Showing posts with label Trump Sinister. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Trump Sinister. Show all posts

June 27, 2019

Is Trump A Rapist?

Editorial with facts

Add caption
E. Jean Carroll, trump inicially said he never met her that is until pictures and accounts of the two talking came forward. She was very well known as an opinion columnist so there was no reason for him not to. Then he said she is not his type to rape. Well he is comparing to all the ones he has admitted to grabbing their puzz. She looks like those married or divorced outgoing women he talked about in the bus. The picture of hers on those years shows a very good looking woman, educated and smart. Just the type he resents and like to bring down to his knees. She kept quiet and helped Trump be elected on 2016.   (Adam Gonzalez)

E. Jean Carroll says Donald Trump sexually assaulted her in a dressing room at a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s. He denies the accusation.

E. Jean Carroll says Donald Trump sexually assaulted her in a dressing room at a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s. He denies the accusation.CreditCreditCraig Ruttle/Associated Press
I am simply disgusted by what’s happening in America.
Related image
 Take mine, no take mine is shaven, no mine is bushy. A Man with no sence of decency or inside control will sucumb many times and so did Trump. The problem is that these type of men preferred what is not his and the ones that don't want it. This according to his own descriptions,

My political differences with this president and his accomplices in Congress — and now on the Supreme Court — are only part of the reason. Indeed, those differences may not be the lesser reason, and that, for me, says a lot.

For me, the reason is that the country, or large segments of it, seems to be acquiescing to a particular form of evil, one that is pernicious and even playful, one in which the means of chipping away at our values and morals grow even stronger, graduating from tack hammer to standard hammer to sledgehammer.

America, it seems to me, is drifting toward catastrophe. Donald Trump is leading us there. And all the while, our politicians plot about political outcomes and leverage. Republican politicians are afraid to upset him; Democratic politicians are afraid to impeach him.

One thing that should never be underestimated is a politician’s clawing instinct toward self-preservation. These disciples of flexibility have learned well that the trees that remain standing are those that bend best in the storm.
Sign Up for Jamelle Bouie's Newsletter
Join Jamelle Bouie as he shines a light on overlooked writing, culture and ideas from around the internet. 

Trump is to them a storm. But, to many of us, he is desolation, or the possibility thereof.

But, because nothing changes, because he is never truly held accountable, too many Americans are settling into a functional numbness, a just-let-me-survive-it form of sedation. But, that is where the edge of death is marked. That is where the rot begins. That is where a society loses itself.

Take for instance the latest sexual accusation against Trump: Advice columnist E. Jean Carroll alleges that Trump sexually assaulted her in 1995 or 1996 in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room. Carroll doesn’t call it rape, but rape is what she describes.

Carroll writes that Trump “pushed her against the wall, pushed his mouth against her lips, then pulled down her tights, unzipped his pants and forced his ‘fingers around my private area, thrusts his penis halfway — or completely, I’m not certain — inside me,’” as The New York Times reported it.

Don’t just keep reading. Don’t just think that you’ve heard this before. Don’t just think that this kind of “behavior” is baked into how people feel about Trump. Go back and read that last paragraph. Read it slowly. Place yourself — or your mother, or your wife, sister, daughter, cousin, girlfriend or friend — in that dressing room. Imagine the struggle. Imagine the violation. Imagine the anger.

And now remember that the alleged perpetrator is now the president. And, remember that Carroll is by no means alone; a chorus of other women have also accused Trump of sexual misconduct.
But, Carroll’s account stands out for its brutality and severity.

And yet, her account landed like one more body on the pile in a mass grave: reduced by the multitude of other accusations rather than amplified by them.

There was media coverage of Carroll’s accusation and social media discussion of it, but it never truly sufficiently sunk in and gathered the gravity it deserved.

Then Dean Baquet, executive editor of The Times, even said this newspaper “underplayed” the article it published on the accusation.

And Trump, in his swelling depravity, responded to the allegations by telling The Hill: “I’ll say it with great respect: Number one, she’s not my type. Number two, it never happened. It never happened, O.K.?”

Well, sir, which type for you is rape-worthy?

To you, America, I ask: What is the breaking point? Is there a breaking point? Does nothing now matter that used to matter? Do we simply allow this accusation to pass like all the others, using the limping excuse that whether or not the man who sits in the Oval Office is a sexual predator or not, he was sufficiently litigated in the 2016 election?

A sickness has settled on this country. We are stuck in a stupor. People have settled in themselves that the only remedy is at the ballot box in 2020, mostly because that is what they are incessantly being told.

And just a few days on from the rape allegation, the news of the moment has shifted. We eagerly anticipate a sorting to emerge from the Democratic debates, anticipate Robert Mueller’s testimony before Congress and anticipate Trump’s performance in Asia. 

There are other crises, other emergencies, other traumas. Trump is waging war on immigrants, waging war on the environment, and has hinted at waging war on Iran.

How to weigh one woman’s tale of victimization — or that of multiple women — by Trump against a world being driven into chaos by Trump? Mustn’t our concern shrink relative to our concern for the rest of humanity? In a life in which the human capacity for outrage is limited and wanes, mustn’t we aim it at the most egregious offense?

I say that this allegation, if true, is the most egregious offense. Not the most deadly or having the most consequences for future generations, but absolutely the most revelatory about character, privilege and abuse of power.

This would be an act of the most intimate violence performed by the man who is now president himself, flesh to flesh, not with the numbing distance of a signature on an executive order or an offense screamed out at one of his rage rallies.

This president acts as if he is above the law, or is the law. He lies and he cheats and he bullies. He is hateful and rude and racist. He talks about women to whom he is attracted as if they’re objects to be possessed and about women who dare to challenge him as enemies who must be destroyed.

Carroll’s allegation fits the behaviors that have been established or alleged. America owes it to itself to deeply ponder it, and possibly hear sworn testimony about whether it’s true.

Or, conversely, America can simply sleepwalk its way to the polls in 2020 hoping the world is still intact when it opens its eyes.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email:

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and Instagram.

Charles Blow joined The Times in 1994 and became an Opinion columnist in 2008. He is also a television commentator and writes often about politics, social justice and vulnerable communities. @CharlesMBlow • Facebook

June 22, 2019

Trump Responds to New Accusations of Rape Using The Same Language as A Sex Abuser

Donald Trump deployed half a dozen tactics in a press release on Friday that any abuser would recognize.

Trump’s goal was to get us to question our own eyes and discredit columnist E. Jean Carroll, who described an encounter with Trump in the 1990s that ended in rape.

According to a book excerpt that appeared in New York magazine, Carroll bumped into then-real estate mogul Trump at Bergdorf Goodman in New York. The two recognized each other and they had a friendly back-and-forth. But then Trump became violent, Carroll wrote, going on to describe her rape in a dressing room.

Carroll preempts her critics with some explicit concessions: She did not go to the police. She did not see any sales attendants around. There was no video footage. Her key corroborating evidence is that she told two friends the same story at the time, and New York magazine confirmed the account with them.

Carroll is the 22nd woman to accuse the president of sexual misconduct on the record. Trump has denied these accusations and turned on the women who made them. As Carroll put it in her piece, she feared to join the women “who’ve come forward with credible stories about how the man grabbed, badgered, belittled, mauled, molested, and assaulted them, only to see the man turn it around, deny, threaten, and attack them.”

Her fears came true within hours when Trump released a statement in response to the piece that attempted in several ways to gaslight anyone who read Carroll’s account and threatens any other woman who might want to speak out.

Tactic #1: Inject doubt

“I’ve never met this person in my life.”

When I read this line, I paused. I could have sworn New York magazine published a photo showed Trump and Carroll together. Maybe I had misunderstood. Maybe I was wrong about what I saw. Maybe the publication pulled a fast one on me.

No. I was right. A photo is clearly embedded in the story.

Even if Trump didn’t remember Carroll, he certainly read the article and would have seen the photo of himself with her. It’s just not true that he never met her — and he knows it. Trump is deliberately putting readers back on their heels, making them doubt their own eyes.

Tactic #2: Misdirect

“Shame on those who make up false stories of assault to try to get publicity for themselves, or sell a book, or carry out a political agenda—like Julie Swetnick who falsely accused Justice Brett Kavanaugh.”

An obvious parallel to Carroll’s story is Christine Blasey Ford’s. Like Carroll, Ford is an accomplished, professional, well-spoken woman who told the world a detailed, deeply personal story about a powerful man. She sat in front of a Senate committee for hours and answered questions about her account of an encounter with Brett Kavanaugh in high school in which she says he attempted to rape her. Most Americans found her credible.

Trump is attempting to make us forget that Ford was at the center of the Kavanaugh controversy, instead of bringing up a woman named Julie Swetnick, who said she saw Kavanaugh acting inappropriately at parties when they were in high school. Swetnick’s account was far less specific and detailed as Christine Ford’s account. She couldn’t establish that they knew each other. Her story was thus less compelling and less reliable. It was covered in the national media, but it was not the defining storyline of the Kavanaugh nomination.

Trump is trying to rewrite history, to make us forget what really happened with Kavanaugh. He’s trying to shift the comparison from Ford to weaken Carroll, to make us hold her less regard.

Tactic #3: Play up irrelevant details

“Ms. Carroll & New York Magazine: No pictures? No surveillance? No video? No reports? No sales attendants around??”

Carroll wrote that there was no one around to witness the assault. She did not tell the police. The store didn’t have surveillance. No one was standing by to take a photo. This would all be helpful evidence, certainly, but the lack of it doesn’t mean that her story isn’t true.

And while Trump plays up these examples of non-existent evidence, he doesn’t address the existing corroborating evidence — that 20 years ago she told two friends who remember the details today. If he did, he’d draw attention to a significant detail in her favor. And he’d have to call not just one successful and established woman in media a liar — but three. Rather than confront the relevant detail, he’d rather get us to think about the irrelevant details.

Tactic #5: Play the victim

“False accusations diminish the severity of the real assault. All should condemn false accusations and any actual assault in the strongest possible terms.”

Trump wants us to feel sorry for him. It’s a sleight of hand. He’s attempting to get us to look at him not as the abuser, but as the victim. In turn, that makes Carroll the villain. This isn’t novel. It’s what abusers do. And it’s something Carroll specifically feared.

Tactic #6: Cryptic threat of violence

“The world should know what’s really going on. It is a disgrace and people should pay dearly for such false accusations.”

Trump doesn’t say he wants someone to hurt Carroll. He doesn’t say he wants his mass digital following to attack her. But the implication is there for anyone who supports him to read into if they wish.

Trump knows this. Ford has moved repeatedly after receiving death threats. He’s seen what happens to people he targets on Twitter. He can claim he didn’t mean to incite anyone, but he knows he’s done it before.

He’s also not just warning Carroll. He says “people should pay dearly” — as in, anyone who might come forward in the future. Trump wants to keep accusers afraid. So far, on more than 20 women, it hasn’t worked.

Author E.Jean Carrol Accuses Pres.Donald Trump of Rape


Image result for E. Jean Carroll
Famed columnist E Jean Carroll claims she was raped by Donald Trump in NYC dressing room Daily Mai

In a New York magazine cover story published Friday, author E. Jean Carroll accused President Trump of raping her in a dressing room of New York's Bergdorf Goodman department store in the mid-1990s.

Why it matters: Carroll's accusation is the 16th allegation of sexual misconduct or assault levied against the president throughout his time in public life — all of which he has denied.

Trump was caught on tape in 2005 during filming for an episode of "Access Hollywood" discussing groping and kissing women and saying that "when you’re a star, they let you do it." That tape was given to the Washington Post during the 2016 election.

The White House issued a statement on Friday evening in which Trump claimed he "never met this person in my life," despite the New York magazine article featuring a photo of Trump and Carroll together in 1987.

Between the lines: It's unusual to see a sexual assault allegation written in first person — the piece is an excerpt from Carroll's forthcoming book "What Do We Need Men For: A Modest Proposal?" — but Carroll says she disclosed the incident to two friends soon afterward, which New York magazine says it verified.

The big picture: The Trump account is only one portion of Carroll's piece, which includes her recounting other instances of alleged sexual assault at the hands of multiple men — including former CBS CEO and Chairman Les Moonves. She claims Moonves forced himself on her in a Beverly Hills hotel elevator after she interviewed him for a 1997 Esquire piece.

April 10, 2019

If President Obama Accomplished IT Then It Must Be Bad ~Trump Will Tear It Down~ Good For The Nation? It Never Crosses His Desk

The Trump administration has canceled a deal between Major League Baseball and the Cuban Baseball Federation that would have allowed Cuban players to join professional teams in the U.S. and Canada.
Under the four-month-old agreement, a major league club seeking to sign certain Cuban players would have to pay a release fee – 25 percent over the player's signing bonus – to the Federation. The player would also have to pay Cuban income taxes on foreign earnings.
The deal, which was initially negotiated under President Barack Obama, met with immediate opposition from the Trump administration.

Jose Abreu of the Chicago White Sox, seen in 2017, was one of the Cuban players who survived a risky, secret journey to the U.S. to play baseball.
Morry Gash/AP
It was designed to end the often dangerous pattern of ambitious Cuban stars seeking to join the major leagues by defecting and arranging to smuggle themselves out of Cuba with the aid of human traffickers. Under the agreement, Cuban players may return to the island during the off-season, unlike those who defect.
A senior administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said in a briefing that the agreement itself was a form of "human trafficking" by the Cuban government and that the Cuban Baseball Federation is a subsidiary of the Cuban government.
"We look forward to the day that Cuban baseball players can fully contract with Major League Baseball like players from every other country in the world and not as pawns of the Cuban dictatorship," the official told reporters.
Major League Baseball defended the plan.
"We stand by the goal of the agreement, which is to end the human trafficking of baseball players from Cuba," said league vice president Michael Teevan, in a terse e-mailed statement.
The administration blocked the baseball deal just a few days after the Cuban federation released the names of 34 players eligible to sign with MLB teams. Cuban players older than 25 years old and with six years of experience were eligible for the arrangement. Younger players were required to get the Cuban Baseball Federation's blessing to play for MLB teams. "The agreement with #MLB seeks to stop the trafficking of human beings, encourage cooperation and raise the level of baseball," the Cuban Baseball Federation said in a message on Twitter as quoted by Reuters. "Any contrary idea is false news. Attacks with political motivation against the agreement achieved harm the athletes, their families and the fans."
Some Florida lawmakers had opposed the baseball agreement for being an accommodation with the Cuban government. Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, in December, called the deal "both illegal and immoral."
Among the Cuban-born players who have defected and struck it rich signing with MLB clubs in recent years are Jose Abreu of the Chicago White Sox, Yoenis Cespedes of the New York Mets and Yasiel Puig of the Cincinnati Reds.

March 24, 2019

FYI: Donald Trump Has Shifted $1.3 Millions of Campaign Donor $ to His Business

"This is against the law but that never stopped Donald"

Donald Trump has charged his own reelection campaign $1.3 million for rent, food, lodging, and other expenses since taking office, according to a Forbes analysis of the latest campaign filings. And although outsiders have contributed more than $50 million to the campaign, the billionaire president hasn’t handed over any of his own cash. The net effect: $1.3 million of donor money has turned into $1.3 million of Trump money. 
In December, Forbes reported on the first $1.1 million that President Trump moved from his campaign into his business. Since then, his campaign filed additional documentation showing that it spent another $180,000 at Trump-owned properties in the final three months of 2018. 
None of this seemed likely when Donald Trump first got into politics. “I don’t need anybody’s money,” he announced on the day he launched his 2016 campaign, standing inside the marble atrium at Trump Tower. “I’m using my own money. I’m not using the lobbyists. I’m not using donors. I don’t care. I’m really rich.”

At first, he acted like it, spending $50 million of his own money from April 2015 to June 2016. But the following month, when he was officially named the Republican nominee for president, his financing model changed. From July to November of 2016, outsiders contributed $234 million while Trump put up just $16 million.  
Once he became president, Trump had a chance to get some money back. The campaign put more than $800,000 into Trump Tower Commercial LLC, the holding company through which Trump owns his interest in the original Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue. Trump Tower Commercial LLC took in an additional $225,000 in rent from the Republican National Committee, which coordinated those payments with the campaign. That means that, since the inauguration, Trump’s reelection effort has had a hand in funneling more than $1 million into the president’s most famous property.  In addition, the campaign has paid $54,000 to Trump Plaza LLC, which controls a property that includes two brownstone apartment buildings in New York City. The reason for those payments, which are listed as “rent,” remains unclear. Forbes staked out the property for 14 hours on a November day but still could not pin down what exactly the campaign was renting. A person working behind the front desk couldn’t make sense of it either. “If there was any kind of office rented out for campaigning or whatever, I would know about it.” Six residents also said they had never seen any indication of the campaign in the buildings. A 2016 campaign staffer, however, said people sometimes crashed at an apartment there when they were in town. 
It is also unclear what exactly the 2020 effort is renting from Trump Restaurants LLC, which has received $60,000 in campaign funds. Trump Restaurants LLC is another holding company tied to Trump Tower. The building’s website, which features a handful of Trump-branded eateries, includes a page of legal disclaimers for Trump Restaurants LLC. 
Inside the building lie clues to the purpose of the payments. Near Trump Grill and Trump’s Ice Cream Parlor, there’s a kiosk where tourists can buy T-shirts, hats and other campaign memorabilia. The fine print at the bottom of a poster next to the stand says, “Paid for by Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.”—the official name for the president’s 2020 campaign committee. 
The Trump Organization did not respond to a list of questions, including whether the stand is, in fact, the basis for the payments and how many square feet it occupies. So a Forbes reporter paced out the space to take a rough measurement. It appears the entire stand is approximately 60 square feet. With monthly payments of $3,000, that implies that the campaign is paying $600 per square foot in annual rent. For comparison, Gucci rents prime space upstairs, along Fifth Avenue, for only $440 per square foot, according to an analysis of a debt prospectus obtained by Forbes.
Real estate experts offered varying opinions on whether $3,000 a month represented an appropriate price. “That’s robbery,” said one person familiar with the New York market, surveying the kiosk from inside the building. Two others said it seemed like a fair deal since smaller spaces often command higher rates on a per-square-foot basis. A Trump campaign official said the 2020 effort pays market rents.
It’s a key question because federal regulations allow candidates to put campaign money into their own businesses only if they pay going rates. Given the varying opinions on whether $3,000 a month constitutes a fair price, however, it seems unlikely that the payments will spark an investigation by the Federal Election Commission. “If something is really egregious, yeah, it’s there,” says Bradley Smith, a Republican who served as a commissioner of the FEC from 2000 to 2005. “But they’re just not going to try to pick apart things on a difference of a few percentage points and try to second-guess what should be paid.” 
That means Trump should be free to continue shifting his supporters’ money into his business for the rest of the election cycle.

I write about Donald Trump, the people around him, and how they affect business. Before he won the presidency, I covered billionaires, industrial America and sports. 

January 9, 2019

Rod Rosenstein to Resign and Trump Threatens to Withhold FEMA Funds For CA. Fires

Report: Rod Rosenstein expected to resign once new AG confirmed 

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has communicated to the White House and President Trump that he plans to leave office once William Barr is confirmed as attorney general, ABC News, and CNN report. 
The big picture: There is no indication Rosenstein is being forced out by the Trump administration, ABC writes. In September, Rosenstein offered his resignation after reports surfaced that he suggested the 25th Amendment be invoked. 


Trump threatens to end FEMA funds for California wildfires President Trump threatened to cut off FEMA funding for California's wildfire relief in a Wednesday tweet, blaming the state's poor land management. 

"Billions of dollars are sent to the State of California for Forrest fires that, with proper Forrest Management, would never happen. Unless they get their act together, which is unlikely, I have ordered FEMA to send no more money. It is a disgraceful situation in lives & money!"
Our thought bubble from Axios science editor Andrew Freedman: Climate change is extending wildfire season year-round and increasing the frequency of extreme fires that spread quickly and are harder to contain. Forest management, including "raking" brush, which President Trump has previously advocated, would not reduce the risk, fire experts have told Axios.

November 13, 2018

The Only Uplifting Moment for Donald was Vladimir Otherwise He Seemed Grouchy and Not Happy to be There with The Many

Donald Trump joked about being "drenched" by rain as he gave a speech at an Armistice ceremony just a day after canceling a visit to a cemetery because of poor weather.
Talking at the Suresnes American Cemetery in France, he spoke of the “terrible cost” of the allied forces’ victory in World War One.
Thanking six World War Two veterans in the crowd, he turned to one and said: “You look so comfortable up there, under shelter, as we’re getting drenched. You’re very smart people.”
After that he complimented the group for looking “in very good shape” and said: “I hope I look like that one day.”

President Trump shelters under an umbrella as he walks through the cemetery (EPA)

On Saturday, President Trump faced criticism for canceling a trip to a World War One memorial due to bad weather.
He was due to take part in a wreath-laying event and a minute's silence at Aisne-Marne American Cemetery and Memorial, which is about 55 miles away from Paris.
However, heavy rain stopped him from arriving there via helicopter. 
It is not the first time he has bemoaned bad weather during a speech, having complained about a “bad hair day” when he spoke to reporters in the rain after a fatal shooting in Pittsburgh.

President Trump thanks military personnel and veterans in attendance

After this incident, which claimed 11 lives after a gunman attacked a synagogue, he said: “I was standing under the wing of Air Force One, doing a news conference earlier this morning, a very unfortunate news conference and the wind was blowing and the rain, and I was soaking wet.
“I said maybe I should cancel this arrangement because I have a bad hair day.”

President Trump smiles Vladimir Putin arrives at an Armistice Day event in Paris (AFP/Getty Images). Donald falsies look they are about to come out and kiss Vladimir Putin. Have you ever seen a smile like that between two heads of state? That was not all they came making hand signals for the limited time they were both there.

In his memorial speech on Sunday, he thanked a number of military personnel in attendance and a young American boy who had saved up money to attend.
He spoke of the armistice celebrations in 1918, when people took to the streets on hearing the news of war is over, though he said: “Victory had come at a terrible cost.”

Mr. Trump also described it as a “brutal war” as he spoke of those who lost their lives.
Speaking of soldiers who fell in World War One, he said: “It’s our duty to preserve the civilization they protected.”
Earlier in the day, Mr. Trump attended an event at the Arc de Triomphe, for the centenary of the armistice being signed. 
He was one of around 70 world leaders, including Russia's Vladimir Putin and Germany's Angela Merkel, to attend the service hosted by French president Emmanuel Macron.
This began slightly behind schedule and, after traveling separately from the majority of leaders in attendance, Mr. Trump was one of the last to arrive.

November 10, 2018

We Are At The Precipice But Mueller is Got Minions of Prosecutors Out of Reach of Trump

By Richard Ben-Veniste and George Frampton
Mr. Ben-Veniste and Mr. Frampton worked on the Watergate cover-up task force of the special prosecutor’s office~~~The New York Times

In a stunning move on the heels of the midterm election, President Trump has forced the resignation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and appointed an outspoken critic of the Mueller investigation — Matthew Whitaker — as acting attorney general, shunting Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to the sidelines. This raises the specter of a fearful president attempting to muzzle Special Counsel Robert Mueller or hinder him from revealing whether his 18-month-long grand jury investigation has turned up evidence of criminality implicating Donald Trump or his immediate family.
But a 44-year-old “road map” from the Watergate prosecution shows a potential route for Mr. Mueller to send incriminating evidence directly to Congress. The road map was devised in 1974 by the Watergate special prosecutor, Leon Jaworski, with our assistance. We wrote the road map — actually a report — to be conveyed to Congress; it was called “Report and Recommendation” and served as a guide to a collection of grand jury evidence contained in a single document. That evidence included still-secret presidential tape recordings that had been acquired through grand jury subpoena — but which had been withheld from Congress by President Nixon. 
The recent decision by Washington’s Federal District Court chief judge, Beryl Howell, to release the document from the National Archives provides a historic legal precedent that could be a vehicle for Mr. Mueller and the grand jury assisting him to share the fruits of their investigation into possible criminal conduct within the Trump presidential campaign and subsequent administration.
In all the discussion about Mr. Mueller’s options when he concludes his investigation, little attention has been paid to the potential role of the grand jury. Chief Judge Howell’s decision unsealing the Watergate road map brings new focus on the role the grand jury might play in the dynamics of the endgame. Although the grand jury is a powerful tool for federal prosecutors, it has historic and independent power and operates under the supervision of the federal judiciary. Following the Oct. 20, 1973, “Saturday Night Massacre” — in which President Nixon forced the Justice Department to fire the original special prosecutor, Archibald Cox — the Watergate grand jury played a critical role in forcing the president to back down, hand over the subpoenaed tapes and appoint a new special prosecutor.

Although Mr. Cox had been fired, his staff — duly appointed federal prosecutors — had not. The grand jury, as an arm of the judicial branch, could not be fired by the president. Indeed, Judge John Sirica of the United States District Court immediately summoned the grand juries (there were two) to his courtroom and exhorted them to continue to pursue their investigations and assured them that they could rely on the court to safeguard their rights and preserve the integrity of their proceedings. 

In the face of Congress’s inability to obtain evidence that the grand jury well knew incriminated the president, we prepared the grand jury report to Judge Sirica and requested that he use his plenary authority to transmit that evidence to the House Judiciary Committee, which had already commenced a proceeding to consider Mr. Nixon’s impeachment. It was carefully written to avoid any interpretations or conclusions about what the evidence showed or what action the committee should take. The report contained a series of spare factual statements annotated with citations to relevant transcripts of tapes and grand jury testimony. Copies of those tapes and transcripts were included as attachments. 
Judge Sirica was convinced that the materials contained in the report should be made available to the House Judiciary Committee. His decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. This evidence formed the gravamen of Article I (obstruction of justice) of the impeachment resolution adopted by the Committee.
Much note has been made of the fact that the Justice Department regulations under which Mr. Mueller was appointed actually require him to submit a report to the attorney general. Importantly, nothing in the department regulations prohibits Mr. Mueller’s Department of Justice superior, now Mr. Whitaker, from refusing to release the report

What if Mr. Mueller concludes that the president has committed a crime? The question of whether a sitting president can be indicted remains a subject of vehement debate among scholars. But assuming that Mr. Mueller follows what many regard as “current Justice Department policy” based on several past internal legal opinions that an indictment is inappropriate, then the appropriate place for consideration of evidence that the president has committed crimes rests definitively and exclusively with Congress.

If Mr. Mueller has obtained such evidence, his responsibility and the correct operation of our system of government compel the conclusion that he and the grand jury can make that evidence available to Congress through a report transmitted by the court. 
With the fox now guarding the henhouse, there is sufficient precedent for the grand jury and Special Counsel Mueller to seek the chief judge’s assistance in transmitting a properly fashioned report to Congress.
Richard Ben-Veniste, an attorney in Washington, was the chief of the Watergate cover-up task force of the special prosecutor’s office and was a member of the 9/11 Commission. George Frampton is the chief executive of the Partnership for Responsible Growth and was an assistant special prosecutor on the cover-up task force.

Featured Posts

Good Morning Sunday:Dutch Gay penguin Steals Egg From Another Couple Now Trying To Hatch it

  JORDAN HIRST Stock photo of African penguins. Photo: Charles J Sharp/Wikimedia Commons A gay penguin couple at a Nethe...