jabbing himself in the chest with a thumb, he insisted, there had been a lot of corruption in Ukraine “against us. And we want to get to the bottom of it, and it’s very important that we do.” 

The problem was clear, if not to Trump. He was the guy who called Ukraine’s president. He was the guy who asked his counterpart to investigate a political opponent. He was the guy who solicited it would appear foreign help in next year’s election. Donald J. Trump was the guy willing to withhold U.S. military aid to force an ally to go along with his scheme. 

 

Nixon was a patriot, at least. 

Former Trump transition adviser J. W. Verret appeared on television to sound alarm. “People have made the analogy to the Nixon-era scandals and Nixon’s resignation, but this is a lot worse than that,” Verret said. “Nixon was a patriot. Of all the crazy things he did, he never would have accepted help from a foreign power for his own personal interest in an election, particularly one that would compromise the U.S.’ strategic interests. This,” situation in Ukraine, “is much worse and I think momentum continues toward impeachment.” 

Sarah Longwell, a Republican strategist and organizer, suggested that, as in the days of Watergate, it might be time for the GOP to cut its losses. 

Dump Trump. 

Presto, President Michael R. Pence! A leader you can be confident won’t be banging porn stars.

Wednesday, April 20, 2022

December 19, 2019: Senate to Allow Zero Witnesses in Impeachment Trial

 

12/19/19: Senate Majority Leader McConnell announces that Democrats are afraid to send articles of impeachment over to the Senate, because their evidence is so thin. 

He’s so sure it’s thin, he has said he’s going to move to acquit the president no matter what evidence there is. McConnell has hinted that he will move to call zero witnesses. This is “much better” than calling witnesses, as did the House of Representatives, he says. Because the Democrats were unfair and mean and terrible and had witnesses testify behind closed doors! Under oath! Then they released the transcripts – and called back more than a dozen to testify in public. They made them submit to cross-examination by members of the Trumplican Party, including Rep. Jim Jordan, who sometimes appeared to have rabies. 

Clearly, then, having no witnesses at all in the Senate “trial” proves that the case for acquittal is rock solid. 

Would McConnell perhaps enjoy having a few supporting documents? No. Mitch is cool reading the president’s tweets. 

Perhaps he could have the #1 witness in the matter testify: that is, President Donald J. Trump? 

Mitch can’t see a need.



Who else thinks Trump is innocent? Vladimir Putin.

 

At this point, you have to be a drooling idiot to believe that the Trumplicans have truth on their side. The Mueller Report, to cite an example, outlined ten cases of possible obstruction of justice. Trump blocked White House counsel Donald McGahn from testifying in the Russia probe. This despite the fact investigators found that Trump asked Mr. McGahn to obstruct justice. 

And, of course, Trump refused to testify under oath. 

Now, we have his “perfect” July 25 phone call with Ukraine. Former National Security Adviser John Bolton heard that call. He was involved in critical meetings, including one on July 10, when, according to the testimony of several witnesses, he characterized whatever Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and other Trump aides were cooking up as a “drug deal.” 

So, if you weren’t afraid of witnesses, you could bring in Bolton and have him testify. The Trumplicans have insisted that Democrats have no case because they have no “firsthand testimony.” 

That isn’t true. 

But no one would have more “firsthand” knowledge than Bolton. Except Trump. Bring in both. Let them testify under oath. 

And clear Trump’s name!!!!

 

* 

BUT WAIT!!! According to one expert on U.S. constitutional law, Trump’s name has already been cleared! 

According to Vladimir Putin the Trumplicans, who have a majority in the U.S. Senate, will never vote to impeach. It was “unlikely,” he informed reporters, that they would vote “to remove a representative of their own party from office on what seems to me an absolutely far-fetched reason [emphasis added, unless otherwise noted].” 

The Russian autocrat even parroted a favorite Trumplican talking point. “The party that lost the election” in 2016, he said, “is trying to achieve results by other means.” (See: 12/20/19.) 

Better luck in 2020, Democrats! Maybe your candidate could ask China for help in defeating Trump. 

Foreign help is no longer taboo.

 

* 

ON THE OTHER HAND, Christianity Today, a magazine founded by Billy Graham, also weighs in on impeachment. 

Yes, editors admit, Trump has fought a good fight against abortion and defended freedom of religion. 

(Mostly for Christians, this blogger might note.)

 

____________________ 

“The reason many are not shocked about this is that this president has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration.” 

Christianity Today

____________________

 

 

Christians can no longer afford to ignore the danger his behavior represents. In the matter of impeachment, 

[The] facts…are unambiguous: The president of the United States attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president’s political opponents. That is not only a violation of the Constitution; more importantly, it is profoundly immoral.

 

The reason many are not shocked about this is that this president has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration. He has hired and fired a number of people who are now convicted criminals. He himself has admitted to immoral actions in business and his relationship with women, about which he remains proud. His Twitter feed alone – with its habitual string of mischaracterizations, lies, and slanders – is a near perfect example of a human being who is morally lost and confused.

 

We believe the impeachment hearings have made it absolutely clear, in a way the Mueller investigation did not, that President Trump has abused his authority for personal gain and betrayed his constitutional oath. The impeachment hearings have illuminated the president’s moral deficiencies for all to see. This damages the institution of the presidency, damages the reputation of our country, and damages both the spirit and the future of our people. None of the president’s positives can balance the moral and political danger we face under a leader of such grossly immoral character.

 

If Christians don’t reverse course, editors warn, for decades to come no one will take them seriously when they talk about “justice and righteousness.” Abortion may be “a great evil.” Can they then “say that the bent and broken character of our nation’s leader doesn’t really matter in the end?” 

It does matter. And you don’t have to be a Christian to understand that. 

Politics may be a poker game; and Christians may have won several hands, but the editors warn, 

we are playing with a stacked deck of gross immorality and ethical incompetence. And just when we think it’s time to push all our chips to the center of the table, that’s when the whole game will come crashing down. It will crash down on the reputation of evangelical religion and on the world’s understanding of the gospel. And it will come crashing down on a nation of men and women whose welfare is also our concern.

 

Amen.

December 29, 2019: Trump on Ukraine - “They are all corrupt, they are all terrible people.”

 

12/29/19: The New York Times gathers up documentation, in part the result of a Freedom of Information Act request, and analyzes what it finds. You know: the “Enemies of the People” doing what journalists do. Reporters assemble a detailed outline of behind the scenes maneuvers by members of the Trump administration in an effort to block military assistance to Ukraine. 

And: not get caught.



Trump puts self-interests above U.S. and Ukrainian security concerns.


 

____________________ 

The scheme to hold up aid to Ukraine is hatched.

____________________

 

 

May 23: The scheme to hold up aid to Ukraine is hatched in the spring. Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, Mulvaney aide Robert B. Blair, and the president met in the Oval Office. Trump insists he does not want to give the Ukrainians any aid, saying, “They are all corrupt, they are all terrible people.”  

(Leave it to Trump to make insulting generalizations about entire religious groups and nationalities.)

 

At the time the United States was planning to provide $391 million in military aid to the Ukrainians. That included $250 million allocated by the Pentagon for sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, grenade launchers, medical supplies, and night vision goggles. The State Department would send $141 million in aid “to buy night-vision devices, radar systems and yet more rocket-grenade launchers.” 

Neither Congress nor the Ukrainian government was notified about the plan to put a hold on the aid. 


June 19: Blair called Russell T. Vought, the acting head of the Office of Management and Budget or OMB. “We need to hold it up,” he said, meaning aid to Ukraine. The Times quotes officials who had been briefed. 


June 27: In a newly revealed email to Blair, Mick Mulvaney writes, “I’m just trying to tie up some loose ends. Did we ever find out about the money for Ukraine and whether we can hold it back?” 

Blair knew the House and Senate had both passed the aid package. It could be done; but it wouldn’t be pretty if word leaked. “Expect Congress to become unhinged,” he said. 

Mark Sandy, a veteran of the War in Afghanistan and a career official, was in charge of the flow of money. After learning of the president’s June 19 decision to hold up aid, Mr. Sandy contacted the Pentagon. Sandy later testified as part of the impeachment inquiry. He told lawmakers that he repeatedly pressed Michael P. Duffey, a political appointee to OMB, for an explanation. Why had Trump decided to hold up aid?

 

Duffey “didn’t provide an explicit response on the reason,” Sandy explained. “He simply said we need to let the hold take place – and I’m paraphrasing here – and then revisit this issue with the president.” 

Several political appointees insisted it would be legal to hold aid until September 30, when the fiscal year ended. Congress had not been notified by the State Department about the plan to provide $141 million in assistance. So, it would be easy to hold that money  – simply by telling State not to notify Congress. “But the Pentagon has already certified that Ukraine was cleaning up corruption and the aid should go forward.” Sandy told lawmakers that Mr. Duffey suggested adding a footnote to routine budget documents, saying aid was delayed “for a brief time.” 

This would be good for up to four days. 

Mr. Sandy later testified that in his twelve years at OMB, he had never seen anything like this.

 

The Times explained: 

And there was a problem with this maneuver: Mr. Sandy was concerned it might violate a law called the Impoundment Control Act that protects Congress’s spending power and prohibits the administration from blocking disbursement of the aid unless it notifies Congress.

 

“I asked about the duration of the hold and was told there was not clear guidance on that,” Mr. Sandy testified. “So that is what prompted my concern.”

 

Mr. Duffey continued to skirt the rules by inserting footnotes in budget documents every few days, holding aid that way. Mr. Sandy made his concerns about the legality of this hold known. The White House responded by removing control of the funding from his office and handing the reins to Duffey.

 

July 18: The story begins to leak. During a conference call, a number of diplomats and U.S. officials learn from an unidentified voice at OMB that the aid has been on hold since at least June 19. One or more persons were concerned enough that day to make four phone calls to the House Foreign Affairs Committee. 

As the Times notes, Mulvaney has said that he learned about the contents of the president’s July 25 call weeks later. According to multiple witnesses, National Security Adviser John Bolton complained in a July 10 meeting with representatives of the Ukraine, Ambassador Sondland and others, that he wanted no part of the “drug deal” that Mr. Mulvaney and Mr. Giuliani were cooking up. We now know, according to Sondland, that Mulvaney had told him to promise a White House meeting between Trump and Zelensky if the investigations happened.

That is: the first of two quid pro quos was in play no later than July 10. 

The Ukrainians continued to resist being dragged into U.S. politics; but they were increasingly worried.

 

July 25: President Trump called President Zelensky; and as we all know (except the 40% of Americans who love Trump and will never read the White House call memorandum), Trump asked the Ukrainian leader to “do us a favor.” That favor: investigate Burisma and Hunter and Joe Biden. 

That call ends at 9:33 a.m. 

At 11:04 a.m., Duffey sends a request to the Pentagon. The president wants the military aid held up. “Given the sensitive nature of the request,” he tells his contact on the other end, “I appreciate your keeping that information closely held to those who need to know to execute the direction.” That note was revealed as part of a Freedom of Information request filed by the Center for Public Integrity, which later passed on the documents it had received to the Times.

(If you’re getting the feeling Duffey knew laws were being broken, you’re right.)

 

August 2: We know that Rudy Giuliani, acting in his capacity as Trump’s personal lawyer, met with Andrey Yermak, a top aide to President Zelensky, in Madrid. The Ukrainians are well aware of what Trump wants. 

Investigations. 

Of the Bidens. 

No one else. Only Hunter and Joe. That is the second quid pro quo. 

Records show that another footnote was added to budget documents that day, calling for a “brief pause” in aid till August 5. 


August 9: A new problem for Trump and his cronies arises. Elaine McCusker, a top budget official at the Pentagon, notifies OMB that either $61 million will have to be spent by the following Monday, or it will be lost. According to analysis by the Times and information from other sources, “The budget office saw her threat as a ploy to force release of the aid.” 

Mr. Duffey continues to insert footnotes in budget documents every four days. 

August 10-11: President Trump spends another weekend at one of his private golf resorts, this time in Bedminster, N.J.

 

August 12: 

In a previously unreported sequence of events, Mr. Mulvaney worked to schedule a call for that day with Mr. Trump and top aides involved in the freeze, including Mr. Vought, Mr. Bolton and Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel. But they waited to set a final time because Mr. Trump had a golf game planned for Monday morning with John Daly, the flamboyant professional golfer, and they did not know how long it would take.

 

Late that morning, Ms. McCusker checked in with the budget office. “Hey, any update for us?” she asked in an email obtained by Center for Public Integrity.

 

Mr. Duffey was still waiting for an answer as of late that afternoon. “Elaine – I don’t have an update,” he wrote back. “I am attempting to get one.”

 

The call involving the various officials and the president never took place. Later that day a whistleblower filed an official complaint.

 

August 16: Mr. Bolton personally appeals to President Trump for a release of the aid. He makes it clear that the National Security Council, Pentagon and State Department all back the aid. 

By now, the assistance has been delayed at least 58 days.

 

____________________ 

“I have no doubt about why the president allowed the assistance to go forward. He got caught.” 

Chairman Eliot L. Engel of the House Foreign Affairs Committee

____________________

 

 

August 28: Politico reveals for the first time, publicly, that the aid has been frozen. At that point, the delay is at least 70 days. 

Late August: Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Bolton have a “previously undisclosed Oval Office meeting with the president.” The three men try but fail to convince him to release the aid. “This is in America’s interest,” Mr. Bolton is said to have told Mr. Trump. Secretary Esper assured the president: “This defense relationship, we have gotten some really good benefits from it.” Knowing that dollars and cents mean a great deal to Trump, he pointed out that most of the money was being spent on equipment made in the United States. 

It is reported, and here Trump fans might find a fig leave of cover, that Trump complained that other European nations weren’t doing enough to help Ukraine. He told his top officials that he didn’t believe Mr. Zelensky’s promises of reform. “Ukraine is a corrupt country,” he insisted. “We are pissing away our money.” 

The aid remained blocked.

 

August 31: Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican, arranges a call with the president. Johnson had been told days earlier by Mr. Sondland that the aid would be unblocked only if the Ukrainians gave Mr. Trump the investigations he wanted. 

Johnson asks Trump directly: Is the aid held up until the Ukrainians agree to pursue the investigations Trump wants? Trump replies with a string of expletives and says there is no such demand.

 

September 1: Trump is scheduled to attend an 80th anniversary meeting of the start of World War II in Poland. With Hurricane Dorian headed for the U.S., he decides to stay home. VP Pence is sent instead. In a private meeting, President Zelensky has a chance to ask Mr. Pence about the aid. 

Sondland later tells lawmakers that the same day, he had a private meeting with Mr. Yermak and told him: no investigations, no aid. 

The delay has now lasted for 74 days, or more. 


September 9: Congress has now received the whistleblower complaint. For some reason it had been held up, contrary to U.S. law. Three House committees announce they will join in opening an investigation. 

Aid has now been delayed for 82 days, at least.

 

September 10: Mr. Duffey sends a long email to Ms. McCusker, the top budge official at the Pentagon. It would seem clear he is covering his exposed posterior. He insists that the Defense Department had the authority to do more to ensure that the aid could be released to Ukraine all along, and certainly by the congressionally mandated deadline of September 30. 

Forty-three minutes later, McCusker, with whom Duffey had been arguing all summer, sent a stinging reply. “You can’t be serious. I am speechless [emphasis added].” 


September 11: Sen. Rob Portman and the president talk by phone. Trump complains again that other nations are not doing enough to help Ukraine. “Sure, I agree with you,” the senator says. “But we should not hold that against Ukraine. We need to release these funds.” 

Trump reverses himself and aid is unfrozen later that day.

 

Here, the Times gives the last word to Chairman Eliot L. Engel of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “I have no doubt about why the president allowed the assistance to go forward,” he says. 

After 84 days, or more, “He got caught.” (See: 1/2/20, for more on the hold on Ukrainian military aid.)

 

* 

GOP Sen. James Lankford admits what most Americans have already figured out for themselves. 

On Face the Nation, he says: “I don’t think that President Trump as a person is a role model for a lot of different youth. That’s just me personally,” he says. “I don’t like the way that he tweets, some of the things that he says, his word choices at times are not my word choices. He comes across with more New York City swagger than I do from the Midwest and definitely not the way that I’m raising my kids.” 

Let’s be clear. “New York swagger” is fine. 

Trump is an asshole, and a liar, too.



Would you want your children to behave like the president?