Search This Blog

Saturday, July 28, 2018

What is the true relationship between President Trump, Vladimir Putin and Russia Intelligence?


The Helsinki Summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin has sent alarm bells in Washington and throughout the country. This meeting has started a troubling discussion of the alleged relationship between Russian intelligence, the Kremlin, and the American President's inner circle.

July 20, 2018

________________________


After a troubling press conference during the Russian and American Summit in Helsinki, Finland, alarm bells went off in Washington, D.C, and parts of the country. First and foremost was President Trump's disavowing of information collected by U.S. intelligence agencies and assets regarding Russian influence in the past presidential election, and President Trump's public support of Russian President, Vladimir Putin.  Donald Trump essentially said that despite what American intelligence has gleaned about Russia's alleged interference in the prior election, President Trump affirmed the honor and integrity of Mr. Putin.  It is, to many observers, the first time an American president promoted a view that the leader of a nuclear power, and antagonist for American foreign policy goals, was vouched for by the occupant of the Oval Office. It made the matter worse when Trump denied the veracity of American intelligence.   It was so glaring that many in the media, including conservative talking heads, publicly rebuked the American president and stated that Trump did a favor for his critics who view him now as a bonafide Russian asset, with Putin as his handler.  In fact, a recent article by Jonathan Chait in New York magazine makes a case that President Trump could, in fact, be doing Putin's bidding in his quest to dismantle Western Democracies and their alliance against his country, both militarily and economically.

Mr. Chait goes on to write that Donald Trump has worked with Russian oligarchs and others who purchase condos and other real estate assets throughout Trump's vast global portfolio.  In fact, many oligarchs overpay for space in Trump Tower, and most of those remain empty.  The articles make an astonishing implication that Trump has laundered money through his real estate holdings going back decades, beginning around 1987.  This was the year that Donald Trump became a public figure, first with the publishing success of his book, "The Art of the Deal," and public comments regarding immense Japanese investment in the United States, through real estate, Wall Street, and purchasing of American name brands.  Additionally,  he was against Japan's reliance on the United States military to protect and defend Japanese territorial sovereignty.  The year is also noteworthy in that it was the year that Donald Trump and his then-wife Ivana visited the Soviet Union, staying in Moscow's prominent hotel, the National Hotel, even staying in the Lenin Suite, which Mr. Chait believes was most certainly bugged.  After his return, Donald Trump began a decades-long flirtation with the Oval Office, which culminated with an aborted run for president in 2011, and ended with his shock win in 2016.  Until his win, Trump had opined through newspaper Op-Eds that America was being taken advantage of by countries (Western Europe and other Asian nations besides Japan) who required American military support. However, he neglected to mention whom the United States was protecting these countries from (Russia), according to Jonathan Chait.

The New York Magazine details how Russian intelligence cultivates their assets, through years of flattery, while making copious notes regarding those individual proclivities relating to ego, money, sexual appetite, stupidity, and greed, all of which Mr. Chait believes Trump has in large supply.  It further makes a case that Donald Trump during his long career in business, felt comfortable working with less-than-stellar segments of the New York business scene, including La Cosa Nostra (organized crime, which controlled cement production in greater New York), and a close associate named Felix Sater, who many believe has close ties to Putin's inner circle of business and intelligence friends, including the Russian Mafia.  One of the most damaging claims in the New York Magazine article is that Trump has received numerous financial loans from Russian banks due to his obsessive desire to litigate against anyone who he feels has wronged him.  American and European banks avoid working with him because of his large volume of litigation against those businesses when he was loaned money for his real estate ventures.  As a result, the vast majority of his recent loans involved Russian origins, and one of his sons, Donald Jr., stated as such, in 2008.  

Other journalists (Michael Isikoff and David Corn) feel that part of what drives President Trump in his policy decisions is his virulent hatred of anything President Obama did, mostly as a result of public humiliation during the 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner, where Obama had a field day with Donald Trump and his behavior towards him.  In fact, anything that President Obama approved, Trump goes against it.  That is partly why he does things, in my opinion, to spite a black former President, from the current one who many assume is racist and has negative impressions of black Americans.

The article by Mr. Chait provides names of many close Trump associates, including Paul Manafort, a consultant and lobbyist who has worked for Pro Russian Ukrainian politico Viktor Yanukovych, Roger Stone, known GOP operative, and others who have close ties to Russian businessmen and oligarchs, many of whom stayed in contact even after Paul Manafort left the Trump campaign during the summer when the election was not in doubt, and it appeared Trump would lose convincingly to Hillary Clinton.  Robert Mueller has indicted Manafort, whose bail was denied, and remains in jail awaiting trial for money laundering (there's that theme again).  The piece does lay out a convincing case that there could be more than meets the eye regarding the awkwardly weird relationship between the American president and Russia's leader.  

In this frenzied political climate, where both parties want to win national elections and access the power that comes with controlling the federal government, the breathless speculation only amplifies America's deep class, political and economic divisions between citizens of all stripes.  I am not refuting the salient points in the New York Magazine article presented by Mr. Chait, but it would be better for everyone to wait and see what the findings of the Mueller probe are.  If the final report shows that President Trump is overwhelmingly beholden to the leader of a foreign nuclear power, it will be the end of the Trump Administration.  Even if he does not want to leave the Oval Office, if Republicans turn on him after the evidence presented shows massive compromising information, Trump will be impeached.  Whether after all that he still refuses to leave, even attempting to drum up his base, it will cause a conflagration of the American way of life, the status of the Constitution, and whether the United States remains a vibrant democracy.  What compounds the problem is that both the Democratic and Republican parties increase the distrust of government institutions, the rule of law, and the art of compromise because of their desire to win elections at the expense of the opposition. The parties are helped by media conglomerates (Fox News, MSNBC, CNN) who prey on this partisanship.  It would be better for the country if Americans are patient and wait to hear and read what is in the final report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

I do not know if America can recover if the Leader of the Free World is an asset of Vladimir Putin, or at least heavily leveraged in debt to the same person; it will forever damage the credibility of the American President's position in world affairs.  





Friday, July 13, 2018

Supreme Court Confirmation Armageddon



July 3, 2018

The upcoming and explosive confirmation fight will divide the country even more as the new Supreme Court justice will determine the ideological direction of American jurisprudence and affect the future of the interpretation of the Constitution.

________________________________________



The recent announcement by Justice Anthony Kennedy that he will retire from the Supreme Court after the court's term which ends in May of this year has sent shocked court observers, Republicans, Democrats and prominent members of the media and internet bloggers. 

On July 9th, President Trump nominated D.C. Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a conservative legal mind, to fill the Kennedy position on the nation's highest court.  This was applauded by various conservative online publications (National Review), but he was not the first choice for other conservatives.  That choice was Notre Dame graduate Amy Cony Barret, who is a staunch Catholic, law school professor, and current judge.  She is favored by religious activists, for her strong advocacy for faith and living with a moral compass.  I think President Trump chose Mr. Kavanaugh for his extensive paper trail and vociferous positions regarding originalist Constitutional interpretation of the laws.  It helps that he is 53 years old, relatively "young" for a justice so that he can serve for a significant amount of time.

While his confirmation fight will be contentious for a multitude of reasons, many of his positions have broad support amongst Republican members of Congress and members of the D.C. Establishment. Some of them include: (provided by the National Review;www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/brett-kavanaugh-trump-supreme-court-nominee)

1) Taming the Administrative State: Kavanaugh has an extensive track record with rulings that put a limit on what the Federal Government can and cannot do in terms of forcing states to comply with specific provisions that go against the type of intrusive government power on state's rights.  Judge Kavanaugh disagrees with the Chevron principle; where there is a disagreement with a state and a government agency, the government agency has final say on behalf of the United States government.  Many states (conservatives) do not feel this type of governance is Constitutional.

2) Enforcing the 2nd Amendment:  As a D.C. Appeals court ruling, he dissented against Washington, D.C.'s prohibition against the owning of semi-automatic weapons.  He will be a strong defender of those who want to own most types of guns.

3) The American Worker:  Judge Kavanaugh is against allowing undocumented immigrants from voting in union elections, and that certain instances companies cannot choose lower wage employees over American workers.  He also sides with domestic farmers and agriculture interests over foreign competitors.

4) Abortion:  Judge Kavanaugh is a devout Catholic, and his personal views go with Catholic dogma.  In a case against the Department of Health and Human Services, he objected to a court case involving granting the right of a female undocumented minor to seek an abortion while she was under government detention.  It is safe to say that any abortion case that comes across the Supreme Court's docket involving any abortion rights, he will provide a vote towards any conservative opinion and majority.  Democrats are going to make this issue the central component of their vociferous opposition to his sitting on the nation's highest court.

Judge Kavanaugh has over 300 court opinions from which Democratic Senate staff will pore over to find flaws in his beliefs that could damage his ascendancy to the Supreme Court. I feel his nomination will not run through too much obstruction when the U.S. Senate gets to vote.  Because of Senate rules that were changed under previous Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, where a simple majority vote in the Senate allowed President Obama's nominees to win confirmation, Republicans now control the Senate.  Democrats will make for great theater in opposing Brett Kavanaugh's nomination unless the judge cannot remove himself from certain positions that might proof fatal, he will soon sit on the Supreme Court.   With two Republican Senators, Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who are staunch Pro-Choice Republicans, I don't see those two Senators will vote against Judge Kavanaugh unless he provides any reason why he will not seek to overturn settled law (Roe v. Wade) and precedent regarding future abortion cases.

What the Democrats can best hope for with the remaining liberal judges who are older, like Ruth Bader Ginsburg,  is to pray she remains in good health until the Democrats can regain the upper chamber in the U.S. Congress.   They should also have a good set of judges who a Democratic President, once sworn in January of 2021, can nominate someone who will protect legal issues that the Democrats hold dear.

This is a fight between the ideologies of both parties. The Republicans support judicial originalism, which focuses on any rulings that damage the "original" Constitutional intent of the Founders. In other words, if American voters want something changed with the Bill of Rights, the Constitution or legal precedent, they should use voting and the legislative process to enact change.  The Democrats want proactive judges to use the power of the Supreme Court to overturn policies that will benefit the country (or more truthfully) members of their largest constituent groups (women and minorities).

That is why this Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh will be full of grand theater in a highly partisan political environment.  It will determine the course of how we live, and whether we stray from Constitutional intent or treat the Constitution as a "living, breathing" document which will usher the country into the modern era.

Exciting times.


The State of the GOP Primary So Far

  January 10, 2024 After four debates between the Grand Old Party (GOP) aspirants for the party's nomination, it is still former Preside...