Showing posts with label Larry Beinhart. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Larry Beinhart. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 3, 2019

Hillary Guilty Of "Political Murder" in 2016? - More BS From The "Pizzagate Wing" Of The GOP (Wm. McGurn - Lindsey Graham)



We must admit that one rapid consequence of Barr's  "summary" of the Mueller report has been a massive mindfuck,  mainly amongst the Neolib  corporo media.  But also affecting too many (originally) critical pundits  in said media,  including Joe Scarborough and George Will. Both now seem to believe "democracy has been vindicated" on the basis of a 3 1/2 page crib sheet from Barr, and all is well in the land of the free and home of the brave.  Well, it's no where near clear that Barr's effort was anything more than a get out of jail free card for Trump . Worse, a license  for this thug to commit even more depredations on our nation - even as it gives license for the rat protectors to mount specious investigations of their own. Into who or what? Well, Hillary Clinton - loser of the 2016 dumpster fire election!

Thus one beholds imps like the WSJ's William McGurn and lesser moron Lindsey Graham,  charging forward with crimes against Clinton under nutso conspiracy ideations. They have now proven they've joined the "pizzagate" crackpot wing of the Republican party.  McGurn, in his WSJ column yesterday ('Don't Lock Hillary Up', p. A15) claims:

"Thanks to two lucky breaks Hillary Clinton got away with political murder in 2016. The biggest break came when opposition research produced by one of her hired hands ended up being used by the FBI to spy on her rival's campaign".

Ok, hold strain there, Billy. We know you've already shown ample signs of senility and dementia, but we can't let that twaddle pass - even in a WSJ op -ed.   Hard as it is for McGurn to wrap his febrile brain around, the fact is the Fusion GPS oppo research was originally launched by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative news site. The relevant  WSJ editorial at the time noted it was funded by big GOP donor Paul Singer.  Singer wanted oppo research done on the Donald -  a two bit Queens' chiseler and lowlife he didn't trust. Singer and a group of old guard GOP donors hired Fusion to do the job of digging up dirt on the Queens' real estate crime boss and scumball.   

Subsequently, after Trump won the Repub primary,   the material was handed off to the Clinton campaign. This was NOT in any way sinister or illegal as McGurn tries to portray  - and certainly not a whit to do with "political murder" .  Nor in any way conspiratorial, certainly like seeking the help of a hostile foreign power to meddle in a presidential campaign.  Like Trump, who up to now has not disdained or objected to the Russians' help.

What was illegal was the Trump team holding more than 100 meetings - that we now know of -  with Russians, including GRU intelligence agents.  Specifically, as the NY Times has shown,  "Trump and His Associates Had More Than 100 Contacts With Russians Before the Inauguration," 

If Mueller lacked the intestinal fortitude to call out what was staring him in the face -  in terms of Trump's conspiracy with Putin and the Russkies  -  then that's on him. We can say he was the wrong guy for the job. Or maybe he fell victim to membership in the 'chickenshit club" noted several posts earlier.  See e.g.



But don't blame Adam Schiff for now sticking to the facts, and open evidence for what Trump has thus far gotten away with.   

As for McGurn's complaint about the FBI getting involved, that wasn't because of the Clinton team - or the Steele dossier.  That was because multiple personae in Trump's campaign orbit were making contact with GRU agents. (Which led Mueller to indict no fewer than 12 of them last summer.)  What? Everyone all of a sudden forgot that? Did Barr's BS summary spatter that much gray matter in the nation's collective hippocampus?

We know that contacts were made by at least 17 campaign officials and advisers who had contacts with Russian nationals and Wikileaks intermediaries.   Nor were these merely crumpets and tea gatherings at the (Trump) Tower.

Further, foreign intercepts of meetings of Trump cronies, e.g. Carter Page, with Russian  (GRU) agents meant that the U.S.  FBI  had to enter the picture with its own FISA warrants, surveillance, etc. Not to do so would have violated agreements with foreign intel sources, assets, and would have amounted to dereliction of duty.   

Hence, there was no evil conspiracy by the FBI.  It only exists in McGurn's mind as when he babbles later "there are those Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Warrants the FBI took out on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page". Uh, no, "there aren't."  The FBI needed to do a surveillance on Page after he disclosed he was a Russkie stooge by making contacts with the GRU.

So don't even think of egging Graham on to instigate another special counsel  (and another investigation) to go after Clinton. That dog is done and will no longer hunt.

McGurn then names the second "lucky break" enabling Hillary to "get away with political murder" (ibid.):

"She'd also lucked out in early July when the FBI director himself, even though he lacked the authority to do so, publicly and personally cleared her of any charges for having taken her emails as secretary of state off grid."

Ok, let's leave out for the moment that Ivanka and Jared have done the same - indeed  worse - not even bothering to try to secure their messages on What's App.   But never mind the double standard, in his high dudgeon and dementia McGurn seems to forget then FBI head Comey dumped all over Hillary with a 2nd interjection 10 days BEFORE the General Election!  

Most sentient observers of normal intelligence took that to be a totally undesirable intrusion that essentially sunk whatever chances Hillary had to win.  Seems to me McGurn -  and other Trumpies-   ought to be thanking Comey for helping knock HRC out instead of accusing her of "political murder" and "putting fingers on the scales of the election."  What planet or parallel universe do these mutts inhabit anyway?

But at least McGurn is gracious enough to admit that the Trumpies and their goons shouldn't lock her up.

Then there is the cowardly poltroon and political pipsqueak Lindsey Graham, also referenced in the piece.  He also seeks to be magnanimous...sort of...sputtering :

"I'm not so much worried about retrying her, but I want to make sure the public understands that she got away with something they wouldn't get away with."

Oh, please, you ridiculous piece of shit! She "got away" with nothing, She fucking lost!  Get over it!  Trump, meanwhile, got away with blatant conspiracy with the Russians and is still getting away with crimes and misdemeanors galore - every damned day.  As former federal prosecutor Mimi Rocah put it back in January in an MSNBC appearance:

"Remember that GRU indictment - if you go back to that- one of the objects of the conspiracy is not just hacking but hacking and disseminating.  You can't look at them alone, you have to go back to everything we know, the Trump Tower meeting, the calling out by Trump to Russia (to grab Hillary's emails)...there's just so many other things."

Note here the crimes to do with Hillary's emails were not on her side, but Trump's goons hacking them in the first place, especially after he egged on Russian  bad actors, e.g. on July 27, 2016:

"I will tell you this, Russia if you're listening, I hope that you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. You will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let's see if that happens."

The emails showed Russkie contact and Brit music promoter Rob Goldstone telling Trump's dumbo son Don Jr. that “the crown prosecutor of Russia” had offered “to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father”.

Goldstone added,  in the exchange of June 3rd, 2016: “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”

He didn't mince words or soft soap it, absolutely pointing out the "support for Mr. Trump".  Any sensible individual with more than air between the ears would have run - not walked - to the nearest FBI office and turned in the material. What did Don Jr. do instead?

Seventeen minutes later, the jug-headed imp welcomed the email with the reply: “If it’s what you say, I love it, especially later in the summer.”     He then forwarded the incriminating material to his comrades in crime, as his email betrays:

------------------------------------------------------------------
From:   Donald Trump Jr.
Sent:    Yesterday, June 8, 2016, 12: 55 p.m.
To:       Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort
Subject: FW: Russia - Clinton -  Private and Confidential
-------------------------------------------------------------------


Just a few weeks later the first batch of DNC emails were released.  If that isn't conspiracy - as Bill Maher so quaintly put it Friday night, then "what the fuck is it?"  

Still not buying it? Let's refer to the words of Mueller's own indictment of the Russkie GRU agents from last summer:

According to the indictment:
"On or about July 27, 2016, the conspirators attempted after hours to spearphish for the first time email accounts on a domain hosted by a third party provider and used by Clinton's personal office. They also targeted seventy-six email addresses at the domain for the Clinton campaign. '

Got the lingo there? Conspirators! Of course, this referred to the gang of GRU hackers and thugs doing the spearphishing. But were they just doing it by coincidence or happenstance?   No, they did it the very same day Traitor Trump appeared in front of the media cameras and pleaded for the Russians to grab Hillary's emails.  Only a certified imbecile would not infer conspiracy or at least coordination here, certainly after the Trump Tower meet.  

So why didn't Mueller call it out?  Well as I pointed out in my March 30 post on the 'Chickenshit theory', quoting Larry Beinhart:

"White collar cases are the toughest to make and there are multiple reasons for this. They tend to take place in linguistic fogs. Instead of money taken at the point of a gun, it's taken by promises and claims that can be made to appear as merely over-ambitious, misunderstandings of complex rules, just careless, or actually made by underlings."

I added:

 It's all about manipulating the language so that - by the end of the judicial process- there is no clear proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" by which to rest a case.  In other words, like the agnotologists who muddied the waters on the causes of climate change - delaying action by sowing doubts for decades-  it's nearly impossible to prove a crime attributed to a white collar crook. Especially one with tons of cash to toss around, i.e. to buy the best lawyers, meaning the best at manipulating the language for their client's own ends.

So, in effect, the semantic fog succeeds in diluting evidence to the point a special prosecutor may not be willing to use it. But bear in mind Carl Sagan's oft repeated quote: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

And now,  given Mueller's finding for "absence of evidence"  when faced with language distortion by Trump's lawyers,  we see their side emboldened.   McGurn and that execrable punk Graham want to turn the tables on Hillary for "political murder" and "putting fingers on the election scales".  David Corn, who's done extensive work on the Trump- Russia links has accepted none of it:


 "Trump and his minions have kept saying this didn't really happen, so in a lot of ways this is an indictment of Donald Trump, of all the people who said the Russia attack never happened. Here we have it in granular detail.  Read between the lines of this indictment and there's the other half of the equation. That throughout the campaign, and while the attack was going on, Donald Trump and his lieutenants were saying it's not happening. Even when he was briefed by U.S. intelligence he came out and said, 'nope, nothing happening, could be a 400 pound guy, we don't know that it's Russia'


Well, now we know it's Russia. Now we know while they were doing this he was providing cover, he was covering up what they were doing, which was for his benefit. "

But we're not done. Graham is so beside himself with self-righteous punkery and faux outrage at Adam Schiff's sticking to the conspiracy crime that he had the nerve to squawk to McGurn:

"Mr. Schiff really does represent the Oliver Stone wing of the Democratic Party".

Of course, this imbecile probably only has the faintest inkling that it was Stone's film 'JFK' (which he always said was "a counter myth to the myth of the Warren Report") actually paved the way for the JFK Records Act and the millions of files that have since been released from the National Archives. Among those, that Clay Shaw (under the alias "Clay Bertrand") was really a CIA contract agent as Jim Garrison had shown. As then released CIA Doc. (JFK 1993: 6.28.16.07.26.560280) noted:


"A memorandum marked for files says that J. Monroe Sullivan, #280201, was granted a covert security approval as of 10 December 1962 so he could be used in Project QKCHANT [Clay L. Shaw has #402897]"

Does Lindsey know any of this? Of course not! Otherwise he'd not be expelling brain farts about Adam Schiff being from the "Oliver Stone' wing of the Democrats  which in retrospect turns out to be a compliment to perspicuity and dogged persistence to get at truth. 

As opposed to being a collapsible, spineless worm like Graham, who wifey has even described as akin to a rotten shellfish, "white, slimy all over and yellow on the inside."  And especially as this South Carolina putz still wants to appoint his own special counsel to now investigate Hillary.  

Echoes of Devin Nunes? Maybe, even a clone. Quislings of a yellow feather stick together, after all. And almost certainly part of the whackadoodle, Pizzagate wing of the Repuke party. 

Stay tuned because one thing Barr did accomplish with his inane, skewed summary Mueller's report is to open the floodgates to even more polarization.

See also:


Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Other Voices On The Barr Version Of The Mueller Report

Other voices commenting on AG William Barr's 4 -page summary take on the Mueller Report. (Warning: Not for the politically squeamish!)

by P.M. Carpenter | March 26, 2019 - 6:45am | permalink

Excerpt:

I'm still mired in the inescapable epic of Donald J. Trump, Attorney General William Barr and Special Counsel Bob Mueller. For two years we've watched on the screen and read in B & W mounting evidence of Trump Inc.'s multiple ties with Russian intelligence, shady hackers and WikiLeaks' mediation, in addition to evidence of the president's nearly countless obstructions of justice.


Yet in less than two days, Barr both read Mueller's evidentiary submission (of possibly immense length) and wrote a four-page, single-spaced letter to Congress, neatly disclosing that all, after all, is well: The astoundingly criminal Mr. Trump is blameless. This came as even bigger news than the facts that Donald had spooned with Vladimir and has lied about it repeatedly ever since.

Larry Beinhart's picture
Article Tools E-mail | Print Comments (0)

Excerpt:

The "chickenshit club" is a phrase coined by James Comey after he was US attorney for the Southern District of New York back in 2002. The title means he was head of an office of over 200 assistant US attorneys. Several months into his job, Comey, who would later head the FBI for four years before being dismissed by US President Donald Trump in 2017 in what some saw as an obstruction-of-justice move, called a staff meeting.

As reported by Jesse Eisinger in his book, The Chickenshit Club: Why the Justice Department Fails to Prosecute Executives, "Comey asked the seated prosecutors a question, 'Who here has never had an acquittal or a hung jury. Please raise your hand.' The go-getters and resume builders in the office were ready. This group thought themselves the best trial lawyers in the country. Hands shot up. Backs straightened in preparation for praise. Comey looked at his flock with approbation. 'You are members of what we like to call the Chickensh** Club'."

Prosecutors who had never lost a case were prosecutors who had never dared to take tough cases. White collar cases are the toughest to make and there are multiple reasons for this. They tend to take place in linguistic fogs. Instead of money taken at the point of a gun, it's taken by promises and claims that can be made to appear as merely over-ambitious, misunderstandings of complex rules, just careless, or actually made by underlings.

Donald Trump has been playing those games his whole life in white-collar crime court cases he has faced, as did his father before him, as have his children, his foundation, his company, and his associates. Rich white collar defendants have lots of money for their defences. Money throws enough muck around the courtroom to befuddle jurors and bedazzle judges so much that they throw their hands up inconclusively.

If a wealthy white-collar person is convicted, expect their attorneys to appeal. In recent decades the Supreme Court has reversed very solid white collar convictions and federal appeals courts have followed that lead. These have given very clear signals to prosecutors.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller sent out clear - though silent - signals before the release of the report that he had joined the chickensh** club. He didn't indict Donald Trump, Jr and Jared Kushner for possible offences they may have committed, like lying to Congress and failing to disclose foreign contacts, and then interview them, if they were to be charged. That would have set up an interview with the president himself.

by Jaime O'Neill | March 26, 2019 - 7:00am | permalink


Excerpt:

There is, in fact, nowhere to look that isn't dark. As we all try to absorb the deep disappointment of the Mueller Report, it feels more and more like our country has experienced a hostile takeover, a coup that was unfolding in the late summer and fall of 2016 when we were all being told that, though he was a Republican, FBI Director James Comey was a guy with impeccably impartial standards, a comic book model of probity, honor, and adherence to truth, justice, and the American Way, a man who made Superman look a little shaky in his sense of right and wrong. But then Comey did that thing he did when he violated FBI protocol, first by announcing that the investigation into Hillary Clinton's email was being shut down for lack of evidence of wrongdoing, then adding an editorial opinion, stating that in his view, she'd acted recklessly and exercised poor judgment. But that was in June of 2016. In October as the election drew near, he strode forth once more to tell the nation that the investigation into Hillary's emails was being reopened. By nearly all accounts, that act sealed the election for Trump, even as the Comey was withholding the information that an investigation was already underway into the Trump campaign's connections with Russian operatives working to deliver the election to the man they wanted to see become the President of the United States.

From then on, the attempts to hide the truth and obstruct justice became ever more obvious, ever more blatant, ever more open and in plain sight. From the interview with Lester Holt in which Trump said getting the Russian thing off his back was the reason he fired Comey, to the constant denigration of Jeff Session, Trump's hand-picked and deep-dyed racist Attorney General who was insufficiently willing to define the AG's office as being Trump's personal law firm, to the daily Big Lie the Republicans were telling with such determined repetitions: "There was no collusion.

Despite the meetings, the indictments, the money changing hands that enriched Manafort, Trump's campaign manager, to the determination of so many to evade the truth, the "no collusion" mantra was sounded again and again. The word "collusion" was heard ever day, mostly in those denials, but the collusion seemed to be everywhere, not just with Russians, but with the news media that had given Trump so much free air time, that had spent so much time talking about Hillary Clinton's emails, and far too little time airing details of Trump's shady business deals, his inexplicably easy loans from Deutsche Bank, or the host of sexual abuse allegations against him, some of which he seemed to acknowledge, unwittingly, when he was caught on tape bragging to Billy Bush about his pussy grabbing proclivities, or his locker room talk with Howard Stern, radio douchebag.

And, despite daily assaults on our national sense of decency, honesty, class, or dignity, we were told to pin our hopes on Robert Mueller, the pillar of all that was good, right, true, and righteous left in the United States of America. Look up "rectitude" in the dictionary, and there was his picture. Look up Boy Scout, and you'd be told to "see, Mueller, Robert." Look up "hero," and there he was again, with his long face just oozing probity and integrity and gravitas.

He was the bulwark. He was going to save our sorry asses. He was the guy the media had meant to describe when they were saying all those great things about the sainted James Comey. He was the fearless guy who was going to get to the truth. He was, at last, the one goddamned Republican we could trust to put the nation ahead of even the softest whisper of partisanship.

....What took Robert Mueller and his team some 22 months to gather and write took Bill Barr less than a weekend to read and digest, at which time he offered us all a four-page summary concluding that there really wasn't much to see there, that there wasn't much the public needed to know in that undisclosed number of pages that constituted the full report, and that the Republicans could begin to plan how to spend all the loot that would soon flood in for Trump's 2nd Inaugural shindig.

by William Rivers Pitt | March 26, 2019 - 6:24am | permalink

Excerpt:

From the moment the Mueller investigation began to the moment Attorney General William Barr released hissummary of Mueller’s labors, Donald Trump acted like the guiltiest man on Earth. His efforts to obstruct the inquiry were egregious, vocal and constant, his denials facile and unconvincing in their serial repetitions. His now-notorious Twitter eruption the weekend before the report’s conclusion was every inch the child frantically deflecting blame after pushing his sister down the stairs.

The third week in January of this year provided a perfect example of the phenomenon when it was revealed that Trump made a habit of confiscating the translators’ notes after every meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin before swearing the translators to absolute secrecy. This was unprecedented behavior with potentially staggering implications, and never mind the hypocrisy; had Barack Obama done something similar during his tenure, the outrage on the right would have been visible from space. With Trump, however, it was business as usual.

The announced completion of Robert Mueller’s investigation on Friday launched a 48-hour period of media mayhem not seen since a certain white Bronco was on the loose in California 25 years ago. Those who were expecting a detailed impeachment map to be immediately revealed endured a number of existential crises after exposing themselves to the television coverage. DEAR GOD WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN was the going media refrain, and no answers were forthcoming until the attorney general released his review on Sunday afternoon.

To the astonished horror of millions, Barr’s very short “summary” announced that Mueller had found no evidence of collusion between Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and agents of the Russian government. Barr further announced that the report contained no actionable evidence to support charges of obstruction of justice against the president. No new indictments would be forthcoming from Mueller’s end of the pool.

Only one scant sentence out of Barr’s entire four-page letter — “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him” — serves to correctly note that Mueller did not exonerate Trump from wrongdoing. More ominously, Mueller’s office refused to endorse the conclusions reached in Barr’s letter. Perhaps they are playing it with their usual caution, but such an endorsement would have ended the discussion with a resounding thud.

After the initial shock wore off, anger flooded the feed. “Nothing Trump is accused of from now on by the press will be believed by huge chunks of the population,” writes Rolling Stone columnist Matt Taibbi, “a group that (perhaps thanks to this story) is now larger than his original base. There will be people protesting: the Mueller report doesn’t prove anything! What about the 37 indictments? The convictions? The Trump tower revelations? The lies! The meeting with Don, Jr.? The financial matters! There’s an ongoing grand jury investigation, and possible sealed indictments, and the House will still investigate, and…. Stop. Just stop. Any journalist who goes there is making it worse.”

Much respect to Matt — I’m a definite fan — but this journalist is going there, because something reeks. If the moment arrives when crow must be eaten, I will devour my fair portion because it is the writer’s lot to say so when they have been wrong at the top of their lungs. We are not there yet, and Taibbi himself accidently explained why. “There will be people protesting,” he wrote. “The Mueller report doesn’t prove anything!” Here’s the problem: We are not talking about the Mueller report. We don’t know what’s in the Mueller report. All we have to go on is the word of William Barr, and speaking personally, that simply isn’t good enough.

by Marc Ash | March 26, 2019 - 5:53am | permalink


Attorney General William Barr stood before reporters and beside Donald Trump in the Oval Office on March 15th and said with unqualified certainty that the president’s Declaration of an Emergency at the U.S./Mexican border was not only constitutionally legal but absolutely justified by the circumstances there. It seemed a statement tailored to support the conclusion Trump sought and the political outcome Trump wanted.

Sunday’s carefully worded summary of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report by Attorney General Barr seems to pursue the same outcome.

The attorney general’s summary does a far better job of supporting Trump’s assertions and talking points than shedding any real light on the substance of the special counsel’s actual report.

If the attorney general’s objective was to preempt that spin cycle and create political ammunition for the White House in advance of the actual report being made available to Congress or the public, this summary seems ideally suited to for that express purpose.

What does Mueller’s report actually say? We are still not permitted to know. Mueller’s report is still the same mystery, the same enigma it has been for two years.

Congress and the public must be allowed to view the special counsel’s report, in its entirety. Not an avowed Trump loyalist’s interpretation of the report.