March 8, 2018: A Fresh Batch of Lies from the White House

 

3/8/18: Another crazy day in Trumpistan: The New York Times reports on possible witness tampering by the president. 

Also: We have fresh news involving Stormy Daniels, the porn star currently trying to sue the Orange Buffoon. 

____________________ 

If Stormy had proof, she would be sued if she revealed it.

____________________ 

 

Perhaps you watched Press Secretary Pinocchio yesterday, as she went through her daily contortions. Her job was to make it sound as if the Buffoon was as innocent, when it comes to Ms. Daniels, as a neophyte in a nunnery. Had Trump ever had an affair with Stormy? Never, Sanders said. Who then paid the $130,000 settlement to her? Trump? No. Why was Stormy paid to begin with? Pinocchio didn’t wish to comment. Did Trump know about the payment? Who would think it! Pinocchio tried to claim the porn star was lying, because the president had just won an “arbitration” case in which his lawyers blocked Daniels from speaking out. 

Either Sanders is lying, 

or the president is letting her lie, and not correcting her.

By the way, court documents, including a settlement agreement, show Daniels could be sued for damages in excess of $1 million if she revealed images, emails or other evidence she might have which would support her claims. 

Evidence! Damn it! (See also: 1/26/18.)

 

So, to recap: Trump didn’t pay to shut up Stormy. His lawyer paid out of pocket. Trump didn’t know about the settlement. Stormy was lying. But if Stormy had proof, she would be sued if she revealed it – even though she couldn’t because the affair never happened. Finally, Trump knew all about the “arbitration” case, even though he had no idea what he was suing Daniels to stop her from talking about. (See: 4/26/18.) 

Really, with Trump in the White House, never a dull day passes. Did you know a friend of the president, David Pecker, publisher of the National Enquirer, allegedly paid another $150,000 for a story Karen McDougal, a former Playboy Bunny, had written about an affair with Trump? 

Pecker’s decision to pay, but bury the story to help his pussy-grabbing pal, also came during the lead up to the 2016 election. 

That might also turn out to be illegal. (See: 12/13/18.)

 

* 

SWITCHING TOPICS, Reince Priebus, Donald McGahn, and their lawyers have been concerned enough about Trump’s approaches to them, since both are potential witnesses in the Russian investigation, to report questionable contacts to Special Counsel Robert Mueller. 

Priebus’s contact seems fairly benign. 

McGahn’s encounter is more problematic and occurred this past January – after he had already given sworn testimony – and after The New York Times ran an article about Trump’s attempt to fire Mueller in June 2017. 

Based on talks with people who had been briefed on both meetings, the Times reported yesterday: 

After the article was published, the White House staff secretary, Rob Porter, told Mr. McGahn that the president wanted him to release a statement saying that the story was not true, the people said.

 

Mr. Porter, who resigned last month amid a domestic abuse scandal, told Mr. McGahn the president had suggested he “might get rid” of Mr. McGahn if he chose not to challenge the article, the people briefed on the conversation said.

 

Mr. McGahn did not publicly deny the article, and the president later confronted him in the Oval Office in front of White House chief of staff, John F. Kelley, according to the people.

 

The president said he had never ordered Mr. McGahn to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn replied that the president was wrong and that he had in fact asked Mr. McGahn in June [emphasis added] to call the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, to tell him that the special counsel had a series of conflicts of interest that disqualified him for overseeing the investigation and that he had to be dismissed.

 

Or to put it plainly, if McGahn is correct, then Trump had asked him to lie about what happened last summer. 

In legal circles that sounds just like attempted witness tampering. 

In fact, it sounds like witness tampering if you deliver mail, pick up garbage or teach middle school. Because it is.

June 15, 2018: President Trump - "Paul Manafort, Who?"

 

6/15/18: The sun rises again over Washington D.C. Rudy sleeps in late after a hard night ranting. 

Paul Manafort puts on a clean shirt, exquisite tie, and expensive suit (he’s known to have spent at least $500,000 on suits) and heads for court. He’s facing fresh accusations of witness tampering. When proceedings open, his lawyers tell the judge Ol’ Paul didn’t realize that what he was doing was wrong when he contacted two potential witnesses in his case. 

Prosecutors disagree. Manafort, they insist, engaged in a sustained effort to suborn perjury, including sending encrypted messages, while out on $10 million bail. 

The judge orders Manafort to jail, where he will be wearing a much less expensive suit until trial.

Paul Manafort? Trump hardly knows the guy.

 

The president has prepared for this development by laying out the “coffee boy” defense. This defense was first perfected after campaign adviser George Papadopoulos copped a plea. No big deal, Trump said at the time. George was nothing more than a “coffee boy.” Trump now tells reporters he feels bad for Manafort, who “worked for me for a very short period of time…for what, 49 days, or something?” 

Or something. 

Manafort worked for the Trump campaign for 144 days. He led the campaign for three months.

 

BLOGGER’S NOTE (1/25/21): We know, in the end, that President Trump, who hardly knows this guy, decides to pardon Paul Manafort, just before exiting the White House.

May 17, 2019: If It Sounds like Witness Tampering...That's Because It Is

 

5/17/19: New court filings related to the case against General Michael Flynn do further damage to President Trump’s claim that he has been totally exonerated by the Mueller Report. 

New documents reveal that Flynn, 

informed the government [investigators] of multiple instances, both before and after his guilty plea, where either he or his attorneys received communications from persons connected to the Administration or Congress [emphasis added, unless otherwise noted] that could have affected both his willingness to cooperate and the completeness of that cooperation.

Trump points at the guy he plans to pardon.

 

____________________ 

“If there’s information that implicates the President.” 

John Dowd, the president’s lawyer

____________________

 

 

Flynn provided a voicemail recording – and that recording was included in the Mueller Report – from John Dowd, a defense lawyer for President Trump. The recording was made on November 22, 2017, just hours after Flynn made it clear he planned to start cooperating with Mueller’s team. 

As with the emails to Don Jr., promising Russian help (see: 5/9/19), try to pick out the subtle hints in what Dowd says: 

I understand your situation, but let me see if I can’t state it in starker terms. … It wouldn’t surprise me if you’ve gone on to make a deal with ... the government. … If … there’s information that implicates the president, then we’ve got a national security issue, … so, you know, … we need some kind of heads up. Um, just for the sake of protecting all our interests if we can. … Remember what we’ve always said about the President and his feelings toward Flynn, and that still remains.…

 

(As the Washington Post explains, “These ellipses and this punctuation are taken directly from the report.”)

 

The next day, Flynn’s lawyer calls Dowd back. The Mueller Report explains: 

According to Flynn’s attorneys, the President’s personal counsel was indignant and vocal in his disagreement [that Flynn was making the right decision to cooperate]. The President’s personal counsel said that he interpreted what they said to him as a reflection of Flynn’s hostility towards the President and that he planned to inform his client of that interpretation. Flynn’s attorneys understood that statement to be an attempt to make them reconsider their position because the President’s personal counsel believed that Flynn would be disturbed to know that such a message would be conveyed to the President.

 

That’s not “Fake News,” either, no matter how many times President Trump wants to say it is. 

It’s reporting.

 

BLOGGER’S NOTE: For additional witness tampering, see Sean Hannity’s texts with Paul Manafort, 6/22/19. 

For John Dowd’s final take on his client, the President of the United States, see: 9/9/10.

January 7, 2020: Republican "Family Values"

 

1/7/20: Tuesday night, the Iranians fire twenty missiles at U.S. military bases in Iraq. It is thought that some carried 1,500 pound warheads. 

Any miscalculation in the next few hours or days could lead to war between the two nations. 

Fortunately, there are no reported U.S. casualties, which leads to another tone-deaf tweet from President Twitter Thumbs: 

All is well! Missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq. Assessment of casualties & damages taking place now. So far, so good! We have the most powerful and well equipped military anywhere in the world, by far! I will be making a statement tomorrow morning.

 

* 

WITH MISSILES FLYING, another news story gets buried. Imaad Zuberi, who claimed he donated $900,000 to Trump’s inauguration, admits to a series of felonies. 

To be fair, Zuberi raised money for Democrat candidates and causes in the past. But this time may be different. Zuberi funneled foreign money to Trump and his minions. Among other questionable actions, which led to a charge of obstruction of justice, Mr. Zuberi covered up the fact that at least $50,000 “he” donated came from a foreign individual. 

According to CNN, Zuberi deleted emails related to a number of transactions. Those included “a $5.8 million transfer from a foreign national that came in around the time of his [$900,000] political donation.” 

That would be Big Money. 

Big Foreign Money. Big Foreign Money likely intended to enrich individuals associated with Team Trump 2016. 

Often called: bribery. 

Zuberi had already pled guilty to other charges, including income tax evasion, and on those charges alone faces fifteen years in jail. In his latest plea, prosecutors note that Zuberi was desperate enough to offer to pay six witnesses a total of $6,150,000 for false testimony or silence.

 

* 

WE MIGHT expect Zuberi to start cooperating with investigators. We know that Elliott Broidy, vice president of the Trump Inaugural Committee, is under investigation. On the topic of felons, we know Broidy pled guilty to bribery years ago, in a scheme to game the New York State pension system. 

He was a felon, too, till he agreed to cooperate with the investigation. For that, his conviction was later reduced. 

And for the sheer fun of it, let’s remember that Broidy is famous for paying a Playboy Bunny he says he impregnated a cool $1.6 million to keep her mouth shut about the affair. Even more amusing: That payment was handled through the good offices of Michael Cohen, Donald J. Trump’s personal attorney at the time and a man currently residing in federal prison.

Broidy.

 

Finally, we know the Bunny had an abortion. 

(There were rumors that Broidy took the fall for none other than our current president and the real father, Donald J. Trump.)  

In any case, the Bunny, Shera Bechard, claimed in court that Broidy had unprotected sex with her, despite the fact he had herpes. 

She said Broidy insisted she have the abortion because – you know – Republicans – family values – and abortion should be illegal.

 

* 

WE ALSO HAVE a Sebastian Gorka sighting and are reminded what a no-class fellow he is. 

On his inaptly-named radio show America First with Sebastian Gorka, the host decides it would be funny to refer to 17-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg as, “Thunder thighs.” 

Yes. A conservative stalwart mocking the physique of a teenage girl. 

Family values.

July 10, 2020: A Tale of Two Witnesses Tells All

 

7/10/20: Two men testify before Congress. Which witness will be punished? Which will be rewarded by Team Trump?

 

Now, you have a chance to be judge!

 

____________________

 

“The grand jury is designed to help the state proceed with a fair accusation against a person, while protecting that person from being charged when there is insufficient evidence.”

 

The Ohio Supreme Court

____________________

 

 

Witness A vs. Witness B

 

Witness A: This man tells the truth as far as he can see it.

 

Witness B: This man lies to the congressional committee hearing his testimony.

 

Witness A: His testimony is later backed up by former National Security Advisor John Bolton.

 

Witness B: With investigators hot on his trail, this man earns an extra felony count for threatening Witness C.

 

Witness A: This man does not get charged with any felonies.

 

Witness B: Counting that extra charge, this man is charged with seven felonies, after a grand jury decides there is ample evidence to pursue a case against him.

 

This is how grand juries work, as explained by the Ohio Supreme Court:

 

The grand jury is an accusatory body. It does not determine guilt or innocence. The grand jury’s duty is simply to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to make a person face criminal charges. The grand jury is designed to help the state proceed with a fair accusation against a person, while protecting that person from being charged when there is insufficient evidence.

 

At his criminal trial, Witness B is represented by high-priced lawyers. He is still convicted on all seven counts by a jury of his peers. His legal team couldn’t convince a single juror that there was reasonable doubt about a single one of the crimes Witness B was accused of committing. He might as well have hired Mr. Blogger to be his lawyer, for all the good it did.

 

Witness A: He is a decorated combat veteran. He was awarded a Purple Heart for service in Iraq.

 

Witness B: He used to work for a lobbying firm that burnished the reputations of scumbag dictators and world leaders. That firm became known in Washington D.C.  as part of the “Torturers’ Lobby.”

 

Witness A: This man was recommended by superiors for promotion to the next highest rank in the U.S. Army. His record was clean, his service meritorious.

 

Witness B: This man was called in by the judge, while out on bail, after he seemed to threaten her life.

 

 

“Significant national security implications for our country.”

 

If you haven’t already guessed, Witness A, is Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman. He testified truthfully in front of the House Intelligence Committee.

 

While under oath he made it clear he believed President Trump had held up critical military aid to Ukraine to force the president of that country to help gather dirt on Joe and Hunter Biden.

 

At the time, Lt. Col. Vindman explained his decision to come before Congress and give testimony:

 

I want to emphasize to the committee that when I reported my concerns on July 10 [2019] relating to Ambassador Sondland and on July 25 relating to the president, I did so out of a sense of duty. I privately reported my concerns in official channels to the proper authority in the chain of command. My intent was to raise these concerns because they had significant national security implications for our country. I never thought that I’d be sitting here testifying in front of this committee and the American public about my actions. When I reported my concerns, my only thought was to act properly and to carry out my duty.

 

Witness B is, of course, Roger Stone, man of zero integrity. At his trial, the prosecutor pointed out that all the lies that Stone told served to protect the president.

 

To give you some idea of who Stone is, he has a tattoo of disgraced former President Richard M. Nixon on his back.

 

So, which man would you reward? And which would you punish?

 

Lt. Colonel Vindman is leaving the U.S. Army after saying that he has faced retaliation for testifying. His promotion, which the Army said he earned, was blocked.

 

Roger Stone, the seven-time felon, has had his prison sentence commuted by President Trump, without ever spending a day in jail.

 

 

POSTSCRIPT: You have to follow matters closely to grasp the full extent of how sleazy this president is, and how sleazy so many of the men and women Trump attracts to his service are. Stone, you may remember, lied about ever meeting with any Russians during the 2016 campaign. A second gentleman, who helped set up Stone’s parlay with the Russian, and said he forgot about it too, who then amended his testimony to avoid a perjury count, still has a job deep in the large intestine of the Trump administration.

 

That would be Michael Caputo.

 

He was quietly posted to serve as assistant secretary of public affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services in April. Tweets immediately surfaced, with Caputo showing his chops for public affairs, by calling multiple women “dogface,” and making racist comments. Call the spreading virus what you want. Caputo decided to “focus” on HHS matters by denigrating Chinese people. “Millions of Chinese suck the blood out of rabid bats as an appetizer and eat the ass out of anteaters,” he tweeted. In Caputo’s mind eating anteater ass completely explains the spread of COVID-19.

 

When other Twitter users questioned his comments, he responded with….more racism. “Don’t you have a bat to eat?” he asked one Asian American. “You’re very convincing, Wang,” he replied to another.

 

A person not named “Wang.”

 

What happened to Vindman and what happened to Stone, with Michael Caputo for dessert, tells you everything you need to know about Trump and his scuzz bag crew.